Cluster Bombs and Food Packages

[Barry the Sprout]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Silver Cheetah:


I'm totally with you on Blair! Me and my friend Hester never had a conversation about him - maybe we shoulda done...

Re the anti-war thing - I'd love to come. Can't you get them to change the date? I'm in Somerset doing a 5 rhythms dance workshop - 5 day, residential. Finishes on the night of the 18th. As it cost £500, I'm unlikely to duck out.... But for the next one, maybe we could meet up?

---

Hmmm, we are hoping for upwards of 100000 people... Maybe I could call around and ask them. When is good for you?

Don't worry about it, have fun dancing.

Hopefully we won't NEED a next one. (said with due cynicsm)

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yorick:


Did it occur to you that Bin Laden et al may have thought the same thing?

Why do you repeatedly refuse to apportion any blame on those that of their own volition destroyed the lives, careers and families of innocent civilians in New York?

This is such bullshit! Did Al Qa'eda send any food packages? Did Al Qa'eda try and minimalise civilian losses by attacking at 3am when the buildings would have been deserted?

No. MAXIMUM CIVILIAN DEATH was their aim.

Again I ask, whose side are you on?

Al Qa'eda wanted people like me DEAD. But for the grace of God I would be dead, as would many friends of mine.

Did I deserve this? Did I do anything to Mr Bin Laden? I AM NOT AMERICAN!!!!!

If the army has to commit destruction to prevent a nuclear bomb hitting New York so be it. Al Qa'eda started this and WILL NOT STOP!

Do you want me to die? Is that what you're implying? Because that is what will happen if Bin Laden is not reigned in. It is just a matter of time.

---

Yorick, I can totally understand your being upset - especially given where you were on September 11th.

But please please please stop taking posts which question the wisdom of the war as personal attacks on you or other Americans! They are *not*!!

I am totally against violence to achieve aims. I am against terrorism. (I shouldn't even have to say that here. I've posted enough on the subject for people to know where I'm coming from, surely..)

As for sides, it isn't a question of sides here, Yorick! It's a question of looking at what has happened and is happening, as objectively as we can given the circumstances, and looking at the likely consequences of actions currently being taken.

YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO IS AFRAID!

I am not, repeat am *not*, repeat am *not* pro-terrorist. I find your implications quite upsetting, frankly, but as I said, I do understand why you are coming at this in the way you are, well, part of the reason, at least.

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barry the Sprout:


Hmmm, we are hoping for upwards of 100000 people... Maybe I could call around and ask them. When is good for you?

Don't worry about it, have fun dancing.

Hopefully we won't NEED a next one. (said with due cynicsm)

---

Are you helping organise?

[Ronn_Bman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ladyzekke:
Well I've heard about those yellow food packages and cluster bombs. As Ronn Bman said, somebody is getting reamed big time right now for that! But I am still a big ignorant to what exactly a cluster bomb is. Obviously, it is not a bomb dropped that explodes on impact, or nobody would be worried about civilians accidentally picking one up thinking it was a food package. So how do they work? Timer? Remote? Just curious.

---

Actually, they are suppose to explode on impact though I don't doubt there are timed versions (if there are, the timers are for seconds or minutes after impact to allow for further distribution). This is why the individual "bomblets" are wrapped in colorful covers. So when they don't explode, they will be easily noticable. Otherwise, they could be considered a version of landmines, which are illegal under UN resolutions, treaties, and laws.

Cluster bombs come out of the plane as big projectiles full of mini-bombs, each about the size and force of a hand grenade. At some point above the ground, to allow the "bomblets" to scatter over an area, the mini-bombs are released.

The mini-explosions over a large area are incredibly useful agianst "soft" targets, like troops, transport units, planes, fuel depots, etc., but less so against "harder" targets like tanks, and useless against hardened-bunkers and such.

These aren't used in cities, or intentionally, against civilians.

[John D Harris]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:


Actually, they are suppose to explode on impact though I don't doubt there are timed versions (if there are, the timers are for seconds or minutes after impact to allow for further distribution). This is why the individual "bomblets" are wrapped in colorful covers. So when they don't explode, they will be easily noticable. Otherwise, they could be considered a version of landmines, which are illegal under UN resolutions, treaties, and laws.

