Qaddafi Forces Fire Cluster Bombs Into Civilian Areas

[Gerald]

Latest estimates are over 100 million in up to 64 different countries. this is the number of landmines already in place. The various countries which still produce landmines for use...

[Platapus]

Here is a shocker

The United States also refuses to sign the Ottawa Convention either.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by Vendor

Latest estimates are over 100 million in up to 64 different countries. this is the number of landmines already in place. The various countries which still produce landmines for use...

Ours are in storage, not in the ground, the day someone steps on them he deserves it.

[Gerald]

Not only US,

http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/do...eet-150807.htm

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

Ours are in storage, not in the ground, the day someone steps on them he deserves it.

So it is in many Western countries, that they are in stock, and deployed at the war authorization, or other exceptional condition

[TLAM Strike]

The Ottawa Convention is pure political BS.

We signed the CCW that follow that, all our mines fields are marked or self neutralizing after a set time.

If someone gets a leg blow off in a marked minefield oh well, Darwin in action.

[NeonSamurai]

What's the failure rate on the self neutralizing mines though? As I recall that is the same issue faces with cluster munitions.

[joegrundman]

this is just another act in the dance of bs that is unfolding before us.

In a grim way, the show is funny

cluster bombs are nasty - sure. we can all join in sombre condemnation of all who have used cluster bombs, past, present and future.

however - the rebels get to fire tomahawks and laser guided bombs, so the loyalists fire some twenty year old cluster mortar bombs. are we to be shocked at the unfairness or something?

or is this info just usefully being exploited after the us has decided that the british and french, enjoyable as it has been, are unable to take on one puny country without uncle sam's help, and must weigh in again to end this charade?

but srsly - britain and france! wtf! very funny!

but since now what exactly the "rest of the west" can do has been shown to great effect, it is past time for the US to move the game past the first stage and into the interminable hostile occupation stage. Causus belli in place, full steam ahead!

"If it were done, when 'tis done, then twere well it were done quickly."Macbeth

[Gerald]

Originally Posted by NeonSamurai

What's the failure rate on the self neutralizing mines though? As I recall that is the same issue faces with cluster munitions.

http://www.unidir.org/pdf/articles/pdf-art2533.pdf

[Jimbuna]

Not very civil having a poke at your allies Joe...the terms of engagement allowed under the UN mandate are somewhat short of an invasion...which is just as well really because Britain for one is pretty low on capability due to years of defence cuts.

If your thinking the US should go in and finish off this 'charade' then good luck....I certainly hope you fair better than was the case in Nam.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

So true, our beloved and naive socialist President wanted Finland to give up landmines, they where replaced by cluster munitions.

Actually the mines are still waiting to be destroyed, might take time as our Generals look after the countrys best interest unlike politicians.

A fine example of Finland wanting to just kiss some ass. If there's something
I dislike about our country, it's the need for our politicians to please the larger
countries.

How about keeping up with the spirit and doing what's best for us, not what
looks the best in other's eyes.

As for the landmines... well, Finland has always kept a good record of what and
where has been placed, even during the peak of WWII. Most of the
mines were cleared afterwards.

[joegrundman]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Not very civil having a poke at your allies Joe...the terms of engagement allowed under the UN mandate are somewhat short of an invasion...which is just as well really because Britain for one is pretty low on capability due to years of defence cuts.

If your thinking the US should go in and finish off this 'charade' then good luck....I certainly hope you fair better than was the case in Nam.

I am british Jim. And i feel the nuances of my post may have temporarily slipped past you.

The terms of the UN resolution mean either the partition of Libya, or war to the end. There is no way that we can accept at this point a loyalist victory, which means we have to ensure a rebel victory, or at the minimum a fudged compromise involving the exile of gaddafy (which lets face it is the best option for everyone ) - for otherwise the west will not be able to handle the embarrassment.

But Libya! Libya was once the battleground where the British and French fought each other - or was that Egypt? well nevermind!

Mind you, Libyans were once pretty tough cookies themselves - those Libyan spearmen that were on the flanks of Hannibal's army, the Romans will never forget them!

Blame the terrorists.
Daffy is right, these rebelious terrorists are hiding amongst the civilian population, they are the ones who are responsible, they are the ones using Libyans who they claim to care about as human shields.
They just expect the western liberal media to jump on its usual anti daffy bandwagon and condemn the attacks which they are inviting on themselves for propoganda purposes.
These stupid laws on trying to make warfare legal are ridiculous, the governments job is to kill as many people as needed as quickly as possible to ensure an end to open armed revolt which is most probably all being run by foriegn terrorist sponsoring countries anyway.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

These stupid laws on trying to make warfare legal are ridiculous, the governments job is to kill as many people as needed as quickly as possible to ensure an end to open armed revolt which is most probably all being run by foriegn terrorist sponsoring countries anyway.

make warfare legal?

[Gerald]