Should landmines be banned?

[Baphomet 0]

Ideally I'd say they should be banned. That's not going to happen. War is awful. War brings out the worst in human beings. It's not hollywood or -any- game at all.

It's being stuck out in the rain, snow or desert for days; cold or overheated and hungry and tired. Seeing random people and friends getting killed and stumbling in a moment of fatigue induced thoughtlessness, eyes glazed over from lack of sleep onto a landmine you never saw and couldn't fight if you wanted to.

Still they'll be used anyhow. It's war. We can try to establish all sorts of rules but in the end self preservation for the moment always wins out.

[SpecOp9 0]

good question.

I voted "I don't know" because

1. I see landmines as a normal weapon

2. Landmines can be a unfair weapon

[MacReady 0]

Only killers, profiteers and retards voted no. They shall burn in hell.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion without getting flamed for it.

This behaviour is uncalled for and not acceptable on these forums.

Don't do it again please.

I'm not flaming anyone, after all, I'm speaking in general. But if somebody finds it offensive it's his own GD problem. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

Sorry, but I will speak my mind whenever I fell like it.

[Harnu 0]

Quote[/b] ]Only killers, profiteers and retards voted no

Speaking in general, but specifically to all those who voted no?

Sorry, but I will speak my mind whenever I fell like it.

That's going to prove very difficult once you're banned  

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

Only killers, profiteers and retards voted no. They shall burn in hell.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion without getting flamed for it.

This behaviour is uncalled for and not acceptable on these forums.

Don't do it again please.

I'm not flaming anyone, after all, I'm speaking in general. But if somebody finds it offensive it's his own GD problem. Truth hurts, doesn't it?

Sorry, but I will speak my mind whenever I fell like it.

You can say whatever you want - within the confines of the rules.

If you break the rules, you lose your privilidge to post. It is your choice how you choose to behave in the future

[Gollum1 0]

Sorry, not meaning to armchair moderate, but Macready I'd just like to point out that this is a forum owned by BIS and it is a privilege to post here and not a freedom-of-speech related right.

And btw I don't kill people or sell landmines, and I do go to college.

[WhoCares 0]

I am completely against land mines, except maybe AntiPinguin Mines.  

(Flash Player required)

PS: A less gory version is in my signature.

[DarkLight 0]

@ Feb. 28 2004,19:35)]Voted no. If someone can quarantee that our eastern neigbour won´t attack us then i would say yes to ban them.

Hmmm... I guess i haven't been listening to the news a lot lately...

I actually thought that our fucked up, stupid Western world always attacks the East!

Haha please forgive me, i'm so stupid!!! Of course we just attack out of self defense... Or to help those poor Eastern ppl with their weeeeird religion!

*Sigh*

....Damn i love this world....

Smeeeell the irony

hmmm haven't been on this forums for a while...

Hey guy that lives near Ypres, where exactly do you live?

[DarkLight 0]

Btw, i voted yes...

[MacReady 0]

@Harnu: Well the poll itself is anonymous, so yes I was speaking in general. If, however, a person comes out and says 'i voted NO', then it's his own problem if he gets targeted by my opinion.

About banning: you can ban me if you want to, but that doesn't mean I can't get back in a matter of minutes if I choose to. So I believe banning anyone is futile. You better learn to deal with opposing opinions instead of banning people who openly disagree with you.

@Ex-RoNiN: I don't intend to be rude or anything, but if someone asks me about my opinion then I will not spare a word. If you don't like it, so be it. I couldn't care less, really.

@Gollum1: Like I said, they can ban me if they want to. There isn't much that I can do about it, is it?

And about your college, do you mean US college? If that's the case I regret to inform you that going to college in your country is really not an equivalent to high IQ.

[Frisbee 0]

I actually thought that our fucked up, stupid Western world always attacks the East!

I think he's Finnish,their eastern neighbour being Russia.

They're a conventional weapon,but they are often used in a manner where more civilians get hurt by them,than soldiers.

Dictators and rebels will use them regardless of the ban,but that's no reason to let everyone else still use them imho.

[Gollum1 0]

@Gollum1: Like I said, they can ban me if they want to. There isn't much that I can do about it, is it?

And about your college, do you mean US college? If that's the case I regret to inform you that going to college in your country is really not an equivalent to high IQ.

Why on Earth would I go to an American college, I live in Finland as you can plainly see by my extremely visible sig and profile.

I was responding to your accusation of me being a retard, we do have some standards over here (in fact, U.N and other surveys frequently state that Finland has one of the best quality educations in the world...IIRC, but that's OT so no need to correct me )

Oh and Darklight, yes Goeth is Finnish and Finland has not attacked a country since WW2, while its main threat to existence has always been the U.S.S.R (or...the Russian Federation nowadays? That's anyone's guess.) I understand his point.

[Harnu 0]

@Harnu: Well the poll itself is anonymous, so yes I was speaking in general. If, however, a person comes out and says 'i voted NO', then it's his own problem if he gets targeted by my opinion.

About banning: you can ban me if you want to, but that doesn't mean I can't get back in a matter of minutes if I choose to. So I believe banning anyone is futile. You better learn to deal with opposing opinions instead of banning people who openly disagree with you.

I can't ban you (Not a moderator... until I drop Hellfish into lake Michigan )

And so you know, I don't have an opposing opinion with you, I voted "Don't Know" on this poll because I'm currently indifferent on the issue. If you want to argue further about anything else, I'd be happy to through PM's, I'm up for a good argument today

[Tamme 0]

You better learn to deal with opposing opinions instead of banning people who openly disagree with you.

Nothing bad with disagreeing with others. The problem is that you were flaming other members. Arguments like that won't be taken into consideration. Try constructive criticism.

I'd like to know how we'd protect our eastern border without land mines? We are outgunned, outmanned and the FDF isn't very advanced technologically. Do you have any suggestions for us?

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

So I believe banning anyone is futile.

@Gollum1: Like I said, they can ban me if they want to. There isn't much that I can do about it, is it?

And about your college, do you mean US college?

Quote[/b] ]About banning: you can ban me if you want to, but that doesn't mean I can't get back in a matter of minutes if I choose to.

That's what you think

Quote[/b] ]You better learn to deal with opposing opinions instead of banning people who openly disagree with you.

What? The issue is your tone, not your opinion.

Quote[/b] ]@Ex-RoNiN: I don't intend to be rude or anything, but if someone asks me about my opinion then I will not spare a word. If you don't like it, so be it. I couldn't care less, really.

Like I said, I don't give a rats ass about your opinion - as long as it conforms to the rules, and as long as you present it in a civil manner. Forum rules are there for a reason.

Quote[/b] ]If that's the case I regret to inform you that going to college in your country is really not an equivalent to high IQ.

Your condescending tone becomes comical considering you completely misunderstood Harnu, others and myself

[Baphomet 0]

DarkLight. Those are some mad jubblies in your sig.

I forgot what I was going to say because of them.

[dinger 1]

Quote[/b] ]

wouldn't it be great if they would just deactivate by themselves after a set time period? I imagine that wouldn't be too difficult to set up in the age of 1.000.000 $ smart bombs.

The US has mines that do that. Some of them you can even set to when they deactivate (self-destruct). Popular options are 4 and 24 hours. The US rationale in not supporting the ban is:

A) Landmines are nasty because they persist long after their utility.

B) We make mines that don't persist.

C) therefore, our mines are not nasty.

If A) is the reason for the landmine ban, the US has a good argument. What they're delivering is more like timed ordnance than a landmine.

Of course, I'm always in favor of:

A') Force multipliers are nasty because they encourage the side possessing them to maim and kill at reduced risk.

B') Landmines are force multipliers

C') Therefore landmines should be banned.

Hell, let's wage a war old-school style, with loincloths and barefeet. And let's send our leaders out in front of our armies.

[Baphomet 0]

Couldn't you just see someone like Margaret Thatcher charging headlong into battle with a big knobby club and a few tattered scraps of cloth for battle garments?

... Talk about scary.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

Couldn't you just see someone like Margaret Thatcher charging headlong into battle with a big knobby club and a few tattered scraps of cloth for battle garments?

... Talk about scary.  

That ain't scary, that's disturbing

[denoir 0]

Quote[/b] ]

wouldn't it be great if they would just deactivate by themselves after a set time period? I imagine that wouldn't be too difficult to set up in the age of 1.000.000 $ smart bombs.

The US has mines that do that.  Some of them you can even set to when they deactivate (self-destruct). Popular options are 4 and 24 hours.  The US rationale in not supporting the ban is:

A) Landmines are nasty because they persist long after their utility.

B) We make mines that don't persist.

C) therefore, our mines are not nasty.

There are two problems with this:

1) USA and other western countries sell non-deactivatable mines to third world countries.

2) USA and other western countries use air-deployable mines and cluster bombs that are non-deactivatable.

[bn880 5]

4 and 24 hours is nothing, you need mines that can be preset for 6 months to 4 years (life expectancy of entire wars) Then self destruct.

[dinger 1]

They can do that too Bn880

Denoir:

I'm just explaining the logic of the US counterproposal, not what the US is actually doing. Don't call my country hypocritical, or we might just invade your scandinavian ass to give you a taste of true freedom.

And the discussion is on landmines. The ban on unexploded munitions (or submunitions) is another matter. And until then, our little toys will go about their business, merrily blowing the toes off of civilians and soldiers alike.

I still say we go for the loincloth-and-fists military policy. The world would be a much better place. (Uh.... just as long as Schwarzenegger doesn't get his amendment to run for president).

[DracoPaladore 0]

They can do that too Bn880

Denoir:

I'm just explaining the logic of the US counterproposal, not what the US is actually doing.  Don't call my country hypocritical, or we might just invade your scandinavian ass to give you a taste of true freedom.

He's swedish if I remember correctly.

[turms 0]

They can do that too Bn880

Denoir:

I'm just explaining the logic of the US counterproposal, not what the US is actually doing.  Don't call my country hypocritical, or we might just invade your scandinavian ass to give you a taste of true freedom.

He's swedish if I remember correctly.

And Sweden is in scandinavia...

[DracoPaladore 0]

They can do that too Bn880

Denoir:

I'm just explaining the logic of the US counterproposal, not what the US is actually doing.  Don't call my country hypocritical, or we might just invade your scandinavian ass to give you a taste of true freedom.

He's swedish if I remember correctly.

And Sweden is in scandinavia...

Boy...

Uhh..

Man do I ever feel like a moron right now.