Warfighting without Claymore mines...

[Caribou Kid]

It seems that one of the key stumbling blocks towards ratifying a worldwide ban on mines is the reluctance of many western Governments to relinquish Claymore Mines from their collective Arsenals.
Now, most of us here on the forum know the difference between a claymore (or Soviet/Chinese/Euro/African equivalent) and an anti-tank mine, but it seems like the EOD efforts in places like Cambodia and Afghanistan would be vastly simplified if the whole World relegated the use of mines into the same bucket as Slavery and Child abuse.

Before the howls of protest & outrage begin, let me state this for the record: Claymore mines Rock! Offensive, Defensive, Daisy Chained up in a tree-line...Hard to beat. But would YOU relinquish them if you knew you were making the world a better place overall? Would you sacrifice operational peace-of-mind for moral satisfaction? Don't get me wrong, I am a BIG fan of trip-wired perimiter security, or a clacker in my foxhole/fighting bay leading to a bank of cleverly sighted mines, as much as the next guy. But what if you didn't have that option... This includes improvised ones, too, like the ones "Andy McNab" made with the ice cream containers in Bravo Two Zero, too, okay?

Thousands of traumatic limb-amputees around the world would surely rejoice at the news of mines no longer being PRODUCED, don't you reckon? :| Then all we'd have to do is purge the world of the existing stocks...wouldn't we? p-)

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Its one big oxymoron. On one side you got people willing to bad them but when it comes to wars we (western countries) use them ourselves. The problem with mines is that in war they are recklessly placed (mind you working with clackers is a lil different, and western countries dont mindlessly place em everywere), most times it isnt even recorded or made any noteation to superiors were they have been placed. Therefor the locals dont have a clue were they've been placed, and thats were the problem starts. I think theres a figure that says theres over 1 million landmines placed in Afghanistan, thats alot of mines...it will take nearly my whole lifetime for those mines to be found and removed plus billions of dollars.

Thats not to mention the psychological factor of a land mine, you know they are around you just dont know were. Much similar to a sniper.

Its just like guns in a way, if used correctly can be a great benifit, if used wrong it causes great harm. Either way people will continue to make / use landmines wether there is a ban on them or not.

[ogukuo72]

Command initiated Claymore mines are definitely different from the trip-wire or pressure plate landmines. Since they are command initiated, and easy to render safe compared to buried mines, I don't see why it is necessary to ban them as well.

I see the landmine ban as another example of how certain activitists would pick up a Celeb Cause, define the issues simplistically, and find even more simplistic 'solutions' to the problem. They will then concentrate all their efforts to push these solutions.

The main problem today of landmines is the millions sown irresponsibly during the wars of the 20th Century. The issue is simple - the removal of these mines and the prevention of more being sown. The solution is simple as well - you need to physically take every of these mines out of the ground, and to prevent irresponsible governments and rebels from putting more into the ground. But the amount of work necessary to implement this solution is extraordinary - you need to fund mine clearing teams and to have rigorous monitoring of mine manufacturers.

Now, this will take too much effort for our Celeb Cause activists. So, instead, they choose a method that will fit neatly into their weekend schedules, to raise funds through dinner parties, and have nice gatherings in the park in warm sunshine to demonstrate. You will not find them laying on their stomach on the ground between two taut strings with a probe in a mine-infested country.

[phony doctors. hello!]

I'm not sure that the current land mine treaty bans claymores, because as was previously said, they are for the most part, command initiated. Here in NZ all we did was change their name to eliminate the 'mine' reference, in order to keep the greenies happy. NZ has signed and ratified the treaty which bans land mines. As for conventional land mines, most of the countries/groups that western armies are going to be operating against, simply scatter mines in a random manner and seldom map their locations, making it very diffecult to clear them. They remain on site for years and years after the end of hostilities, and become a weapon of terror against local civilians, and therefore you can argue that in the hands of such groups, they are a weapon of terror, not of war. As I understand, the United States main reason for not signing the treaty is because other nations refuse to give it an exemption on the mines it has along the DMZ in South Korea, if they had been given an exemption, the Clinton Administration at least, was prepared to sign the treaty.

[California Joe]

Nice handle, was "I play one on TV" taken?

[phony doctors. hello!]

Nice handle, was "I play one on TV" taken?

