This Is Where We Lose The Moral High-Ground

Unbelievable.  There cannot be a good reason for opting out of this ban. If you scroll down the article, theres a video of the damn things at work.  Christ on a cracker, we can be so cowardly sometimes.  Pathetic.

Advertisements

14 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

14 responses to “This Is Where We Lose The Moral High-Ground

  1. Mack:

    Absolutely right. And the Kyoto protocols. As long as the corporatists see a chance to increase their fortunes at someone else’s expense–they will do so.

    Of course the U.S. is quite concerned about companies that still use CFC’s (because they’re a cheaper technology to work with) than newer, more expensive propellants for spray paint, etc.

  2. Actually, now that I’ve had a moment to think about it…

    Perhaps we should just send the dolts who formulated this position on a fact finding mission to Eritreia, Cambodia or some other place that is well “salted” with CBU bomblets and let them experience, personally, what a joy it is to be paralyzed with fear or just plain paralyzed.

  3. When it is poor children of color getting maimed and killed, it just doesn’t generate outrage at the levels necessary to change things. Same ol same ol.

  4. cluster bombs give regular armies a big advantage in battle – they can literally destroy a batallion of tanks in an instant. Our army is still worried it will have to fight the sovie, uh Rooshans and all their tanks or those Chinese Commies and all their tanks in a big land battle. As if they could move all their tanks somewhere we’d also want to move all ours and fight.

    The military cannot absorb the lessons it should have learned about war after Vietnam and 9/11, while still being afraid of WWIII.

  5. Seems to me, Jim, that absent a land based attack up through Mexico or down through Canada, we won’t have to worry about repelling a ground attack. Most wars now require lighter, faster, smaller units…but, really, isn’t that besides the point? These weapons continue to kill and injure years after truces or treaties are struck, and they should be banned.

  6. I just purchased the book “Sex & War: How Biology Explains Warfare and Terrorism and Offers a Path to a Safer World,” which I plan to read as soon as I finish my current book. I read an excerpt here, and then an interesting interview with the authors.

    I think this will be a must-read for anyone interested in the future of warfare. I really do think the developed world has evolved to a place where warfare is no longer useful in achieving goals, and we need to devise a more effective, non-war based means of problem solving.

  7. Well, yeah, but isn’t that exactly the point? It’s like armies who use rape as a tactic. It is about continuing to damage folks long after truces or treaties have been struck.

    I agree that they should be banned, but I just don’t want us to lose sight of the fact that we pretend like wars end and we make up and things go back to how they should be, but that’s not how we fight wars–we continue to inflict harm under the radar.

  8. I don’t know, B. I highly doubt that rape committed by soldiers is anything more than a crime of opportunity, I don’t think the idea is to inflict damage years beyond the offense, though that clearly is what happens.

    We fought the japanese and the Germans, I don’t think we wanted to see their kids blown up years later by left over munitions.

    Some wars do end. Thank God. Some just morph into a different type of fighting. But we have seen bans on some chemicals used in warfare, so, its not like banning certain weapons is unprecedented.

  9. BTW, I’m aware that some armies indeed use rape as a weapon of terror.

  10. I agree, Mack. The military considers the number of bomblets that don’t go bang a small enough percentage that they just don’t care. It’s called collateral damage, and they consider it acceptable levels of risk (where risk means geerals aren’t going there anyway, so dubya tee eff).

  11. although I have seen posts – but not recent ones – where Germany or Britain would find unexploded bombs in a basement or such.

  12. bridgett

    Rape is not only meant to terrorize the women and demoralize the men, but change the demographic composition of an occupied territory. You’re creating an army to leave behind that will eat up resources and be a humiliating reminder of the occupation even if you later leave. (Yep, strategic planners actually talk about stuff like that. Evil. )

  13. You have painted cluster bomb with a broad brush. There are those types that aren’t designed to explode. You also left out the ones, used almost exclusively by the evil US, that are designed to either detonate or disarm after X amount of time.

    Are you saying we had the moral high ground previous to this?

  14. Cluster bomb “design” does not, necessarily equal cluster bomb performance.

    CBU’s are one of several munitions that are designed to cause both physical and emotional damage to an enemy. Another is those lovely mines that are made of materials that are hard to detect with traditional mine-sweeping devices.

    Exador the short answer to your question is, “no.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s