US senators send letter to Obama urging landmine ban

Mugabe lecturing the US on how to act comes across as a bit hypocritical. Not to mention laughable.

I think you mistook exactly who got laughed out of the room on that one.

that is exactly the point. if a prick like mugabe can make some points, you are in trouble. the hypocritical part is not only on mugabe's side, he plays defense, the usa tries to play offense. without covering the weak spots.

land mines, e.g.

The point is, Mugabe didn't make any points.

Forgive me if I am of the opinion that Mugabe can go shit in a hat for all I care.

at least we have the same opinion of mugabe.

can you see the hypocrisy argument about the landmines?
 
that is exactly the point. if a prick like mugabe can make some points, you are in trouble. the hypocritical part is not only on mugabe's side, he plays defense, the usa tries to play offense. without covering the weak spots.

land mines, e.g.

The point is, Mugabe didn't make any points.

Forgive me if I am of the opinion that Mugabe can go shit in a hat for all I care.

at least we have the same opinion of mugabe.

can you see the hypocrisy argument about the landmines?

Nope. 'Cuz we're not lobbying for the rest of the world to sign it, while we don't. THAT would be hypocrisy.

Us just not signing it.....is just us not signing it....
 
The point is, Mugabe didn't make any points.

Forgive me if I am of the opinion that Mugabe can go shit in a hat for all I care.

at least we have the same opinion of mugabe.

can you see the hypocrisy argument about the landmines?

Nope. 'Cuz we're not lobbying for the rest of the world to sign it, while we don't. THAT would be hypocrisy.

Us just not signing it.....is just us not signing it....

ah, ok. i get it now. but that is retarded. you think the landmine thing exists in a vacuum? no, you don't. you are just lobbying for a lot of other kinds of weapons for the rest of the world to ban . while you have it.

basically, you want it all, and want to dictate what the others can have.

and that is why you are not liked.
 
at least we have the same opinion of mugabe.

can you see the hypocrisy argument about the landmines?

Nope. 'Cuz we're not lobbying for the rest of the world to sign it, while we don't. THAT would be hypocrisy.

Us just not signing it.....is just us not signing it....

ah, ok. i get it now. but that is retarded. you think the landmine thing exists in a vacuum? no, you don't. you are just lobbying for a lot of other kinds of weapons for the rest of the world to ban . while you have it.

basically, you want it all, and want to dictate what the others can have.

and that is why you are not liked.

Yeah, um...no.

Where have I lobbied for other kinds of weapons to be banned?

Where did I say that I want it all and want to dictate to others what they can have?

Can you see over the top of your strawman?
 
Nope. 'Cuz we're not lobbying for the rest of the world to sign it, while we don't. THAT would be hypocrisy.

Us just not signing it.....is just us not signing it....

ah, ok. i get it now. but that is retarded. you think the landmine thing exists in a vacuum? no, you don't. you are just lobbying for a lot of other kinds of weapons for the rest of the world to ban . while you have it.

basically, you want it all, and want to dictate what the others can have.

and that is why you are not liked.

Yeah, um...no.

Where have I lobbied for other kinds of weapons to be banned?

Where did I say that I want it all and want to dictate to others what they can have?

Can you see over the top of your strawman?

yes. i was making very general statements.

i can give an example.

when i wrote: that is why you are not liked, i was not referring to you, because you are actually one of the very few posters on this board that i like.

so all the "you" statements were not directed at you personally, but at the USA.

are we clear now, i suspect you knew this already and were just calling me on my sloppy wording.
 
ah, ok. i get it now. but that is retarded. you think the landmine thing exists in a vacuum? no, you don't. you are just lobbying for a lot of other kinds of weapons for the rest of the world to ban . while you have it.

basically, you want it all, and want to dictate what the others can have.

and that is why you are not liked.

Yeah, um...no.

Where have I lobbied for other kinds of weapons to be banned?

Where did I say that I want it all and want to dictate to others what they can have?

Can you see over the top of your strawman?

yes. i was making very general statements.

i can give an example.

when i wrote: that is why you are not liked, i was not referring to you, because you are actually one of the very few posters on this board that i like.

so all the "you" statements were not directed at you personally, but at the USA.

are we clear now, i suspect you knew this already and were just calling me on my sloppy wording.

Where has the USA lobbied for the rest of the world sign on to the landmine ban while we don't?
 
Yeah, um...no.

Where have I lobbied for other kinds of weapons to be banned?

Where did I say that I want it all and want to dictate to others what they can have?

Can you see over the top of your strawman?

yes. i was making very general statements.

i can give an example.

when i wrote: that is why you are not liked, i was not referring to you, because you are actually one of the very few posters on this board that i like.

so all the "you" statements were not directed at you personally, but at the USA.

are we clear now, i suspect you knew this already and were just calling me on my sloppy wording.

Where has the USA lobbied for the rest of the world sign on to the landmine ban while we don't?

they have not, to my knowledge. will we play this game for a long time now? i already said my piece, i will not repeat it another time.
 
yes. i was making very general statements.

i can give an example.

when i wrote: that is why you are not liked, i was not referring to you, because you are actually one of the very few posters on this board that i like.

so all the "you" statements were not directed at you personally, but at the USA.

are we clear now, i suspect you knew this already and were just calling me on my sloppy wording.

Where has the USA lobbied for the rest of the world sign on to the landmine ban while we don't?

they have not, to my knowledge. will we play this game for a long time now? i already said my piece, i will not repeat it another time.

You're just not making sense to me. You call it hypocritical, but I see no hypocrisy in the US's actions.
 
Where has the USA lobbied for the rest of the world sign on to the landmine ban while we don't?

they have not, to my knowledge. will we play this game for a long time now? i already said my piece, i will not repeat it another time.

