Senators introduce bill to restrict use of cluster munitions
 

Here's the story:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070215...s_070215002326


WASHINGTON (AFP) - Democratic senators introduced legislation that would bar US use of cluster bombs in or near civilian areas or that have a "dud rate" of one percent or greater.

Human rights groups urged speedy action on the bill sponsored by Senators Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record) of California and Patrick Leahy (news, bio, voting record) of Vermont.

Dropped from aircraft or fired by artillery, cluster munitions open above ground and disperse dozens to hundreds of tiny bomblets over a wide area.

Although designed to stop armored assaults, bomblets have fallen on civilian areas and littered fields long after the end of hostilities, most recently in Lebanon.

The bill would restrict funding for the use, sale or transfer of cluster munitions unless their submunitions have a failure rate of less than one percent, or unless the president grants a waiver on national security grounds.

It would also bar their use in or near civilian areas.

Since 2005, the Defense Department has required that newly purchased submunitions have a failure rate of less than one percent.

Human Rights Watch, however, estimates that only about 30,000 of the millions of cluster munitions currently in the US arsenal meet the bill's criteria.

"The US has a staggering number of submunitions in its arsenal -- perhaps one billion - that are highly unreliable and should never be used," said Steve Goose of the New York-based rights group.

The United States used about 2 million submunitions in Iraq in 2003, some 248,000 in Afghanistan in 2001 and 2002, and another 295,000 on Kosovo in 1999, the group said.



Good Ol' Steve is worred that they are "highly unreliable". They must explode or something dangerous like that.

Well, TR already implied I was a liberal in the global warming thread :) so...

I don't have a problem with the quality requirement, but I do have a problem with limitations on their use. They should get the QC on all of these up to 99% and then it's a non-issue. Having 8% - 30% of these submunitions sitting on the ground waiting for a kid to wander by is neither destroying the enemy nor winning hearts and minds. That's OK in the Fulda Gap, but not OK in a village. They know how to get these things to work -- for probably a little bit more money they can improve their testing to eliminate or weed out the duds.

I know the goal here by the Dems is to be rock stars at international cocktail parties, but it's still a good idea.

Got to be the outlier here, mug, but when my son is sitting in a hole on the 38th Parallel, trying to repel the Chinese Third Army Group (Horde) and live another ten minutes, I do not really give a flying fig what happens to the CBUs after they hit the ground with no enemy nearby.

I also do not want him to have a shortage of new munitions and to be unable to use the billion that we have on hand right now to keep the BGs off his ass.

If the Dims want to buy a few billion new ones in the next year or two, then I would be glad to rotate the old stock to wartime use only.

They already got rid of our Napalm stocks, what is next, no use of explosives in bombs either?

TR

"Interesting..."

I guess if nothing else, I'm useful for seeing how civilians react to this sort of thing, and how the message needs to be countered. I email w/ a COL friend in IRAQ who from time to time asks my perceptions from a "middle America" standpoint. He never tries to counter my views, but when he responds with "Interesting..." I generally do a complete re-evaluation of my position. Sometimes it changes, sometimes not.

I'm in complete agreement with you, the 38th parallel = Fulda Gap in my view. I just have a problem with using the old munitions the way the Israelis did last year. Bad PR. I guess I'm basically frustrated by how poorly we've been handling that part of the mission.

The bottom line is I didn't think through the realities of the situation. We'll be spending so much to refit our gear and spin up the new SBCTs that there realistically won't be the funds to replace the cluster munitions stockpiles.

If you lose....
 

If you lose "they" make the rules.

"They" don't seem to have a problem offing women, children, wounded, captives, Christians, Jews, apostate Muslims, Budists, Animalists or the odd camel or three.

"They" don't seem to have a problem ignoring the rules of war, like uniforms and such. "They" don't seem to have a problem dragging dead bodies through the streets or hanging them from bridges.

They only seem to have one problem "US".

I'd like to see us win. I have no problem with the odd cluster bomb or two hundred scattered around.

Pete

I remember being in places where we came across cluster bomb units and wondered how far they were from the munitions.......

I have issues with people sitting in offices, who have never experienced a war, making rules on the use of weapons......... nothing works as designed 100 percent of the time..... and men in war used what they have to get the job done!

I have people telling me that we are violating the laws of war because we are using a .50 caliber weapon as a sniper rifle.......

Jim

That reminds me of a quote I heard from a B52 pilot: "I can deal with one hundred million casualities. As long as they are on the other side."

I think it is a real shame when we worry more about what potential harm we are doing to our enemies rather than what they are doing to our troops.

So we have elected officials looking to vote to nullify our troops' sacrifices and pull out of our current engagement, and yet they are simultaneously worried about the effects of the war on our enemies' environment. That about sum it up?

Wonder where the concern was over the short and long term health effects of flying loaded passenger aircraft into US business structures in an extremely dense population area? Do you think that they saw the environmental and health damage to our civilians as a positive, or a negative? How about VBIEDs in public areas? WMDs here? :rolleyes:

TR

And what country has expended the greatest amount of resources in demining not only the above cited countries, but throughout the world?

Unfortunately I could only find figures up to 2001. We have spent $600,000.00 to assist in demining and removal of ordnance from 44 countries. These figures do not include the effort in cleaning up Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan since 9/11. Nor do these figures represent the amount of money that goes into R&D to develop the technology used to clean up these messes.

Since the figures come from the US State Department, I would imagine that SF missions such as "Train the Trainer" in South America are not factored into the $600,000.00.

I swear to Odin.............if a child or grandchild of mine ever becomes a Democrat I will right them out of my will!

Perhaps that measure should be used as a qualification for those allowed to serve as legislators.

That was great, sir! Right up until the time I spit coffee on my keyboard from laughing so hard.