Land Mine Treaty Won't Be Signed By Obama Administration
125 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;18562078]How do these maps of other signed treaties have anything to do with this land mine discussion?
Capital punishment, metric system, gay marriage, Kyoto Protocol all have nothing to do with this.[/QUOTE]
People think that because we have policies differing from a lot of other countries, we are a bunch of fuck-tards or something.
I'm not saying I agree with all this stuff (like our veiws on gay marriage), but seriously.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;18563008]Nothing wrong with capital punishment if we're talking about someone like the 9/11 planners, DC sniper etc.[/QUOTE]
Capital punishment is pointless and just opens up the possibility of executing an innocent man
[QUOTE=evilweazel;18563008]I don't really mind gay marriage, don't really care about it. So the USA can do what they want about it.[/QUOTE]
There's no reason not to allow it.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;18563008]I don't see whats wrong with them having their own measurements for their own country.[/QUOTE]
In 1999 NASA lost a $125 million Mars orbiter because one engineering team used metric units while another used US customary units for a calculation. Medical errors in the US are sometimes attributed to the confusion between grains and grams. In 1983 a Boeing 767 jet ran out of fuel in mid-flight because of two mistakes in figuring the fuel supply of Air Canada's first aircraft to use metric measurements.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;18563008]And give some examples of " tons other shit."[/QUOTE]
The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system.
The United States is the only industrial nation that does not currently possess a major social democratic party.
[QUOTE=GunFox;18564286]Well anti vehicle mines generally don't go off for people stepping on them and tend to focus around killing the single vehicle right on top of them.
Anti personnel mines are all about killing a squad of people. One guy steps on the mine, the mine shoots into the air, and airbursts a cloud of shrapnel horribly wounding everyone nearby. They tend to be small and difficult to disarm.
AP mines generally aren't designed to kill. They are designed to wound a large number of people as to cripple the enemy advance. Wounded soldiers that can never return to action are much more useful casualties than enemy soldiers KIA as they place increase strain on your opponent's resources.
Whereas Anti vehicular mines don't want to be triggered by people. Their triggers tend to be designed around only detonating for vehicles passing over them. From what I understand they are now placed and then monitored by the group that placed them. They aren't just randomly placed about to halt the enemy advance because there are no battle lines. I believe with that in mind, modern AV mines are easier to disarm. (For the group that placed them)[/QUOTE]
Indeed, I personally think that APs should be banned, whereas AV could still be used, since it requires usually +500 kg weight to set it off. Depends on model, of course.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;18562078]How do these maps of other signed treaties have anything to do with this land mine discussion?
Capital punishment, metric system, gay marriage, Kyoto Protocol all have nothing to do with this.[/QUOTE]
:allears:
[QUOTE=Kyle902;18558939]You know the minefield set up by Rommel in WW2 still has thousands of landmines in it?
Landmines do more harm then good these days. Sure they did better back in WW1 where it was common practice to charge large amounts of infantry, but today the tactic does more harm then good.[/QUOTE]
The main reason for that is the lack of willing participants to de-mine it. It's not impossible.
Obama likes his mines.
Wars without landmines? how silly
Where always at war with someone gonna need them ol' landmines eventually
[QUOTE=MachiniOs;18566264]The main reason for that is the lack of willing participants to de-mine it. It's not impossible.[/QUOTE]
um no, the main reason is the fact that clearing them will cost a lot of time and money
[QUOTE=smurfy;18564333]
The United States is the only industrial nation that does not currently possess a major social democratic party.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://pollypartisan.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/democratdonkey.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;18566822][IMG]http://pollypartisan.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/democratdonkey.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
no
of course american right wingers haven't known a real left since the red scares and the cold war. i love capitalism
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;18562078]How do these maps of other signed treaties have anything to do with this land mine discussion?
Capital punishment, metric system, gay marriage, Kyoto Protocol all have nothing to do with this.[/QUOTE]
it's that America is the most ass-backwards first world country
[QUOTE=smurfy;18564333]
The United States is the only industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system.
The United States is the only industrial nation that does not currently possess a major social democratic party.[/QUOTE]
You must be joking, they have the most batshit insane liberals on the planet.
[editline]03:23PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;18567754]it's that America is the most ass-backwards first world country[/QUOTE]
yes because it makes perfect sense to sign a treaty that inhibits your resource output and distribution to such an extent that you would have to be a 3rd world country to comply.
Clinton didn't sign it for a reason. (Kyoto)
[editline]03:25PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=smurfy;18561722]All the cool countries have signed it.
[img]http://imgkk.com/i/rzz.png[/img][/QUOTE]
Yeah Venezuela is sooo cool.
My country signed this and I think it's bullshit.
1) Landmines are mostly a defensive tool against a huge was that is very unlikely to happen
2) Replacing systems cost a [B]FUCKLOAD[/B] of $$$, my country bought cluster-bombs and now there is a treaty trying to outlaw those, hurray for third expensive system!
3) Smart landmines (that deactivate themselves after some time) are good and a lot better way forward though, aren't they allowed by the treaty?
[QUOTE=Idi Amin;18568094]You must be joking, they have the most batshit insane liberals on the planet.
[editline]03:23PM[/editline]
yes because it makes perfect sense to sign a treaty that inhibits your resource output and distribution to such an extent that you would have to be a 3rd world country to comply.
Clinton didn't sign it for a reason. (Kyoto)
[/QUOTE]
fight on, noble troll warrior!
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;18568232]fight on, noble troll warrior![/QUOTE]
Yes because political extremism is sooo healthy.
Back up, cool down and have some pizza bro
[QUOTE=evilking1;18568205]My country signed this and I think it's bullshit.
1) Landmines are mostly a defensive tool against a huge was that is very unlikely to happen
2) Replacing systems cost a [B]FUCKLOAD[/B] of $$$, my country bought cluster-bombs and now there is a treaty trying to outlaw those, hurray for third expensive system![/QUOTE]
"Money is more important than the many, many civilian lives lost to cluster bombs and landmines." -evilking1
[QUOTE=evilking1;18568205]3) Smart landmines (that deactivate themselves after some time) are good and a lot better way forward though, aren't they allowed by the treaty?[/QUOTE]
even though the detonator is deactivated, having big hunks of explosives buried everywhere is hardly much safer.
[editline]02:31PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Idi Amin;18568262]Yes because political extremism is sooo healthy.[/QUOTE]
godspeed
[QUOTE=shill le 2nd;18556960]fucking united states[/QUOTE]
Why don't you walk over here and say that again :smug:
Political idealism =/= the right answer
[QUOTE=Hikaru;18568306]Why don't you walk over here and say that again :smug:[/QUOTE]
literally murder the entire united states
[QUOTE=MrBob1337;18561625]I remember hearing something about landmines that use a wood block or something to hold the detanator in, and when the wood rots, the mine becomes safe.[/QUOTE]
Huh, interesting.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;18557440]Mine clearing vehicles.
[img]http://www.gbnews.ch/portraits/fsd/Dok-Ing-MV4s.JPG[/img][/QUOTE]
Might work if there was no such thing as trees, rocks, or elevation.
Not a big deal. Modern landmines can be set to disable themselves after a set time. Modern mines don't sit for years- so the primary reason for requesting their disuse no longer applies.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;18568812]Not a big deal. Modern landmines can be set to disable themselves after a set time. Modern mines don't sit for years- so the primary reason for requesting their disuse no longer applies.[/QUOTE]
When did you get RU?
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;18568269]"Money is more important than the many, many civilian lives lost to cluster bombs and landmines." [/QUOTE]
There are no good replacements for cluster bombs, I just wondered why my government bought those damn things to replace landmines, when landmines could just sit in the warehouse for free.
"Better to have one civilian get killed by a landmine than a thousand by the invading army" -evilking1
[QUOTE=evilking1;18569287]There are no good replacements for cluster bombs, I just wondered why my government bought those damn things to replace landmines, when landmines could just sit in the warehouse for free.
"Better to have one civilian get killed by a landmine than a thousand by the invading army" -evilking1[/QUOTE]
lol yes someone's going to invade finland in this day and age
list of natural resources finland has:
1. hot scandinavian chicks
2. oily fish
3. ...
[QUOTE=SigmaLambda;18569411]lol yes someone's going to invade finland in this day and age
list of natural resources finland has:
1. hot finnish chicks
2. oily fish
3. ...[/QUOTE]
Yeah that is the point, war is so unlikely, why not have landmines in the warehouse instead of few superexpensive artillery ordinance that last for 2 days in the war.
And whoever controls Åland has a nice tactical advantage over Sweden.
[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-jcDRFId68&feature=related[/MEDIA]
Adding Benny Hill can make anything funny.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
