Donald Trump ditches Obama-era restrictions on use of landmines, citing 'great power competition'

If God is still interested in the human part of HIs creation, Bernie WILL WIN.

 

Well they can just clear the anti personnel ones can't they?

 

Okay, so where is your thread from during Obama's Presidency, titled, 'Barack Obama, pure evil --- Land Mines?'

 

Please go back to the opening thread, and read again.
Under Obama all land mines were banned, except for the situation between the 2 Koreans.
So he (Obama) wasn't perfect, but miles above the weapons hot head Trump.
But not surprised of such a reaction from someone with the hint towards Christianity, always in favor of the far right....
Why ?????????????????????
Reg.

 

Yes, I would.
why would people try who to find justification even for land mines? They are a relic of gone times, and should be banned, from all countries, world wide !!!
The US under Obama did so, with the exemption of the Korean conflict zone. It was a good start. Now we are back to zero.
Trump is evil, nothing more, nothing less.
Reg.

 

And what about under Clinton?

 

So once more, we have someone who could cause harm for the purity of their thoughts.
You have "solved" the issue of landmines, IN AMERICA, and meanwhile everyone else
will use landmines, even against you. And there is more fighting because we have made
it easier for armies to attack each other.

So next we will get America to ban cluster bombs, napalm, nukes, any kind of bomb,
dum dum bullets, any kind of bullets, frigates, destroyers, any kind of killing boat, jets,
assault helicopters, any kind of killing aerial vehicle etc etc..
Don't say it won't happen. The activist says, "I don't know anything about these other
things, I am just concerned about landmines." And then, later on, the said activist is
waving an anti-nuclear banner in the street to ban nukes - American nukes that is.

 

Sure lets do things that kill people long after any conflict has ended particularly children. Really it is just those people who enjoy killing people particularly children in peacetime and who have no empathy for other human beings who support land mines.

 

The brutal calculus would be
1 - number of potential lives saved by sowing land mines
2 - number of potential lives lost afterwards

Nations will make those calculations. IMO the issue is straight forward,
register where those mines are and clear them after the conflict. That
could reduce the accidents and the conflict.

 

Enlighten us.....

 

Poo,
this is about the ban on land mines, not on scare mongering scenarios of what happens next.
And to me, maybe not the brightest on the planet, the ban on land mines is/was a step in the right direction...
We need to get back to this, so I sincerely hope Trump won't make another term....
Reg.

 

and what we know is that 80 percent of land mines kill people after any conflict is over and the people who they injure and kill the most is children.

Only people with lack of empathy for other people particularly children could support land mines. Only people who totally lack empathy do not understand there are other ways to deal with differences than killing.

 

So God is into politics
and God is Democrat.
?

 

But sensible, moral and calculating people DO care "what happens next"
Such people are not ideological or overtly political or Marxist
I could reduce the chance of an offensive on this front by 35% with mines
which will reduce human losses by 10,000 men. BUT I could have hundreds
of people killed in years to come when they encounter land mines which
were not removed.
It's a risk I take - hundreds die or are injured. Thousands of lives are saved.

You know, moral activists stopped US car manufacturers testing air bags
on dead babies. They went to Germany for testing and the activists followed
them. Pleas for understanding fell on deaf ears - using baby bodies was
banned. No worry, the auto manufacturers just tested the air bags on live
babies, in real accidents - and learned how to tune the detonators by
looking at the death toll.
Our self righteous activist never took that into consideration, even when
told it would happen. "Not our problem."
Same with people who want to ban land mines.

 

which is why they ban the use of a weapon which kills 80% of its victims during peace time and who kills mainly children in addition to being extremely difficult to remove. Land mines are intended to kill long after any conflict is over. They are a weapon of hate to destroy the innocent.

 

God (if he exists) is certainly not into the fog of politics and irrationality that envelops us on planet earth.

OTOH Jesus said: "Love God and love one-another".....and war is surely the ultimate blasphemy against that commandment.

As for politics, Bernie is not a 'Democrat' (ie as in the 'Democrat' party).
He is an authentic social democrat who cares for people, as can be seen by his policies
1. single payer health
2. debt free tertiary education
3. universal above poverty employment.

Not to mention a consistent anti-war stance through his entire career, unlike Biden and Clinton.

And speaking of war....I note you have abandoned our little exchange re a UNSC without veto.

 

Land mines are not a device of hate, they are a device of protection.
They help keep North and South Korea apart for instance. They
weren't sown to "hate" anyone - they are there to stop North Korean
tanks and infantry.
Best of both worlds is to mark where they are and remove them
after the conflict.

Whoa.. have I forgotten something? UNSC... sorry, get back to that later, if I don't then remind me.
If Bernie is full of love then why does he saddle the tax payer with the cost of every tertiary enrollment?
Does Bernie love tax payers?
If North Korea invaded South Korea (say) and Bernie does nothing - does he love the South Koreans
or the North Koreans? Would Bernie have helped Britain in WWII?
What does Bernie think of the 60 million people who pay for their health insurance?
Is he going to get the unemployed (and there will be more, for sure) to shove rocks to a spot, then move
them back again? He certainly doesn't love businesses that much.
I don't want to leader who "loves" I want a leader who is tough, pragmatic, speaks softly and carries a
big stick and UNDERSTANDS SECONDARY LEVEL ECONOMICS. (this BTW doesn't include Trump)

 

I'm wondering if you criticised him too.

 

Frankly, I don't want to see a two term Trump. In a second term he will be worse
than first term, if that's possible.
But if you got a rival candidate who is going to love everyone, and everything is
free (including dope) and it's going to be a wonderful new world then every single
thinking person is going to vote Trump.

 

By fighting for reason, capitalism, and individual rights. We are the moral, the just, the righteous, the free. They are the immoral, the unjust, the horrid, the thugs and tyrants.

Star fighting for the right ideals, and the bad will go way.

 

How can I criticize something which doesn't exist?
You do/think what you want, but belief and religion go hand in hand, and knowledge is something very different!
Reg.

 

Why do you have to exaggerate everything? You don't like democrats/Labor, that's for sure....
Reg.

 

There has been a slow global movement toward the ban spearheaded by the late Princess Diana

The Ottawa treaty has 164 signatories

 

Land mines are a weapon which is most destructive against civilians in peacetime and in particular children and are exceedingly difficult to remove. 80% of people are killed and injured by landmines in peacetime and the civilians most killed and injured are children., Only someone of psychopathic mentality could promote this. I appreciate that psychopaths are people who at some time were horrendously ill treated which is why their inner feeling self shut down and why being unable to feel themselves they are unable to feel empathy but no one but a person of a psychopathic mentality unable to feel empathy could support the killing of civilians in particular children in peacetime. No one without these negative characteristics knowing what land mines do, knowing that landmines kill 80% of the people in peacetime, that the main victims are children and that they are exceedingly difficult to remove could support using them for any reason.

 

Was carpet bombing a country you were not at war with “moral” or “just”?