Fun Stuff > CHATTER
US War Robots Recalled from Iraq
a pack of wolves:
No, the US has not said they'll stop using anti-personnel land mines and minefields are frequently unmarked. A lot of people are killed or maimed (frequently losing limbs) by land mines every year, 5751 in 2006 confirmed casualties according to Landmine Monitor (and that's just known casualties, that actual number will be higher).
Nodaisho:
Now where is the logic in an unmarked mine field? Your own men are going to get blown up too.
Now, this is only wikipedia, but according to wikipedia, while the U.S. didn't agree to stop using land mines, they did agree to limit how they use them, unless they are marked and monitored, they have to be self-destructing or self-deactivating.
Most of those fatalities are likely due to old land mines, though some could be from rebellions / civil wars where one side buys up some surplus mines on the cheap.
muteKi:
Well, yeah, they usually are from old land mines.
supersheep:
--- Quote from: Nodaisho on 23 Apr 2008, 23:55 ---Now where is the logic in an unmarked mine field? Your own men are going to get blown up too.
--- End quote ---
Where is the logic in a marked minefield? I mean, why would you go to the effort of trying to blow up your enemies and then put up a sign saying "Don't walk here! BAD STUFF!" They mark them on their maps, and then, especially in places where the situation is a little... fluid, they 'forget'/run away too fast to mark them.
International agreements also tend to be, shall we say, creatively interpreted when national security is on the line.
jhocking:
--- Quote from: Nodaisho on 23 Apr 2008, 23:55 ---Now where is the logic in an unmarked mine field? Your own men are going to get blown up too.
--- End quote ---
Simple, just tell them where not to walk. Moreover, if you actually want to take out enemies, vs simply restrict their movement, a marked mine field would be completely pointless, since they'd just go around it.
Ultimately, this whole tension of marked vs. unmarked mine fields gets at why mines are fucked up. They kill indiscriminately.
--- Quote from: Nodaisho on 23 Apr 2008, 23:55 ---Now, this is only wikipedia, but according to wikipedia, while the U.S. didn't agree to stop using land mines, they did agree to limit how they use them, unless they are marked and monitored, they have to be self-destructing or self-deactivating.
--- End quote ---
Well that's good, an attempt to make mines less fucked up. Note however that this entire agreement you describe is founded on the understanding that mines are fucked up. Note also that this clearly refutes your earlier argument, about the lack of logic in unmarked minefields, since they clearly make reference to the distinction with marked minefields.
--- Quote from: supersheep on 24 Apr 2008, 07:26 ---Where is the logic in a marked minefield?
--- End quote ---
To restrict the enemy's movements. Don't want them marching down a certain road? Put a bunch of mines on it, and then tell them about it.
--- Quote from: supersheep on 24 Apr 2008, 07:26 ---International agreements also tend to be, shall we say, creatively interpreted when national security is on the line.
--- End quote ---
hell, this agreement has a blaring loophole right in its one-sentence description. "Marked and monitored," give me a fucking break.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version