- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- ukraine@lemmit.online
You must log in or # to comment.
Ukraine has signed the Ottawa treaty that prohibits the use of mines. What consequences will that have on Ukraine and on the compliance of this kind of treaties by other signing countries?
(Of course Russia and the US, being the large piles of shit they are regarding weapons industry, haven’t signed the treaty).
Russia has shown that it breaks treaties whenever it sees fit. If Ukraine is to supposed to respect treaties, it needs to be supported to such an extend that it sees no need to break them.
Why is it that some people frequently say something that Ukraine has ‘signed treaties’, or ‘the West must not cross red lines’ …
All this without naming the aggressor in this war which is Russia. Russia permanently violates airspace of Poland, Romania, Moldova. Russia deploys sabotage activities in multiple countries across Europe, in the North Sea, the Baltic Sea, espionage activities in the Irish Sea. Russia gets decisive support by China in its war in Ukraine. North Korea is sending troops. Iran has been sending drones.
What consequences should that have on the compliance of treaties by countries, @drolex@sopuli.xyz?
So because Russia doesn’t play by the rules, no one else should?
Somewhat yes
Yeah, that was my thought too…
If they want to defend their country, even in victory… years of farmers and their families getting maimed and killed.
Proper mines destroy themselves after a fixed period of time.
perhaps… someone said a ‘battery’ runs out…
I’m assuming they are loaded with high-order explosive, so a random foot or cultivating machine ‘shouldn’t’ set it off…
Still I’d be hesitant,
even their own troops could walk into it by accident,
I only know of the AT2 anti vehicle mines from Bundeswehr. They disarm after an adjustable period of time, between 3 and 96 hours, by self detonation.
Sadly the better option than genocide.
Well, if they don’t get that victory, they won’t have to worry about those farmers…
Removed by mod
For example, US allies Ukraine and Finland have recently signaled they might withdraw from the treaty out of military necessity.
src (2014)
They say it’s a matter of necessity. And it seems withdrawal from the treaty is an option.
/edit: Another source from Wikipedia:
Russian forces have widely utilized antipersonnel mines since their full invasion of Ukraine commenced on February 24, 2022.
The Monitor also reports the use of antipersonnel mines by Ukrainian government forces in and around the city of Izium in 2022 when the city was under Russian control. Ukraine is bound by the Mine Ban Treaty.
They’ve already been using them.
Dumb :| Give them more missiles instead.
hey if they’re sitting there, give em
Ukraine has signed the Ottawa Treaty, banning the use of anti-personel landmines though. It’s imperative that they stick to it. Also it brings so much issues when the war is over, just look at Cambodia
I’m not arguing for the use of land mines here (too destructive to civilians), but what’s your argument for the following?
It’s imperative that they stick to it [the treaty]
Sincere question, why? They’re being invaded by an enemy that does not accept surrender / treat POWs properly (or even as humans), and which frequently commits atrocities on civilian populations in occupied areas. Even if you accept that some conduct is unacceptable even in defense of one’s home, what about when you know the invaders are going to rape, torture, and kill women and children?
Why do they need to follow “the rules”? Or ANY rules? What’s worse than what is being inflicted on their innocent people?
It’s imperative that they stick to it.
Why?
Letting Russia win introduces continuous genocide and forced conscription for war against EU states issue. Pick your poison.
Abstaining from using illegal weapons is not decisive for the outcome of the war. Ukraine should receive more legal weapons and have no constraints on using them. That is the poison to pick.
Problem is, the first half of your statement is dependent on the latter half. That’s not a choice for Ukraine, but a fallback strategy.
ITT: couch experts worrying about conventions and ethics while the people in question are literally fighting for their lives
Landmines kill innocent people decades after the conflicts they were deployed in are over. So yeah, it’s fighting for their lives, too
All hail the lame duck period!
Just to remind you: Landmines are considered a war crime and should never be used. That is because they mostly do damage in the long-term, similar to nuclear fallout.
War of aggression is a war crime, as are many things. Who’s going to uphold the law though?
Landmines are considered a war crime and should never be used.
They’re not though.
Maybe my memory is inaccurate
The Ottawa Treaty attempted to get rid of them, but it’s essentially just a voluntary thing. Ukraine did sign up to it, but many of the world’s major military powers did not. Unfortunately Russia is among those that didn’t. Since Russia is mining the front anyway, there’s little benefit to Ukraine not doing so
There is a small silver lining here - or a less dark patch of the cloud, maybe - in that modern mines are designed to make themselves inert or self destruct after a few weeks or months
Great, more war crimes and decades of demining after the war…
These mines are battery-powered, and when it runs out, the mine cannot trigger. So demining is easier at least…
Jesus, what were they giving them before? Sticks and stones?
