this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
71 points (97.3% liked)

World News

39107 readers
2395 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 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The United States will soon provide antipersonnel mines to Ukraine, a U.S. official confirmed late Tuesday, in a move that followed Ukraine’s first deployment of long-range U.S.-supplied ballistic missiles in an attack on Russia.

top 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh goody! Let us sit and watch as they seed the soil with death in waiting for uninvolved civilians for the next 50 years.

[–] CoCo_Goldstein 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

From the article...

"The official also pointed to the function of the mines, which they said require a battery for operation and will not detonate once the battery runs out after a period of a few hours to a few weeks."

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That's brilliant engineering but also...I wonder how common some kind of reverse-dud would be?

"Oh cool it's probably inert because that was MONTHS ag--"

[–] chaospatterns 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Batteries are bounded by more predictable chemistry more so than something like the breakdown of a mechanical based trigger waiting for rust or decomposition. Chemistry makes it easier to model and predict. If you've got a 1Ah battery and it consumes x watt hours per hour, then it takes y days to burn through. Tolerances that cause the battery to have slightly more or less capacity or component power consumption will likely be <5%, thus not radically different because nobody is timing this to the minute.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

You're absolutely right. Very good points! I thought that too, a major improvement over analogue mechanisms that have more unpredictable longevity!

I suppose if the batteries are actively discharging as a failsafe, that makes sense.

I was thinking about how sometimes you'd pick up like, a TV remote that's been sitting since 1993 and astonishingly the little red light blinks when you push a button, if only faintly, and for a second.

[–] Tattorack 3 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Aren't those a war crime? ^^;

[–] CM400 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The US and Russia are not bound by that treaty (according to a quick search), but they should be.

[–] CoCo_Goldstein 1 points 3 days ago

Correct. The countries most likely to get into an actual shooting war didn't sign the treaty. The US, China, Russia and some others did not sign the treaty.

[–] Kbobabob 3 points 3 days ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago (1 children)

To deploy in your own country?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Why not? They are banned because they can last forever and blow up random people for decades after the war.

[–] Valmond 3 points 3 days ago

Read the article.

They are basically deactivating after hours, days or weeks.

So not like the old 1970 mines.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

No one is disputing the danger mines pose.

From the article:

The U.S. official said late Tuesday the United States sought commitments from Ukraine on how it will use the antipersonnel mines, with the expectation they will be deployed only on Ukrainian territory in areas where Ukrainian civilians are not living.

The official also pointed to the function of the mines, which they said require a battery for operation and will not detonate once the battery runs out after a period of a few hours to a few weeks.

That does not completely remove the risk, as there is still a blob of explosive in the ground. But this is overall an improvement on the improvised mines they are currently building.

Reading this, it's pretty clear that until landmines can be fully removed from warfare, (which isn't happening in the foreseeable future), that the emphasis is on how they are used.

Namely:

Rule 81. When landmines are used, particular care must be taken to minimize their indiscriminate effects.

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule81

Also of interest is that Russia (and the US) are not signed on to the anti personnel section , making things complicated. That's no excuse to use them carte blanche but it complicates things.

But I'm just one dude, I'm not a pro on this. I'm happy to see them used defensively, with modern tracking and disarmament techniques, rather than old school or home built devices that have no such precautions.