Why not ban landmines? (Second Opinion | Baltimore Sun)

[struggle4progress]

A virtual meeting of The Sun's editorial board, where issues are discussed, opinions made

It has been at least a dozen years since the U.S. produced, used or traded an anti-personnel mine, yet this nation remains the only member of NATO not to sign an international treaty banning landmines ...

A State Department spokesman said this week the U.S. has no plans to join the Mine Ban Treaty during an upcoming milestone meeting in Cartagena, Colombia because "we would not be able to meet our national defense needs nor our security commitments to our friends and allies if we signed."

About whom is the State Department speaking? A total of 156 nations are party to the treaty and nearly every country that hasn't signed is considered to be in compliance, according to the most recent survey issued by Human Rights Watch ...

Why choose the moral low-ground? Mines kill and maim innocent people every day. Brutal and indiscriminant, they blow off the feet and hands and the vast majority of the victims are civilians. They also last a long time -- landmines dating from World War I are still causing injuries. They hamper post-war recoveries and present a particularly grave danger to children ...

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/2009/11/why_not_ban_landmines.html

[Vincardog]

1. If they banned mines, what would be next? Cluster bombs? Then what, all bombs? THINK man where

could it lead? Do you want PEACE to break out?
Do you know what that would do to the Almighty Corporate profits?

[struggle4progress]

2. 46 Nations Push for Cluster Bomb Treaty (WaPo 2007)

By DOUG MELLGREN
The Associated Press
Friday, February 23, 2007; 3:02 PM

OSLO, Norway -- Forty-six countries agreed Friday to push for a global treaty banning cluster bombs, a move activists hope will force the superpowers that oppose the effort _ the U.S., China and Russia _ to abandon the weapons.

Organizers said the declaration was needed despite the absence of key nations at a conference in the Norwegian capital to avoid a potential humanitarian disaster posed by unexploded cluster munitions.

Cluster bomblets are packed by the hundreds into artillery shells, bombs or missiles which scatter them over vast areas, with some failing to explode immediately. The unexploded bomblets can then lie dormant for years after conflicts end until they are disturbed, often by children attracted by their small size and bright colors.

Of the 49 countries attending the Oslo conference, only three -- Japan, Poland and Romania -- rejected the declaration calling for a treaty by next year. Some key arms makers -- including the U.S., Russia, Israel and China -- snubbed the conference ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/23/AR2007022300492.html

Damn tootin I wanna ban cluster bombs, too

[Vincardog]

5. That is exactly why the Corporate States of AmeriKKKa will not ban mines

[JonQ]

9. It's easy to ban weapons knowing that

A) you are unlikely to be called upon to fight and B) if you were ever in a tight spot a country that still uses those weapons could be called upon to help you out.

It's like celebrities complaining about civilians owning guns and loudly pointing out how they would never buy such a thing, then employing armed body guards.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

6. You seem to indicate lack of peace comes from the existence of weaponry.

As if, without such weaponry there would be peace between nations. Not true, infact opposite.
Weaponry exists because there is a lack of peace in the world.
There were international scale wars and confilicts when all people had were bows and swords.

I don't think the US should endorse the use of landmines (for different reasons)...
but I certainly don't think the slipepry slope concept applies to military weaponry.

[Vincardog]

7. You seen to thing it is an acident that the US spends more than the rest of the world combined on

weapons and war. We do not build the weapons because the world is a dangerous place.
The world is a dangerous place because we build the weapons.

When the only tool you have is a hammer the world looks like a nail.

[Demeter]

10. Yeah, Where's the Enterprise in That?

Not to mention, no spinoffs--movies, GI Joe dolls, books, crazy-vet shootups, homeless disabled on the streets, etc....

[imdjh]

3. As an aside, exactly who thought um,that Ian Kelly , um, hem, um haw, um um should be a "spokesman"?

[imdjh]

4. What difference does it make?

[JonQ]

8. Because they are useful

and a good chunk of the defenses between North and South Korea, where we are obligated to help out.

It's easy to ban different types of weapons when you have limited military obligations around the world.