They are banned for the same reason the use of cluster munitions are frowned upon. The problem of being left behind after deployed during war time as they continue to cause horrific civilian casualties which is a huge a big problem for a country trying to recover from war. Particularly if they were deployed inside a country to defend what was then the front line or a fortified location like the outskirts of a town or village.
However if you find yourself in the unfortunate position of having an aggressive neighbouring country where you share a large land border who has broken peace treaty promises repeatedly and is repeatedly making threats about invading, then putting landmines along your border is a VERY effective way to deter and slow down an invasion.
I wish that we weren’t in a situation where countries felt it necessary to deploy landmines for border defense but here we are.
Wrong. If nobody invades, the mines don’t get laid out in the first place.
If it does come to that, the positions are marked mapped and they will get cleaned out. The reason for the treaty was that in some places mines were just spread willy nilly.
I still haven’t seen your explanation for how this is actually an offense, but keep moving that goalpost 👍
Yeah I mean the same the only thing that treaty was stopping was ap mines you could always have at mines and those can be rigged light to be jerry rigged ap.
Reasoning is viable in that it sucks for people living there. But so does invasion. If land mines can do deterrence, it definitely is going to act as a net positive.
Are we the baddies?
No, the neighbour-invading neighbour which makes landmines necessary in the first place is the baddy in this scenario.
lemmy is the kind of place where people get offended by defense. and I don’t mean what americans call “defense” but actual defense
deleted by creator
Maybe I’m lacking imagination here, but how exactly would… …
“I’m planting landmines on my own land, which would only go off if someone decides to invade”
NOT be defence?
Offensive landmines killing poor innocent invaders who come in and step on them.
Finland is being so aggressive in this landmine assault.
deleted by creator
I mean I hope so. There never are until there is
If you wanted to educate us you should post it here, it would work better
They are banned for the same reason the use of cluster munitions are frowned upon. The problem of being left behind after deployed during war time as they continue to cause horrific civilian casualties which is a huge a big problem for a country trying to recover from war. Particularly if they were deployed inside a country to defend what was then the front line or a fortified location like the outskirts of a town or village.
However if you find yourself in the unfortunate position of having an aggressive neighbouring country where you share a large land border who has broken peace treaty promises repeatedly and is repeatedly making threats about invading, then putting landmines along your border is a VERY effective way to deter and slow down an invasion.
I wish that we weren’t in a situation where countries felt it necessary to deploy landmines for border defense but here we are.
Common sense takes are always buried 6 replies deep, I find.
deleted by creator
Tankie your for sharing your opinion!
If nobody invades, there’s no problem, no?
deleted by creator
And how many die in wars if someone invades?
Wrong. If nobody invades, the mines don’t get laid out in the first place.
If it does come to that, the positions are
markedmapped and they will get cleaned out. The reason for the treaty was that in some places mines were just spread willy nilly.I still haven’t seen your explanation for how this is actually an offense, but keep moving that goalpost 👍
Specifically marked minefields were never illegal even with that treaty so…
What I mean is marked on a map, so I guess “mapped”. I’m not operating with my native language here.
Yeah I mean the same the only thing that treaty was stopping was ap mines you could always have at mines and those can be rigged light to be jerry rigged ap.
deleted by creator
This guy has never heard of deterrence
Well, why the fuck does any country without an immediate conflict coming up maintain an army?
For a moment earlier it sounded like you were concerned with people losing limbs to mines, and there I would agree if mines were planted proactively.
But you’re just offended by defense.
Tanks and goodbye!
deleted by creator
Then what’s the problem?
deleted by creator
And that reason is no longer a viable one.
Reasoning is viable in that it sucks for people living there. But so does invasion. If land mines can do deterrence, it definitely is going to act as a net positive.