Cluster bombs come out of the plane as big projectiles full of mini-bombs, each about the size and force of a hand grenade. At some point above the ground, to allow the "bomblets" to scatter over an area, the mini-bombs are released.

The mini-explosions over a large area are incredibly useful agianst "soft" targets, like troops, transport units, planes, fuel depots, etc., but less so against "harder" targets like tanks, and useless against hardened-bunkers and such.

These aren't used in cities, or intentionally, against civilians.

---

You beat me to it.

[Barry the Sprout]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Silver Cheetah:


Are you helping organise?

---

Only with a few organisations. Not the main coalition. At present I am trying to organise a debate on whether the war will stop terrorism, but no one seems interested in arguing that it will. I have sent off batch e-mails to all political parties, and all newspapers, but only the Sun has actually replied and they have turned me down. I would ask Yorick but he is a little way off to put it mildly. Ah well, gotta keep trying.

[Ronn_Bman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barry the Sprout:
Ronn, not attacking you here just pointing out a few things.

One Cluster Bomb will cover an area the size of 12 football fields with bomblets.

20% of the bomblets do not go off.

People are still claiming that this war does not target civilians yet even yourself you have to admit that they are dropping food and bombs on the same place. By having to drop the leaflets (they are also doing radio broadcasts - the majority of Afgans being illiterate) they are admitting that the same people are getting bombed as who they are trying to get food aid to. So has the idea of this not being a war on civilians gone totally out of the window? The use of the cluster bombs seems to prove so. Also another interesting point about food packages:

In the Gulf War 7 people were killed by food packages that were useless to them anyway. The largely Muslim population was given pork... great...

---

Some even say the estimates of unexploded bomblets is as high as 30%, but it still doesn't mean they are "targeting" civilians. Knowing civilians can be casualties and intentionally doing something for the express goal of killing civilians is different.

Not all the unexploded bomblets are yellow, some are red, which seems to be a better color for the representation of danger. The food packets are now blue.

Cluster bombs and food packs are not dropped in the exact same "pinpoint" spots. If they were, the food packets would be destroyed, and there would be no confusion.

I don't think anyone actually died from eating pork, but I get your point [img]smile.gif[/img]

I've read nothing positive about the use of cluster bombs through my research on the internet and don't claim they are a good thing, but they are a weapon of war.

[Barry the Sprout]

You missed my point a bit Ronn, the people were killed by falling crates not from eating the food. It may sound daft but it is incredibly dangerous to just drop stuff on people in the first place. That is the problem with aid drops in general. It happens in most wars, the aggressors say they are being humanitarian by dropping food. Yet it does very little but kill people anyway. What is needed is ground aid - but you can't let people in due to the war.

The point I was trying to make about the pork is that the West has an incredibly bad reputation for not understanding other cultures very well. This reputation is, IMHO, deserved due to mistakes like this. That error could easily have been avoided but it is obvious that no one was even consulted about the aid. If they had of been it is almost certain that is the first thing they would have picked up on.

And finally, what I meant about the cluster bombs is that if they weren't being dropped on civilians then why do the civilians need warning? The war coalition has shot itself in the foot in more than one way due to this. It is the first outright admission that in bombing military targets they have to bomb civilians as well. Whilst the announcements prove that it is not being done without compassion, it is still being done.

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:



Some even say the estimates of unexploded bomblets is as high as 30%, but it still doesn't mean they are "targeting" civilians. Knowing civilians can be casualties and intentionally doing something for the express goal of killing civilians is different.

---

May I respectfully suggest that an option might be to use weaponry that is rather less inimical to civilians than cluster bombs?

If you are trying to avoid civilian casualties, why use weapons that you cannot control? These bombs are a very far cry from the 'smart' weapons that the US govt was making such a point of in the early days of this ridiculous and tragic 'war'.

To my mind, the use of cluster bombs removes all credibility from the American and British govts claims to be proceeding with due care and respect for civilian lives.

What utter nonsense. No-one is forcing them to use these disgusting weapons.

[ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: Silver Cheetah ]

[Neb]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yorick:

Whose side are you on Amanda? Whose side are you on?

---

Yorick, I think you should apologize for that post, I think it's a pretty bad insult, I would certainly feel hurt if anyone suggested that I was siding with Bin Laden or supporting his actions.