Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reelya]

Actually, i decided to check, and we're arguing on the wrong premise. I checked, at the USA didn't in fact sign the landmine treaty at all. So, nobody in USA decided that "landmines kill civilians and that's bad" in any case. At least, not bad enough to sign up to the treaty. You guys are also the lone holdout on "Convention on the Rights of the Child" which even Iran, North Korea, Myanmar are signatories to. So, @Madman198237 this discussion is not making the USA look "evil", just amoral and self-interested. This isn't even a blip on the radar of things that could be said that make the USA seem "evil as possible". It's unarguably more evil to not have signed onto the landmine treaty than to sign it, along with refusing to sign a pile of human rights treaties.

EDIT

Yeah I forgot that the USA doesn't like signing treaties at all, no matter what good they would do. But still, the core point about things the USA did, not being war-crimes stands, even leaving aside the land-mine thing.

For example, Admiral Donitz wasn't a war criminal because of the specific act of ordering the sinking of neutral shipping vis submarines, because the USA and UK ordered that too (though Donitz was convicted for other unrelated charges). The point being it would have been a convictable war-crime if not for the pesky fact that the allies did it, too.

Similarly, bombing civilian targets isn't a war-crime, because that was a tactic used by the allies too, so Werner Von Braun who created the V1/V2 rockets that bombed England wasn't classed as a war criminal - but he would have been if the allies hadn't bombed cities, too.

In additional the USA is one of the nations in the world who hasn't fully ratified the International Criminal Court, which is the body for handling war crimes. The only reason not to sign it, is to prevent the possibility of any living US person being indicted for a war crime. The people this is protecting range from Henry Kissinger through to American operatives in various Latin American dirty wars in the 1980s, through to modern Bush-era people.

[Max™]

My mom actually trained at a dojo Chuck ended up visiting at one point.

That roundhouse kick is pretty much the only thing he does, aside from telling everyone how great he is.

That and getting beat up by Bruce Lee, but he's a Texan so he isn't just telling everyone he's great, he actually is, so am I.

Ted Cruz thanks you for your (implied) endorsement.

I'm from Dallas, vote for me, I'm better than Cruz in every way, and I could swear he's a Moose infiltrator.

[hector13]

My mom actually trained at a dojo Chuck ended up visiting at one point.

That roundhouse kick is pretty much the only thing he does, aside from telling everyone how great he is.

That and getting beat up by Bruce Lee, but he's a Texan so he isn't just telling everyone he's great, he actually is, so am I.

Ted Cruz thanks you for your (implied) endorsement.

I'm from Dallas, vote for me, I'm better than Cruz in every way, and I could swear he's a Moose infiltrator.

In the same way I like to avoid Trump’s association with Scotland, I’m sure Canadians are happy he’s anywhere but Canada.

[Max™]

I mean, I fully endorse Cruz to go mano a mano with me or one of my little sisters (hint: the marine) to prove who is the real Texan worthy of the seat.

[Culise]

Name I don't know even one country that has a military base in another country. The answer is maybe Russia and China have a couple?

This question intrigued me enough to see if there was a list: Australia, China, France, Germany, Greece, India, Israel, Italy, Japan, Pakistan, Russia, Turkey, UAE, UK, USA.  Several of these include the anti-pirate support bases located in Djibouti, though, which is (for instance) how Japan skates by in spite of Article 9.  The US has the most, but it is far from the only one.  France, Russia, and the UK all come in a respectable second through fourth.  China is indeed one of the lower ones on the list; as noted, they build their overseas bases over seas.

[scriver]

Does that technically make them duringseas bases?

[misko27]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but we have superweapons we don't use because they work too well.

Gotta say, saying "Superweapons that are too effective" and not immediately thinking "nuclear weapons" disappoints me.

Germany,

Really? Where?

Greece,

...Cyprus?

India,

99% likely it's Bhutan.

UAE

This must be that piracy one...

[Reelya]

For Germany, probably Afghanistan. But they are involved in a number of other peace-keeping operations around the middle-east and parts of Africa.

[Kagus]

Landmines are banned because unrelated people end up blown up, while any decently well equipped military goes around the minefield instead of just plowing through it screaming about SPEHSS MAHREENS.

Entertainingly enough, that's actually one of the prevailing methods for well-equipped militaries to clear minefields. See: Mine Flails and such.

NINJA'D

There's just nothing positive about skulls.

But they protect your brain!

Just you try doing without them, though.

LET THE REIGN OF BLOOD COMMENCE.

[Reelya]

Landmines are banned because unrelated people end up blown up, while any decently well equipped military goes around the minefield instead of just plowing through it screaming about SPEHSS MAHREENS.

Entertainingly enough, that's actually one of the prevailing methods for well-equipped militaries to clear minefields. See: Mine Flails and such.

We can bring in a new system where Chuck Norris punches the mines instead.

[Loud Whispers]

Regarding landmines; the USA maintains minefields in the DMZ between North Korea and South Korea, but nowhere else outside it. The export of landmines from the USA, the deployment of landmines and the stockpiling of landmines not intended for use in Korea, is not allowed by US Defence policy. There's nothing legal stopping the US from reversing this policy, but for political and efficacy reasons they have opted to cease.

I don't find it particularly convincing that the USA is seeking to gain a competitive advantage by trying to ban the usage of mines. The issue is the USA haven't found minefields to be particularly effective at denying areas to enemies or inflicting casualties upon them, while if you applied the reverse to the USA - the US Armed Forces are one of the most capable logistic nightmares in the world, with some of the best minewarfare countermeasure systems in place. Minefields aren't very effective against modern US Forces. However, long after wars have ended, mines have a tendency to persist causing problems - we are still clearing up landmines and seamines from as far back as WWI all across the world. This is somewhat of an issue when the fighting stops. Even in Korea, the minefields still cause problems since heavy rains can dislodge mines from their planted location into areas which aren't marked as minefields, with inevitable results. Mines aren't friendly explosives

[Kagus]

And the DMZ minefields are now an important nature reserve! American environmentalism at its finest.

[Culise]

Germany,

Really? Where?

Greece,

...Cyprus?

India,

99% likely it's Bhutan.

UAE

This must be that piracy one...

Germany's in France (joint military force) and the US (leases part of several bases for training); Greece is indeed in Cyprus; India is in Bhutan, Madagascar, Mauritius, and the Seychelles; and the UAE is in Somalia itself and Yemen due to the ongoing occupation of Socotra in the local civil war, being one of the more active foreign participants.  The UAE is a bit of a tricky one, because their Somalia base is not just for anti-piracy operations, but rather to extend their strategic interests with the Somaliland separatists, and the initial weeks after their landing on Socotra earlier this year suggested they were aiming for annexation before Saudi Arabia and their "friendly" Yemeni government objected and forced a revised deal.  The countries that maintain major bases in Djibouti are are China, Japan, France, and Italy, and Germany also maintains several facilities which might be seen as a small base. 

[sluissa]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_overseas_military_bases

EDIT: Although in at least one case. (United States Bases in Japan) It condenses several bases spread across around under one "command".

EDIT2: Also important to note that some of the examples on that list are jointly operated bases. Several NATO operated bases in Europe get labelled as belonging to the United States. Having the NATO label on there at least presumes other countries have stakes in it as well.

[Hanslanda]

Regarding landmines; the USA maintains minefields in the DMZ between North Korea and South Korea, but nowhere else outside it. The export of landmines from the USA, the deployment of landmines and the stockpiling of landmines not intended for use in Korea, is not allowed by US Defence policy. There's nothing legal stopping the US from reversing this policy, but for political and efficacy reasons they have opted to cease.

I don't find it particularly convincing that the USA is seeking to gain a competitive advantage by trying to ban the usage of mines. The issue is the USA haven't found minefields to be particularly effective at denying areas to enemies or inflicting casualties upon them, while if you applied the reverse to the USA - the US Armed Forces are one of the most capable logistic nightmares in the world, with some of the best minewarfare countermeasure systems in place. Minefields aren't very effective against modern US Forces. However, long after wars have ended, mines have a tendency to persist causing problems - we are still clearing up landmines and seamines from as far back as WWI all across the world. This is somewhat of an issue when the fighting stops. Even in Korea, the minefields still cause problems since heavy rains can dislodge mines from their planted location into areas which aren't marked as minefields, with inevitable results. Mines aren't friendly explosives

I'm fairly sure USA mines the perimeter of a few of their bases for defense. Guantanamo Bay comes to mind, but I could be mistaken. And it could be AT mines I'm thinking of.