No Cluster Bomb Ban for Turkey, US
The United States and Turkey both have both said they are boycotting a treaty to ban cluster munitions. European nations have taken the initiative to rid the world of these bombs, they have now designed a draft for such a treaty, but Turkey and the US refuse to play ball.
All in all, 111 countries are supporting the European initiative. Once the treaty is written, all these countries are likely to sign it. Obviously, these countries include both rich and poor countries.
But the most important countries refuse to ban the cluster bomb; Russia, the US, China, Brazil, Pakistan, Turkey, Israel and India have said ‘thanks, but no thanks.’
TDN explains that ‘[c]luster munitions are canisters packed with many bomblets that spread over a large area when dropped from a plane or fired from the ground. The problem is that while the weapons are meant to explode on impact, they often do not. Civilians, particularly children, are often maimed or killed when they pick up unexploded bombs, sometimes years later.’
So, why don’t the US and Turkey (and the others) agree to get rid of the cluster bombs then? A Turkish official explained why: “In a war against a legitimate enemy, cluster munitions remain to be the most effective weapons against area targets, and we’ve got a lot of these munitions in our stocks. Unless you find a viable option to cluster munitions, you can’t simply rule out their use.”
“If you’re Luxembourg and have no enemies, fine, such a ban is ideal for humanitarian purposes, but we’re not living in an ideal world,” said one Turkish defense analyst.
And the same undoubtedly goes for the US – which is taking on terrorists in the Middle East; Israel – which is taking on terrorists in Israel, Palestine and Lebanon; Russia – which is fighting against terrorists within its own borders as well; China – which has some trouble with separatists now, and fears more is yet to come; Pakistan – which is fighting against Al Qaeda and the Taliban; and so on.
The fact of the matter is that weapons are designed to kill, and that they are seldom nice. It’s also a fact that modern governments usually do everything in their power to prevent civilian losses… but you can’t rule them out completely if you want to actually win wars.
Making cluster bombs saver is probably the best option; not using them isn’t an option.
Well, not for countries that actually have to fight wars and defend themselves against mortal enemies, that is.
"Well, not for countries that actually have to fight wars and defend themselves against mortal enemies, that is."
So you use weapons that are indiscriminate. Because you don’t hang gays, don’t want to destroy democracy (just give it a good mutilation now and then to keep flexible) and because you have boxes on the hillside made of ticky-tacky with people who went to the universities that need to be protected by scary men. So you blow some limbs off some innocent boys and their brothers and freinds become scary men.
So we lose every concept of civilization, one after another, to protect it. We just lost another man in the fight for the true, unflinching standards that can carry Europe forward. Namely you.
The minute we bended the rules we already became the least despicable people in a category where all are incapable of judging or claiming moral high ground, and we are proof positive that there is nothing truly pure for any human to strive for. There are different degrees of inhumanity, and there is no country that is truly human. You arbitrarily gave some countries the right to use a cowardly barbarians’ weapon. Do you have any idea what you have now justified by the properties of the Kantian core of the golden rule? No, you have created a home out of the hollow halves of faith in the "least imperfect just for the time being I mean jeez the UN are pussies and we have hard jobs to do" with faith in "true morality", and even though you can’t see the cracks left between their incompatible edges I can see you inside.
So much we say and base our lives on are in essence as evil as the concept of owning a woman, firing Qassams at civilians or installing a theocracy in place of a democracy. Thanks for reminding me of that.
I’ll just be redundant and lay it out.
No one is allowed to wage warfare unless they are doing their damndest to limit human suffering and are ready to show they are making this effort.
Especially not when fighting people who don’t agree with rules like the above. Tu quoque will never do. Everything you do to others means you allow someone in the same position relative to you as you were to these others to do the same.