It was a glorious Sunday afternoon when i got thinking, what defines excessive force in war? Technology has come a long way since the trusty bow and arrow used in the middle ages and times before that, but how does one kill another human humanely without the use of excessive force? and what defines humanely aswell? By now we're all used to seeing on the media, fictional and non fictional images of death and mayhem caused by war, vivid images of men being shot, vapourised or simply exploded (excuse ofcourse the bad grammar). One image in my mind is the use of an Apaches 30mm gun to shoot and kill suspected insurgents in Iraq. In a grainy black and white film you can easily see the destruction of man at its worse. Was the use of this gun at a distance of 2km necessary or excessive force? As a member of the Australian Defence Force it is doctrine to never use Artillery, CAS (Close Air Support) or Naval Gunfire when a rifle will suffice, a Machine Gun will do or a simple Grenade will get the job done. Do we have to put ourselves into a situation where by the possibility of harm grows exponentially when we could be sitting back having a brew and a smoko while bombs are raining in on the enemy? Ultimately my question, and i would like historical examples aswell as hypothetical ones, What defines the use of excessive force and how does one kill another humanely?