Its from the Simpsons, actually. Mr Burns says it in the episode when he runs over bart and get sued for $1m dollars. Sorry, I don't play a doctor on T.V, I only play doctor when my three swedish girlfriends come round.

[California Joe]

Any quote by Monty Burns is Ok by me.

See my vest, see my vest..

[Ratamacue]

...made from real gorilla chest...

[PsihoKeke]

Land mine treaty does not ban claymore mines and anti tank mines.

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

Thats news to me. Didnt know that.

[SOG]

"see my sweater? irish setter" lol...

i dont think claymores should be banned, maybe if used they should be used with more care as to how they are left etc, but the fact is, if any country gets in a serious fight the mines will come rolling out just like we shouldnt use certain ammo, certain WMD, shouldnt carpet bomb, all that **** goes out the window in a major conflict, and in a minor one, sure, anyone in the UN may follow that but what about the thousands of factioned/fractioned countries thats wants to win? theyll dump mines everywhere.

this is a eletist/purist state where said person cant handle being responsible for a certain type of warfare thier country engages in, yet they dont care when some **** country does it. as long as its off thier mass media radar they dont give a poop.

its like fighting cancer or aids, we want a pill, not a lifestyle change in which we lower emmisions, save care to fix the ozone, or teach the kiddies a ounce of responsibility/prevention. if you think our air poplution is **** here, trying working in the philipines that is stock full of our cars from the 60s-80s and emitting toxins and wonder why cancer in those countries that absorb out after technologies are absorbing our health problems and are suffering even more since they dont have the economy to fight or live with it the same way we have. these people want a little pipe line dream but dont want to work to stopping as to why these mines are used, they just sit and whine about the children who get mangled by them. so by all means go ahead, if a little kid gets blown away by a mortar or sprayed, then thats that, but mines, good god. trying to snip the war out of a all out small scale war is a riot. they can go ahead and argue and kill and maim, because thats not our business, our business is the innocents that get destroyed after the fact. oops.

mines will be used and manufactured by people regardless of the UN's stance on anything. if it makes people sleep better knowing thier country doesnt deploy mines, then well, sweet dreams. sure as hell wont stop the rest of the world.

[phony doctors. hello!]

"See this hat, 'twas my cat,
My evening wear - vampire bat"


Excellent stuff SOG, yes, it comes down to the old, damned if you do, damned if you don't, I will if he does, but only if he does it first.
Countries like Sweden, Switzerland etc are always crowing about morals and the evils of said weapons, yet their utopian morals seem to magically dissappear when said third world 'president' turns up at the door with briefcases full of cash to buy shiney new weapons/deposit his ill gotton gains in their banks/buy himself a walled villa outside Geneva. Haven't they still got the Jewish gold the nazis stole in their banks?

[martinexsquaddie]

well if there not manufactured they can't be sold
I think nations do have a responsibility to clear up there Battlefields.
Saw a documentary about the work of the mines advisory Group in Laos trying to clear up the UXB left by the USAF. a 2000lb bomb was next to a village. they phoned the pentagon up with all the serial numbers etc only to be told the fuse was classified! :roll:
fact is the fuse did'nt work and its 30 years old it would'nt harm the secuirty of the US to give a bit of technical aid to people clearing up the sight of there glorious second place in south east asian wargames

[SOG]

well if there not manufactured they can't be sold

sold yes, used/made, no. it is ungodly simplicity to make any sort of type of various mines like many used in ww2 from using pie tins to wood boxes that cant be detected by older mine detectors. this was evident especially by the french who could even hide thin mines in the middle of a cobbled hole in the street. given a room with very basic supplies, a handfull of dedicated people, and a week, you could turn out a couple hundred mines at the very least.

i think its this threat and base of warfare and this info that is not only passed on throughout all those countries, but is even easily found on the internet, or even muesems and libraries that will keep these traps killing for quite a long time.

not to mention there will always be backwater ****holes that would not only manufactur any weapon needed but could simply order various products through various channels that compiled could easily make mines. and we arent talking official mine casings or supplies, but the combination of common items to equal a decent mine. of course the fbi/cia watches patterns like this but youcant watch everything, not only abroad but in your own backyard.

getting rid of mines is fine, and yes it will cut down on the "collateral damage" and yes it will quiet the aristocracy who gets off thinking they made the world a better place. but they will still be used all over the world in all the horrid places we are ignoring from russia to europe to china to south america. from terrorism to territory disputes they will be all over. why?

economically easy to make and use
safety - (for those who plant em)
they work and there cheap

working means more of you alive
cheap means you can spray the enemy with double the aftermarket russian supplies.

unless you give the world a substitute or a "new drug" and flood the market with it youll never get rid of em.

getting rid of mines if fine and dandy but it completely ignores why theyre being used in the 1st place. which is the ENTIRE problem. just like old china, you cant fight, give us your weapons, what did they do? make thier bodies into weapons and thier farm tools deadly weapons. just like brazil, you cant practice fighting, so now we dance our dance of death. it doesnt matter what you take away, if motivated theyll always have it.

[duck]

If you look at present conflicts: Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq, Israel/Palestine etc., then the future nature of warfare is clear. Assasinations, explosive devices, mines, suicide bombers, that's how the third world can counter the superior technology and firepower of the industrialized countries. Mines are here to stay.

[Armour recon]

We finlanders never give up from our landmines...I hope.
What's better than many many miles thick forrest...full of landmines!

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

True landmines are cheap and effective, and can be produced almost anywere with lil to no effort. I bet if someone was set to make em they can produce them rather easily. I believe I read an article that showed how to make a simplistic landmine that would give enough force to damage a vehicle or kill a person.

These will be a favorite for third world countries/terrorists for a long time to come.

[GazB]

One of the main reasons the US started out vigourusly supporting the landmine ban is because the land mine is a cheap weapon that is simple to use and denies the US its free mobility in land combat. It also reduces costs after you "liberate" a country, and of course by banning them you have another frivolous "rule of war" that you can use to prosecute those you defeated and punnish them some more.

[Dalleer]

We finlanders never give up from our landmines...I hope.
What's better than many many miles thick forrest...full of landmines!

Correct, there's been alot of discussion here about the matter of banning the anti-personnel (I suppose you could call them infantry-mines) mines due to the various international treaties going against them.

But, as in our case these mines are a very effective, and most of all cheap method of defence, something that our army should really consider an asset in a possible conflict.

Those things can disable a soldier right off, take out a foot or eyesight, after that whoever's the individual soldier won't be fighting much...

[GazB]

"Those things can disable a soldier right off, take out a foot or eyesight, after that whoever's the individual soldier won't be fighting much..."

Unfortunately like a robot they continue to "fight" long after the war is over and does not discriminate between an enemy combatant or a 6 year old girl, or for that matter a cow or deer.

And BTW for those who have mentioned how indiscriminate the East and third world countries were with mines the west still developed air deliverable mines and mines fired from the back of armoured vehicles. How they were accurately mapped I would really like to hear from those who made such comments.

[Ratamacue]

I remember reading about technologies that would give every landmine a small computer chip/sensor which can have a signal sent to it when no longer needed that will disarm it. Of course, the mine would still be there (potentially dangerous) and computers/software are ****e to bugs, but it's a step to a solution for post-war mine clearing. My guess is that such technology would have it deactivated, then later cleared as time goes on.

[Dalleer]

Unfortunately like a robot they continue to "fight" long after the war is over and does not discriminate between an enemy combatant or a 6 year old girl, or for that matter a cow or deer.

Agreed, that's the large downside to mines as you put it. In any case, landmines are pretty effective in combat, it's just that after the war they shouldn't be lying around anymore..

Unfortunately they do.

[GazB]

Many mines are fitted with fuses that are designed to make the mine safe after a certain period. In the real world more than 20% of the time they fail. You can't tell the difference between the ones that fail and the ones that work except by stepping on one. Or lifting it and not dying.

Might be nice for the mine clearers to know that of the 10,000 mines in the mine field they are working on at the moment only 1,000 will probably work, but the practical difference is farmers will still get blown of their tractors and kids will still lose body parts and lives. Of course even if everyone obeyed the rule and not another single mine was ever layed again that wouldn't matter. artillery rounds from WWI are still turning up on French and German and other European building sites on a regular basis, not to mention small caches of grenades and ammo.

[Armour recon]

We finlanders never give up from our landmines...I hope.
What's better than many many miles thick forrest...full of landmines!

Those things can disable a soldier right off, take out a foot or eyesight, after that whoever's the individual soldier won't be fighting much...

And when one bastard is down, it slows the whole team!
:D