Articles, Blog

What Makes a Weapon Inhumane?


Since the beginning of mankind as a species, weapons have been some of our cleverest and most important inventions. Over hundreds and thousands of years of war and killing, humanity has continued to devise new ways to kill one another. Often in brutal fashion. From the club, to the spear to the bow, the catapult, the musket up till today, with those nukes we looked at in the last video. They all serve the same purpose but, over the course of several international conventions some of these weapons have been banned from warfare for being too inhumane If the sole purpose of these devices is to kill the enemy, What makes one method more inhumane than another? Lets say you and I are on different sides of a military conflict in the mid 1600s We’re taking shots at each other with our horribly inaccurate rifles, until finally you get a hit. Luckily for me your bullet just grazed me. Somewhat less luckily I die from infections a few days later Why? Because it the 1600s and you like to store your bullets in corpses or latrine pits to make sure that if you do manage to hit somebody, they die from infection. This storing of bullets in poisonous or infectious substances was the catalyst for the Strasbourg Agreement of 1675 The first ever international agreement banning the use of chemical weapons The general sentiment was that using such an indirect and unpleasant means to kill the enemy was not befitting the principles of “civilized warfare”. Lets fast forward to the 22nd of April, 1915 The second battle of Ypres in Belgium during WW1 saw the first successful mass use of poison gas in war. The german army released 171 tons of chlorine gas over a stretch of about 6.5 kilometers. Chlorine gas is a really nasty substance. It irritates the eyes and skin and when inhaled it reacts violently with the human body causing the lungs to fill with fluid. Those unlucky enough to be caught in the gas cloud often drown painfully from the fluid inside their own lungs As chlorine gas was a rather new development in weaponry the methods the germans used to deploy it was quite crude. The chlorine was stored in nearly 6000 cylinders weighing 41 kilograms each. Which the germans carried by hand to the frontlines. The canisters was opened by hand as soon as the winds shifted towards the French Releasing a sweeping clump of noxious gas. The germans themselves suffered many injuries and deaths from their own gas as it was impossible to control once out of the canisters. When the chlorine reached the French lines within 10 minutes 6000 had died due to aspyixiation and tissue damage to the lungs. Since chlorine gas is denser than air it quickly flown down into the trenches causing the French troops to scramble over the top to escape… … right into german gunfire. Chlorine gas and several other poisonous chemicals continued to see use throughout the rest of the war. Accounted for 1.3 million casaulties and were the driving factor behind the well-known Geneva Protocol of 1925 It’s full title was: The Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare. Doesn’t exaltly roll off the tongue… In essence, the Geneva Protocol is a treaty that bans the use of chemical and biological weapons in international armed conflicts. Like the Strassburg Aggreement. The thinking behind the generic protocol was that chemical weapons caused unnecessary pain and suffering in its victims as well as significant mental and emotional trauma several years later WWII came along and with it a new batch of devious weapons the Japanese employed horrible booby traps to defend their homeland the most famous being the hidden spike fits soldiers would step on a thin layer of foliage and tumble down into rows of sharpened bamboo spikes to make matters worse the Japanese often coded despite his human or animal feces which led to terrible infections among the injured these traps killed and maimed thousands of troops over the course of the war the Americans had their own new toys as well namely the two atomic bombs that decimated Hiroshima and Nagasaki world WWII also saw the devastating use of napalm napalm was the ideal incendiary weapons because it was incredibly simple and cheap to produce it was stable and it stuck to whatever it hit all those features made napalm very popular and accounted for more dead Japanese soldiers and civilians and the two atomic bombs once the dust of the Second World War settled America enjoyed relative peace until the disastrous vietnam war with the jungle terrain came new means of killing what better way to clear foliage and flush out the enemy then by using fire a flamethrower used extensively in both world wars proved itself particularly useful and torching entire villages and hideouts napalm bombs also saw extensive use with the u.s. reportedly dropping about 388,000 tons of it over the course of the war compared to 16,500 times in World to the Vietnam War was hugely unpopular among the American public for many reasons among those were concerned that these fire weapons were cruel and inhumane sure enough on october tense 1980 the united nations convention on certian conventional weapons came to a close and with it came to legislation that prohibited the use of many different types of weapons incendiary devices are listed under what’s referred to as protocol 3, which restricts their use in any situation in which civilians are present interestingly napalm isn’t entirely banned it can be used to set fire to forested areas that conceal enemy troops or vehicles but it’s strictly prohibited in civilian inhabited areas other weapons ban by the CCCW include any form of gas, including tear gas, which can still be used in domestic riots, oddly enough, Spike Pits, undetectable fragment weapons meaning any weapon with the primary effect of leaving shrapnel in human body that is undetectable by x-ray also included are non self-destructing and non self-deactivating mines outside fenced monitored and marked areas these mines must also be removed from the conflict is resolved and finally perhaps more relevant to today’s battlefield blinding laser weapons, any weapon with the ability to cause permanent blindness or severe irreversible eye damage is strictly prohibited. so what do we make of all this, even though we have a long list of prohibited weapons what’s the common thread? what exactly makes them more inhumane than a bayonet or a 50 caliber machine gun? As you may have guessed the main concern is not for the combatant but for civilian populations the protocols are very firm on the position that indiscriminate weapons (weapons that cannot be used to target only hostile troops) must never be used that includes cluster bombs they can blanket a wide area large explosives like nuclear bombs and hidden weapons such as mines and booby traps, of course the secondary concern for the CCW was indeed the humanity of the combatants death at the hands of another is certainly a tragic fate but at least nations have been able to come together and recognize that no one deserves to suffer unnecessarily the future of war is bound to be interesting with later restrictions and technological advances maybe we’ll even see a complete ban on human involvement in war computers and drones of all sorts stand poised to change the battlefield forever we’ll just have to wait and see how long it takes that future to arrive as always this video is intended to spark your curiosity in the subject if you’d like to learn more about banned or inhumane weapons check out the links in the discription if you enjoyed this video please take a moment to subscribe to my channel to help me keep posting two videos a week feel free to leave a like or dislike as you please and tell me what you think about banned weapons and warfare in general in the comments you can watch my previous video by clicking here or binge watch them all by clicking here thanks for watching and I’ll see you in the next video

