Bush Shifts U.S. Stance On Use of Land Mines | Washington Post

[Ediacara]

Bush Shifts U.S. Stance On Use of Land Mines
Policy Slated for 2010 Won't Ban All Devices Designed to Kill Troops

By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, February 27, 2004; Page A01

President Bush will bar the U.S. military from using certain types of land mines after 2010 but will allow forces to continue to employ more sophisticated mines that the administration argues pose little threat to civilians, officials said yesterday.

The new policy, due to be announced today, represents a departure from the previous U.S. goal of banning all land mines designed to kill troops. That plan, established by President Bill Clinton, set a target of 2006 for giving up antipersonnel mines, depending on the success of Pentagon efforts to develop alternatives.

Bush, however, has decided to impose no limits on the use of "smart" land mines, which have timing devices to automatically defuse the explosives within hours or days, officials said.

More at the Washington Post

[Paulie]

1. Smart landmines/clusterbombs have a 10% failure to defuse

So, 1 million devices is 100,000 that can still EXPLODE!

It's insane...

[Big_Mike]

12. We only emplace situational minefields now.

Since WWI, mines have been laid to protect soldiers and positions. They took a lot of time to emplace and even more to take them out. When you have soil that freezes yearly, the maps made to mark the locations of the mines are no longer accurate, due to ground shift.

After Just Cause, my unit was responsible for de-mining Noriega's island. The mines were laid in sand, and had shifted drastically. We spent days clearing that island. Dumb mines need to be abolished.

The new minefields do have a 10% failure rate. That means that when the safe separation timers activate, those 10% self test and then since they can't arm, most of them self-destruct. Those few that don't self destruct do remain in place. But those are mostly inert. Then, at the end of the minefield life, the mines self-detonate. Again, 90% detonate. Those that don't detonate remain live and, in the case of anti-personnel (AP), are hideously sensitive.

The only mines that have been outlawed by the treaty are the AP ones. The reason minefields are used are either as protective obstacles, to protect and defend unit positions, or those used to attrit and chanalize enemy units. They aren't just laid for the hell of it. In most cases, it takes a 2- or 3-star general to approve laying mines at all. It isn't something just done as a regular piece of business as was the case for over 80 years.

The sad fact of life is that in any former battlefield, there remains many different type of Unexploded Ordnance (UXO). Bombs, rockets, mines, grenades, and a multiplicitiy of others. Personally, the dud rate of grenade launcher grenades scares me more than mines. They fail about 30% of the time. The damn things always go off when you try to clear them.

Mines are used by the US as a force protection munition. If there are no AP mixed with the Anti-Tank (AT), then the enemy can just come in and clear a path through the minefield. So we have to keep using them. If you want to cuss someone, cuss the Italians. They have produced the most difficult to locate, most sensitive, and most dangerous mines in the world.

[Skidmore]

2. This makes me ill.

You can sure kill and maim a lot of people with land mines between now and 2010. And he won't be anywhere to be found by then to hold accountable. Another drive by crime against humanity takes place before our very eyes.

[DennisReveni]

3. Still more

Still more than Clinton did.

[sadiesworld]

5. Huh?

[BootinUp]

6. Its a mixed bag

snip...

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.), a leading opponent of land mines, noted "some positive aspects" to Bush's decision. But he said, "On the whole, it is a deeply disappointing step backward."

[w4rma]

4. Death, killing, killing, death, death, killing, killing, death, Bush (n/t)

[LeftHander]

7. Poses little threat....

unless they step on them....then

BOOM off goes your legs and gonads!

[SoCalDem]

8. Compassionate landmines?? or Faith-based landmines??

:shrug:

[German-Lefty]

9. I love the title of the story!!!

"Bush Shifts U.S. Stance On Use of Land Mines"
I'm picturing him standing on a land mine and shifting a little here.... a little there, and then: :nuke:

[The_Gopher]

10. you know you're on the wrong side of the issue when

you stand with China, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan and Russia on one side, and Afghanistan, Canada, Germany, Italy and Britain are on the other.

Go USA!

[stevedeshazer]

11. Incredible irony.

Bushco = Land mines good.

Gay marriage bad, national crisis, Constitutional Amendment urgently needed.

Killing, maiming, murder: Good.

Love, commitment, equality: Bad.

:mad: