»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Mine Over Matter
| The Alley |
|
Mine Over Matter |
|
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA 
|
Obama administration will not sign land mine ban WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration has decided not to sign an international convention that bans land mines. State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said Tuesday that the administration recently completed a review and decided not to change the Bush-administration era policy. "We decided that our land mine policy remains in effect," he said. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-11-24-landmine-ban_N.htm?csp=34&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsatodaycomWashington-TopStories+%28News+-+W ashington+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo Guess they are agreeing with a Bush decision? How about that?? |
||
| © Copyright 2009 Michael Mack - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
More like the Eisenhower administration Mike. If Brad was around he would probably tell you why no U.S. President will ever sign any land mine treaty. We have about a zillion of them planted between North and South Korea. Since we have very little land power there and have air superiority -- the land mines prevent North Korea from sending massive troops into South Korea. Of course that means that we can't send troops into North Korea either -- but -- we have air superiority -- so it's a wash. There will be no land mine treaties ever -- until the ticking time bomb in North Korea is defused. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Thanks for the explanation, reb. Nice to see Obama and Bush agreed on something  |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
I agree. I should also say that when I said 'we' have about a 'zillion' (1.2 million) of them in the DMZ -- the ROK actually 'owns' most of them -- 'we' meaning the U.S. and the ROK. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Um, LR is right. However, I still cringe at the documentaries from Cambodia. Why not get rid of those? Why is it always everything or nothing? |
||
|
Local Rebel Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-21
Posts 5767Southern Abstentia |
Because compromise spoils ideological purity? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
If Korea ever reunifies, there's going to be a big mess. Land mines are a military necessity, at least in some situations. Armies find they save the lives of troops, and are useful in defending territory. These uses, however, have only a time limited utility. And some forms of land-mines we should be able to agree to ban. If there are such things as land-mines that look like toys, and I'm told there are, these things are an abomination. They are directed at children, and civilian children at that. We ought to be able to ban them in the same way that we have banned dum-dum rounds. There ought to be some way of keeping track of where the mines are laid, so that they can be taken up or detonated later when hostilities are over. They should not be the gift that keeps on giving. It seems it might be well worth working out some sort of agreement that takes at least some of these factors into account. How badly do we hate the English, for example, whom we distrusted and disliked quite seriously through the civil war and for some time afterwards? What would it do to our relations today if there were still English mines blowing folks up on American soil at unpredictable times and places? It wouldn't improve my feelings any. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
