this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
117 points (96.8% liked)

World News

39196 readers
1904 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Nov 19 (Reuters) - President Joe Biden has approved provision of anti-personnel land mines to Ukraine, a U.S. official told Reuters, a step that could help slow Russian advances in its east, especially when used along with other munitions from the United States.

The United States expects Ukraine to use the mines in its own territory, though it has committed not to use them in areas populated with its own civilians, the official said. The Washington Post first reported the development.

The office of Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, the Ukrainian defence ministry, the Russian defence ministry and the Kremlin did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests to comment.

The United States has provided Ukraine with anti-tank mines throughout its war with Russia, but the addition of anti-personnel mines aims at blunting the advance of Russian ground troops, the official added, speaking on condition of anonymity.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Viking_Hippie -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No. Got the order wrong. People are working to ban them because they're atrocious. They're not atrocious because people are working to ban them. Don't pretend to be even more obtuse than you already are.

They're atrocious because they can make areas dangerous for anyone to traverse for years if not decades, blowing the limbs off of innocent civilians or making large swaths of land uninhabitable and unavailable to farm without risking death and dismemberment.

[–] PugJesus 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They’re atrocious because they can make areas dangerous for anyone to traverse for years if not decades, blowing the limbs off of innocent civilians or making large swaths of land uninhabitable and unavailable to farm without risking death and dismemberment.

So like all UXO that's indiscriminately used?

[–] Viking_Hippie 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes. "Indiscriminately" being the operative word.

Russians butchering civilians doesn't make it ok for Ukraine to emulate them.

[–] PugJesus 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Yes. “Indiscriminately” being the operative word.

See? I agree. Landmines should not be used indiscriminately. Luckily, Ukraine has already pledged to not use them in civilian areas, and landmine protocols are a far fucking cry from the Vietnam era, so we're good.

Glad to see we're all on the same page of not demanding that victims meekly submit to genocide in the name of some nebulous and ill-defined moral high ground.

How many thousands of Ukranian lives are worth not using landmines to you? Tens of thousands?

[–] Viking_Hippie 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

See? I agree. Landmines should not be used indiscriminately

That's like saying that guns shouldn't be used violently 🙄

The nature of landmines is that of an indiscriminate and long lasting danger. Do you really think that, once the war is one and it's time for civilians to move back to the areas that war has displaced them from, Ukraine is going to dig them all up again?

Because if you do, I have an explosion-proof bridge to Crimea to sell you.

Glad to see we're all on the same page of not demanding that victims meekly submit to genocide in the name of some nebulous and ill-defined moral high ground.

Holy false dichotomy, Batman! Not meekly submitting ≠ doing the same things that you rightly deplore your enemy for doing.

This is some "Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki were all great" type nonsense.

Ukraine has already pledged to not use them in civilian areas

Oh they promised, did they? What a relief!

It's not like politicians and diplomats who know that they'll retain the support of the richest countries in the world no matter what would ever break a promise that they made in order to get something that they want!

Just like how Israel has always told the truth to American politicians!

[–] PugJesus 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The nature of landmines is that of an indiscriminate and long lasting danger. Do you really think that, once the war is one and it’s time for civilians to move back to the areas that war has displaced them from, Ukraine is going to dig them all up again?

Yes, that's literally what fucking happens. Planned UXO operations are already going to take decades because of all the mines that Russia has laid, including in civilian areas, but I'm sure that you're just really concerned about Ukraine's post-war UXO situation becoming worse by (checks notes) Ukraine laying mines it itself has recorded in non-civilian areas.

This is some “Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki were all great” type nonsense.

Ah, the "Blockading Japan and having millions starve is the moral high ground" option.

Dresden was bad because it did not have commensurate military value to the civilian destruction it caused, and bomber command was well aware of that.

Oh they promised, did they? What a relief!

Oh, so we're going on the assumption that Ukraine doesn't care about their own post-war situation despite all of their actions thus far pointing towards the exact opposite?

Cool cool cool. Very paternalistic mindset, glad we're still doing the "Noble Western Savior" thing in telling countries being genocided how exactly they're allowed to defend themselves and accusing them of being savages if they disagree.

[–] Viking_Hippie -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Ok, I see now that you have no interest in arguing in good faith, so I'm gonna leave you to it rather than wasting any more time on your absolutist credulity. Have the day you deserve.

[–] PugJesus 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Ok, I see now that you have no interest in arguing in good faith,

Sorry that you don't like being confronted with the fact that you don't give a single fuck about Ukrainian lives and are just virtue signaling. But hey - have fun advocating for Ukranians to meekly submit to be massacred in order to take the moral high ground of (checks notes) not using explosives to stop the Russian advance. Really terrible stuff would have happened in this war if we allowed that, just absolutely exceptional suffering.

Also, nice one on running from the fact that you accused the Ukrainian government of being ready to just mine their own land and leave it that way post-war. Keep up the good work, I'm sure Putin and all the other fascist fucks are very proud of you.