Comments on: Cluster(Bomb) Fuck http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602 Tue, 07 Sep 2010 13:28:59 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: roger migently http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602&cpage=1#comment-45961 roger migently Mon, 26 May 2008 14:08:41 +0000 http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602#comment-45961 Not dishonest, I think, but ignorant. I discover that SMArt 155 is an anti-tank weapon. "Each round contains only two sub-munitions, has independent, reliable and redundant self-destruction mechanisms, and a self-neutralisation mechanism, and as such cannot reasonably be categorised as risking unacceptable harm to civilians." One might wonder what "acceptable harm to civilians" might constitute, but it does seem that the weapon is not what is generally considered a cluster bomb. And now if you will excuse me, I have to go and apologise to a lot of people..... Not dishonest, I think, but ignorant.
I discover that SMArt 155 is an anti-tank weapon. “Each round contains only two sub-munitions, has independent, reliable and redundant self-destruction mechanisms, and a self-neutralisation mechanism, and as such cannot reasonably be categorised as risking unacceptable harm to civilians.” One might wonder what “acceptable harm to civilians” might constitute, but it does seem that the weapon is not what is generally considered a cluster bomb.
And now if you will excuse me, I have to go and apologise to a lot of people…..

]]> By: derrida derider http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602&cpage=1#comment-45948 derrida derider Mon, 26 May 2008 11:44:59 +0000 http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602#comment-45948 I agree that ALL cluster bombs (and antipersonnel mines, for that matter) should be banned in order to set an example. But, gee, its a tad dishonest not to mention the defence being put forward by the Yanks and the ADF. These new model cluster bombs are designed not to go off after the first day or so or when they're handled, so they can be used for their original purpose (shutting down airfields) while being pretty useless for the sort of atrocities we saw the IDF perpetrate in Lebanon. Whether they're as foolproof at this as advertised is another matter, but my point is that the bombers will rightly argue that you can't judge their degree of horror using the old models as examples. I agree that ALL cluster bombs (and antipersonnel mines, for that matter) should be banned in order to set an example. But, gee, its a tad dishonest not to mention the defence being put forward by the Yanks and the ADF.

These new model cluster bombs are designed not to go off after the first day or so or when they’re handled, so they can be used for their original purpose (shutting down airfields) while being pretty useless for the sort of atrocities we saw the IDF perpetrate in Lebanon. Whether they’re as foolproof at this as advertised is another matter, but my point is that the bombers will rightly argue that you can’t judge their degree of horror using the old models as examples.

]]> By: roger migently http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602&cpage=1#comment-45640 roger migently Sat, 24 May 2008 08:39:05 +0000 http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602#comment-45640 Why do I have that sinking feeling? Why do I have that sinking feeling?

]]> By: Dave Bath http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602&cpage=1#comment-45637 Dave Bath Sat, 24 May 2008 07:51:14 +0000 http://valuesaustralia.com/blog/?p=602#comment-45637 Actually, the Rudd government stance is identical with the stance they took as part of the majority report to the Cluster Bombs (Prohibition) Bill 2006 that the Dems tried to introduce. One of the reasons is that regardless of the treaty, the US will still use cluster munitions, and the love of all things US and military didn't change with the change in government. As noted in <a href="http://www.aph.gov.au/SEnate/committee/fadt_ctte/completed_inquiries/2004-07/cluster_bill_2006/report/c05.htm" rel="nofollow">the committee final report</a>, prohibition of the use of cluster bombs by the ADF would make it difficult to go along with the next US military misadventure. Actually, the Rudd government stance is identical with the stance they took as part of the majority report to the Cluster Bombs (Prohibition) Bill 2006 that the Dems tried to introduce.

One of the reasons is that regardless of the treaty, the US will still use cluster munitions, and the love of all things US and military didn’t change with the change in government. As noted in the committee final report, prohibition of the use of cluster bombs by the ADF would make it difficult to go along with the next US military misadventure.

]]>