4 ms·
> The US and its allies were so dominant that they didn't really need landmines to win anymore, and landmines are one of the cheapest effective deterrents their
by mig39 4y ago
> The US and its allies were so dominant that they didn't really need landmines to win anymore, and landmines are one of the cheapest effective deterrents their potential enemies could use.
If the US doesn't need landmines, why won't the US ban them? The United States is one of the nations that hasn't signed the Ottawa Treaty?
- LarryMullins 4y agoThe US does need landmines. Obama and Biden both committed to reducing America's use of landmines, but both made an exemption for use in Korea.
- scottLobster 4y agoThat statement should more accurately target "US allies". The US is at the top of the system and can largely do whatever it wants, no one's going to slap sanctions on us over landmines. However our (western allies) strength gives our allies the confidence they need to voluntarily give them up, and we can coerce other nations to give them up to be part of our club. It's all a power play at the end of the day, the ethical argument is window dressing. Some people take window dressing very seriously, but don't mistake that for being the decisive factor in policy.