Do you think there should be a global ban on further landmine use? If not, shouldn't countries who use them at least be obligated to remove them after conflicts cease?
by 
Anti-Semantic - Quaerens Intellectum
ANSWERS: 4
-
It's a nice idea, but how ya gonna enforce it.
-
They're not evil in every situation. It's less bad to use landmines along the depopulated North/South Korean border than to remove them and have the NK military have better success invading. Not that there's any chance of that, but you hopefully see what I mean.
-
Well the US is opposed to it - so its unlikely it will happen as of now. And they refuse to provide the Vietmanese with maps and funds so that they can rmove the ordinance - we won't mention Cambodia. But Laos, the most heavily bobmed place ever - is th worst case with probably hundreds of millions of of pieces of ordinance. You know how many casualtis - civiliansespecially children - die as a result of this yearly? The Lao govt estimat about 20.000 per year, most of whom dies from their injuries. You can read about it here pg 61: http://books.google.com/books?id=nTMEirKUw-QC&dq=propaganda+and+the+public+mind&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=3K2rSu5KyoyQBa68tZUG&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4#v=onepage&q=land%20mine&f=false Do they actually want to do something about it? Then why haven't they done anything about what's already there? This book deals with this in one of its chapters: http://www.amazon.com/Manufacturing-Consent-Political-Economy-Media/dp/0375714499
-
Sounds good, but the losers usually are no longer in power and have no say so and the winners usually lose interest in removing them because it cost money to do so. Ban? Ever hear the phrase "all is fair in love and war"? People don't want them around any more than they want nuclear weapons around, but that hasn't prevented anyone from developing nukes.
Moongrim RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC