In 1974 there took place in Geneva the first session of a diplomatic conference called by Switzerland at the instance of the International Committee of the Red Cross to update the provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, particularly with a view to the more careful definition and exposition of what might be described as the fundamental humanitarian principles of law with regard to armed conflict. While it would be an unduly narrow assumption that humanitarian law is only relevant to an armed conflict, it must not be forgotten that breaches thereof are more likely to occur at such a time, for the man in the field has normally been trained to overthrow and if possible kill enemy personnel, even to the extent that occasionally his basic training may be in conflict with the requirements of the law of war. Generally speaking, the ordinary noncommissioned officer is unlikely to stress overmuch the restriction on the permitted means and methods of warfare to be found in the Regulations attached to Hague Convention IV of 1907. Moreover, the ideological campaigns which accompany any major war, with comments by politicians, commanders, and media alike, implying that the enemy has resorted to conduct that might only be expected from those who have placed themselves outside the protection of law or morality accompanied by insulting nicknames that suggest the enemy is not even human, all contribute to the ordinary soldier's idea that destruction of the enemy is the aim and the end regardless of the means employed to achieve it. Examples of this type of situation may be seen in both world wars, as well as in relation to the campaigns in Korea and Vietnam. However, international law has always recognized that there is a law of war and that breaches thereof may result in punishment. The simplest means of imposing such punishment, without at the same time appearing to abandon all sense of legal propriety, is by way of the trial of war criminals.