You're just not making sense to me. You call it hypocritical, but I see no hypocrisy in the US's actions.

you seem to want to limit the whole scenario to landmines. in reality, this cannot be done. so the USA defies the landmine ban. but the USA also wants other countries to honor the non-proliferation of nuclear arms.
the USA chooses the rules that apply to them, and to others. this is my last serious word on this. haha
 
they have not, to my knowledge. will we play this game for a long time now? i already said my piece, i will not repeat it another time.

You're just not making sense to me. You call it hypocritical, but I see no hypocrisy in the US's actions.

you seem to want to limit the whole scenario to landmines. in reality, this cannot be done. so the USA defies the landmine ban. but the USA also wants other countries to honor the non-proliferation of nuclear arms.
the USA chooses the rules that apply to them, and to others. this is my last serious word on this. haha

Landmines do not have the ability to destroy all human life on the planet as we know it.

Bit of a difference in scale there.
 
You're just not making sense to me. You call it hypocritical, but I see no hypocrisy in the US's actions.

you seem to want to limit the whole scenario to landmines. in reality, this cannot be done. so the USA defies the landmine ban. but the USA also wants other countries to honor the non-proliferation of nuclear arms.
the USA chooses the rules that apply to them, and to others. this is my last serious word on this. haha

Landmines do not have the ability to destroy all human life on the planet as we know it.

Bit of a difference in scale there.


the shit that was used to justify the iraq war was not capable of destroying all human life on the planet. there is no scale. just some arbitrary bullshit. i guess in the long term it would be better to nuke a place, instead of planting landmines everywhere. esp. the anti-personnel mines.
 
you seem to want to limit the whole scenario to landmines. in reality, this cannot be done. so the USA defies the landmine ban. but the USA also wants other countries to honor the non-proliferation of nuclear arms.
the USA chooses the rules that apply to them, and to others. this is my last serious word on this. haha

Landmines do not have the ability to destroy all human life on the planet as we know it.

Bit of a difference in scale there.


the shit that was used to justify the iraq war was not capable of destroying all human life on the planet. there is no scale. just some arbitrary bullshit. i guess in the long term it would be better to nuke a place, instead of planting landmines everywhere. esp. the anti-personnel mines.

Going to war with someone is not the same as encouraging them to sign a treaty to ban land mines.

We did the first (which I was against), and didn't do the second.
 
Landmines do not have the ability to destroy all human life on the planet as we know it.

Bit of a difference in scale there.


the shit that was used to justify the iraq war was not capable of destroying all human life on the planet. there is no scale. just some arbitrary bullshit. i guess in the long term it would be better to nuke a place, instead of planting landmines everywhere. esp. the anti-personnel mines.

Going to war with someone is not the same as encouraging them to sign a treaty to ban land mines.

We did the first (which I was against), and didn't do the second.

we are not going anywhere here.

my position is: anti-personnel land mines have to be banned. NOW!
 
There is no "nice" way to make war. There is no way to wage war using gentlemen's rules. War is hell. The purpose of war is not to kill but to save lives. The faster we get it over with, the better for all sides.
I would get rid of every restriction on how war is waged. We want to use hollow point? Good. Fuck the Hague Convention. We need landmines to protect our personnel? Good, use 'em. Phoo gas? Great.
Whatever it takes. Turn the cameras off, do what needs doing, and come home.
 
AFP: US senators send letter to Obama urging landmine ban

WASHINGTON — Two out of three US Senators sent a letter to President Barack Obama urging him to work toward the ratification of the 1997 treaty banning anti-personnel landmines, the Senate said Wednesday.

Signed by 68 senators, including 10 Republicans, the letter supports the Obama administration's ongoing review of US policy on landmines and is the first indication the Senate is in favor of ratifying the treaty, which the US refuses to sign.

Significantly, it represents one more than the 67 votes needed for ratification, however, the senators in their letter make no firm commitment on a vote.

The key US objection to signing the treaty was the Pentagon's concern it might need anti-personnel landmines to slow a possible invasion of South Korea by its communist neighbor, North Korea.

Leahy pointed out that the US military no longer uses landmines in the Korean peninsula.

The Ottawa Convention banning the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel mines as well as their destruction was signed by 158 nations, including several US allies.

Besides the United States, China and Russia have also declined to join the treaty.

Very interesting to say the least, thoughts?

I think this is a great idea. The fuding for land mines could be cut from the defense budget!!! COST SAVINGS!
 
the shit that was used to justify the iraq war was not capable of destroying all human life on the planet. there is no scale. just some arbitrary bullshit. i guess in the long term it would be better to nuke a place, instead of planting landmines everywhere. esp. the anti-personnel mines.

Going to war with someone is not the same as encouraging them to sign a treaty to ban land mines.

We did the first (which I was against), and didn't do the second.

we are not going anywhere here.

my position is: anti-personnel land mines have to be banned. NOW!

I have no problem being banned by internal US legislation, because it can also be repealed internally if need be, and it's none of the rest of the worlds business.

I also have no problem with us never using them again, ever.

I just don't like willingly backing into an international corner.
 
Going to war with someone is not the same as encouraging them to sign a treaty to ban land mines.

We did the first (which I was against), and didn't do the second.

we are not going anywhere here.

my position is: anti-personnel land mines have to be banned. NOW!

I have no problem being banned by internal US legislation, because it can also be repealed internally if need be, and it's none of the rest of the worlds business.

I also have no problem with us never using them again, ever.

I just don't like willingly backing into an international corner.

so let's see if obama can find his balls and ban them. the landmines, not his balls.
 
If we can redefine our tactics and doctrine to the point where mines are no longer needed, I would agree with it as long as the mines can be deactivated.

If the military still needs them to protect our soldiers they should be able to use them
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top