100 thoughts on “What Makes a Weapon Inhumane?

  1. What makes inhuman a weapon 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

  2. The trouble with these is that they are basically voluntary. We might someday ban human involvement in war, and that ban will be in effect until the first time someone thinks they could win a war they otherwise would have lost if they use humans in it. Likewise, countries still research and stockpile chemical and biological weapons. They agree to not use them, but that will only last until it is expedient to ignore that agreement.

  3. I think the gas chamber would be an amazing weapon…oh wait they yet used it…oh well….the flamethrower would be a nice way to die….IDEA GAS THROWER

  4. When you said napalm was more deadly than the two atomic bombs that was a HUUUGGGE understatement. Upper estimates of the amount of casualties in the firebombing of Tokyo would suggest that it’s possible that more people died in one sustained bombing raid using napalm in a populated area than both atomic bombs, so if you count all the times it was used in the entire war, it likely laps the total death toll of both atomic bombs several times.

  5. sooner or later full auto will be banned in military, then semi, then safety, then guns in general, then sharp weapons, then armor, then anything that can hurt at all.

  6. Americans: hey Hitler can you be nice to us

    Hitler: sure I won't kill ya painfully

    Americans: aww your so nice thx for that.

  7. A weapon that the opponent has no chance to counter at all is inhumane. For e.g remote controlled things, such as missiles and nukes. Kind of huge gas attacks too. (My opinion)

  8. You forgot hollow points. To those who dont know hollow point bullets will go into your body a small hole and go out with a huge chunk of your body. They expand, while military jacketed rounds dont.

  9. Something that always made me feel somewhat uncomfortable was the footage of the Lockheed AC-130 during the Gulf War, the one of the black and white cam while they blow up cars and vehicles and things. I think there's a video of one of those on Wikipedia. For me it was always raised a couple of questions in my mind: Firstly, do you know when someone has stopped fighting and is fleeing for their lives? There was some footage of like an Iraqi soldier running away (pretty sure) not firing, and he was being blasted by this gunship. Would it be different if these people were on the ground? Secondly, has it made war less 'human'? Some of the comments I heard made it almost sound like a video game, or very casual. Yep, just my day to day business of blowing things up. And lastly, it made me think about any PTSD these troops may experience, and how it might be different from any that experience it on the ground. It's a wonder how distant war has become.

  10. You know that the US commited war crimes in Vietnam? Like using the bombs mentioned that had napalm in it and dropped it on villages with innocent people who aren't in the war. They also brutally murdered the Vietnamese Fishermen that came out to great the Americans when their stupid general was drunk and ordered the American fleet to shoot at those fishermen. Also why didn't you mention the gas chambers that the Nazis used to exterminate the Jewish in concentration camps?

