There exists an uncritical assumption within the framework of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949 that the broad dissemination of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) principles, coupled with an associated general training regime, will invariably facilitate greater operational compliance with IHL by military forces. Such a perspective has been correctly characterised as a necessary, but perhaps not sufficient, basis for confidence in the capacity to enhance meaningful norm compliance. The difficulty lies in the broad nature of the discretion afforded to nations when undertaking training and education in IHL. Much rides on the character and quality of the training to be dispensed and not all training is the same.