text: Conduct of Hostilities
  immediately (particularly if, at the time of the attack, no military traffic is in the area), but can be established
  by the overall effort to deny the enemy use of bridges in order to isolate enemy military forces on the
  battlefield.
  Military advantage refers to the advantage anticipated from an attack when considered as a whole, and
  not only from its isolated or particular parts. Similarly, military advantage is not restricted to immediate
  tactical gains but may be assessed in the full context of war strategy. It may involve a variety of
  considerations, including the security of the attacking force. The definite military advantage offered by
  damaging, destroying, or neutralizing the object may result from denying the enemy the ability to use this
  object in its military operations (that is, to benefit from the object’s effective contribution to the military
  action). For example, the attack or capture of objects with a common military purpose, such as bridges used
  or available for use in lines of communication, would offer a definite military advantage.
  The military advantage from an attack is broader than only denying the enemy the benefit of that
  object’s contribution to its military action. For example, in a diversionary attack, the military advantage to
  be gained from attacking an object would result from diverting the enemy’s resources and attention. The
  military advantage from an attack may involve a variety of other considerations, including improving the
  security of the attacking force. The military advantage from an attack may result from harm to enemy forces’
  morale. Diminishing the morale of the civilian population and their support for the war effort does not provide
  a definite military advantage, but its incidental effect is not illegal.
  Doubt as to Status of a Person or Object as a Military Objective
  Attacks may not be launched against a civilian or civilian object based on merely hypothetical or
  speculative considerations regarding its possible current status as a military objective. In assessing whether
  a person or object that normally does not have any military purpose or use is a military objective, commanders
  and other decision-makers must make the decision in good faith based on the information available to them
  in light of the circumstances ruling at the time (DOD Law of War Manual, 5.4.3.2).
  In the context of conducting attacks, Additional Protocol I reflects a presumption in favor of civilian
  status in cases of doubt. Article 52(3) of AP I provides that “[i]n case of doubt whether an object which is
  normally dedicated to civilian purposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling or a school, is
  being used to make an effective contribution to military actions, it shall be presumed not to be so used.”
  Article 50(1) of AP I provides that “[i]n case of doubt whether a person is a civilian, that person shall be
  considered to be a civilian.” In applying the API rules on “doubt,” some Parties to API have interpreted it to
  mean “substantial doubt” (DOD Law of War Manual, 5.4.3.2). The Department of Defense has expressed it
  concerns with these AP I articles, as under customary international law no legal presumption of civilian status
  exists for persons or objects, nor is there any rule inhibiting commanders or other military personnel from
  acting based on the information available to him or her in doubtful cases (DOD Law of War Manual, 5.4.3.2).
  The Army and Marine Corps, as a matter of practice due to operational and policy reasons, generally take a
  more restrictive view than required under LOAC. In cases of doubt whether a person or object is a military
  objective, Soldiers and Marines should consider that person or object as a civilian or civilian object.
  Doubt frequently exists in combat, often induced by lawful acts of enemy deception. Although
  technology has advanced, the ability of military commanders to gain a greater intelligence estimate of “what
  is [or may be] on the other side of the hill” often is limited, and doubt is seldom removed entirely.
  Accordingly, a commander will make a measured decision, in good faith based upon information available
  and the prevailing circumstances ruling at that time.
  PERSONS AND OBJECTS OFTEN REGARDED AS MILITARY OBJECTIVES
  Following is a list of persons and objects, including military bases, units, and equipment, that have
  often been regarded as military objectives. The first two are exclusively military in nature and therefore are
  always military objectives. The remaining objects may become military objectives if they meet the definition
  set forth in paragraph 2-31:
  * Military ground, air, and naval equipment (other than medical units, equipment, or transport), to
  include vehicles, ships, weapons, munitions, and supplies.