  11. OK this hole video but if there were to be a nuclear war the bomb itself and kill slot but the radiation can kill even more and it destroys wildlife and everything around it so why don't we get rid of that too

  12. Japan used booby traps and the us uses nuclear bombs

    Am i the only one who thinks this is unfair?😂😂

    Edit: thx for all the likes

  13. Sooo about the blinding laser, let me get this straight, it's not okay to use laser rifle because it causes blindness, but it's okay to regular rifle and blow the whole fucking skull into pieces?
    Humane indeed

  14. Inhumane weapons
    – Education (or lack of)
    – Social Media
    – Consumerism
    – Sugar
    – Tobacco and Alcolhol
    – Poverty
    – Ideologies (far left, far right, religions, etc)

  15. If it kills people it’s in humane, nations should just play over watch to settle things

  16. What I dont get is, you are in all out warfare with another group, take the world wars for example. You use these banned weapons. Then what, that other teams like "damn thats cheating, we're really gonna fuck you up now". My guess was that after the conflict all the other countries cut ties with them or something, but if you just won a war, you already got what u need

  17. I have personal experience with concentrated chlorine gas and its effects much MUCH worse than it sounds

  18. no such thing do not go to war unless you are willing to kill every one on their side big enough to die in war you kill your enemies dog kids and wife that is how you win if you fight be ruthless i want my enemies to suffer great pain and hard ship…

  19. @Second Thought –
    what about usage of pests like locusts …
    and also very unconventional / exotic weapons like:
    1. Weather / climate weapons,
    2. Tectonic weapons,
    3. Plasma, sonic weapons, electromagnetic weapons (like an EMP),
    4. Chemtrails,
    5. Extraterrestrial weapons ("in theory")

  20. what about neutron bombs, there pretty inhumane, i mean really killing anyone in a certain radius from radiation poisoning must be pretty shitty

  21. The thing is, what’s the point of banning weapons if it’s actual war? If a certain weapon is banned, but I as a soldier use it on the enemy, what are they going to do about it?

    Why don’t we just “ban” war entirely?

  22. This is so insane. People deciding which ways of killing each other are humane. How about, oh I don’t know, NONE OF THEM?!

  23. I've heard a more cynical explanation of banned weapons. Some of the banned weapons are cheaper and easier to make than allowed "humane" weapons. So banning certain weapons disadvantages poorer nations, who lack the money and industry to manufacture the more humane weapons. For instance, weapons like poison gas or weaponized diseases (like anthrax) are sometimes called a "poor man's nuclear bomb", because they kill a lot of people but are much easier to manufacture. Anyhow, in a real war, when things get desperate, all notions of "fair play" tend to get ignored. A nation that is losing a war will resort to ANY tactics that might help, regardless of ethical considerations.

  24. I think that if we are smart enough to plan and agree on 'civilized warfare' then we are smart enough not to have war at all.

  25. Germany: Stop using shotguns, they are inhumane

    Also germany:* use clhore gas, flametrower and more*

  26. We should just start using unmanned nightmare styled mechs to do battle. In the form of glorious beautiful and flashy strategic chess like war. Whomever loses must forfeit rights to whatever the war is being fought for. It would become a battle of technological strength and wits as usual just excluding the human element from the crossfire. Choose a large section of land on a neutral grounds to be a permanent rink where we do our battles, instead of wherever the conflict happens to be at.

  27. People are demons they fight like children with toys so I'm surprised they would do this because there is no such thing as humane to me because everyone falls in that catagory

  28. pretty sure we'll see more horrible weapons invented despite these countries being accorded to these protocols…

  29. tell you right now, Ain't no Robots gonna be running all over the field any time soon. still don't have flying cars yet either…. looking at you 1950s!!!

  30. That computer robot war crap doesn't work. "B-12" I sink my brothers battle ship. My brother walks around the table and pummels me.

  31. Pussies and their bent on dragging conflict out for decades and then peeing and moaning about how long the conflict has raged. That's who. Leave the determination of means and methods to the MARINES. If you can't stand the facts, then get the fuck outta the way. Sheesh.

  32. so if weapon gonna be so clean and no poisons what gonna hapen if they gonna shot our heart die yes bcs of bullet damage us and poison?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *