weswelker#83

More than 100 nations agree to immediately ban the use of cluster bombs. Israel, USA somehow not on the list.

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/eu...ef=mpstoryview

otis p. driftwood

"But somehow Israel, USA not on the list"...what a friggin joke you are. Really. Just pathetic and disingenuous.

Though some of the biggest makers of cluster bombs, including the United States, Russia, China and Israel, were not involved in the talks and have not signed the accord, organizers predicted that those nations would nevertheless be pressured into compliance.

Interesting what you left out, wes. Very telling as to what your agenda is, as if we didnt' know.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

weswelker#83

Is it ok to be a criminal Because china and russia are ok with it?

otis p. driftwood

First of all, who determines "criminal"? You? Me? Ireland?

Secondly, I just think it's telling that you made sure to mention the US and Israel, but never mentioned Russia or China.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

weswelker#83

Who determines?



Watch video:
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/clusters/video.htm


more info:
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/clusters/index.htm

otis p. driftwood

Yawn. New ones go off much better. And they're an excellent way to decimate personell, which after all is one of the objectives of war. And guess what? In Gulf I, one of the biggest things that led the Iraqi army to surrender as quickly as it did was the fear of those very cluster bombs. So you could make the argument that they actually save lives.

Or you could just believe every little bit of anti American propaganda that gets put out, whichever.

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

wistahpatsfan

Russia, China, US, and Israel are all dicks for not agreeing to it. You should have included all four in your statement so as to not appear biased for some reason. I know you're biased like I am. So is a.paul, BTW.

Anyways....do you suppose that the US opposition to the pact is being driven by....oh, let's say....certain interests who happen to have a hand in the manufacture of...never mind. Crazy talk, right?

wistahpatsfan

What a total load of bull*****.

Sorry, man, but you are more of an apologist for this administration as I've seen on this forum at this point.

Let me get this straight....
Iraq surrendered because of cluster bombs...not apathy,no pay, battle fatigue or complete lack of patriotism, huh? WTF are you talking about? CLUSTER BOMBS SAVE LIVES? That's some insane, twisted logic...unless of course it was satire.

I also like the way you use the word "personell". It's neatly dehumanizing and very Pentagonish. Right up there with "collateral damage"......"personell"....what a clown!

otis p. driftwood

I'm not biased, whatchoo talkin bout willis?

__________________
Questions are a burden
and answers a prison
for oneself.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Stokes

Instead of banning an effective weapon, why not do as the US official suggested in the article and use technology to render the unexploded bomblets harmless after the battle is over? That seems to be a much more common sense solution than the US taking an useful weapon out of its arsenal. Cluster bombs are good at killing troops. I'm sure commanders in any future conflict would like the option to kill large numbers of ground troops with a few bombs dropped rather than sending in infantry to do it and risk higher casualties.