LOGO: Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines. A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.   Exclusive Truthdig Merchandise: Mr. Fish T-shirts and Signed Prints
February 10, 2010
Log in / Register

 Choose a size
Text Size

Most Read

The Terror-Industrial Complex

Wall Street Wants a Refund

America's Confused Approach to Afghanistan

Haiti, Forgive Us

Palin Calls Global Warming Research 'Snake Oil Science'

Most Comments
Most Emailed

Reports
 * NEW! * Wall Street Wants a Refund
 * NEW! * Haiti, Forgive Us

Ear to the Ground

A/V Booth

Arts & Culture

Digs
Financial Meltdown 101

Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Cluster Bomb Treaty Steps Forward

Email this item Email    Print this item Print   
Posted on Dec 3, 2008
Cluster Bombs Feet
lemonodor.com

A man stands above a cache of unexploded cluster bombs outside an elementary school in Afghanistan.

It looks like a pact to ban current cluster bomb designs will take another step forward, with more than 100 countries slated to sign the treaty in the next couple of days. This is the next stage in a process, begun in Dublin in May 2008, to reduce the use of cluster bombs in warfare. However, the U.S., Russia and China—the largest cluster bomb manufacturers—so far have refused to sign on.


The BBC:

The first of more than 100 countries have begun signing a treaty to ban current designs of cluster bombs, at a conference in Oslo, Norway.

Campaigners are hailing the treaty as a major breakthrough.

But some of the biggest stockpilers, including the US, Russia and China, are not among the signatories.

First developed during World War II, cluster bombs contain a number of smaller bomblets designed to cover a large area and deter an advancing army.

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement


Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By Folktruther, December 9, 2008 at 4:41 pm #

That the US refuses to ban cluster bombs one would expect; it’s foreign policy is militarized, barbarous and brutal.  That China refused to sign it indicates that its imperialism, when it replaces the US as the world’ leading country in the next decade or so, will aslo be brutal.

Report this

By KDelphi, December 5, 2008 at 3:58 am #

Bob Bentley—Umm…you do know that the “Cold War” is over, no? BTW—nobody “won”..

Of course, we could also sign it, if, we only selfishly care if they are used on US—we are no longer the unipolar world power—if we ever were.

Who the hell wants to be?

Your kids, their kids, they are all kids. If you dont know who you are killing, it is so much easier, huh? I suggest you look them in the face.Or look at YOUR kids—want them used on them?

Neither do I!

Report this

By troublesum, December 4, 2008 at 11:19 am #

The purpose of cluster bombs is to terrorize civilian populations which is always part of any US war effort.  Cluster bombs, munitions containing spent uranium, agent orange, napalm, white phosphorus - these things are all methods of terrorizing civilians.  democracynow reported yesterday that over 60% of the victims of cluster bombs are civilians and more that 40% of those are children.  Going after the children is a favorite tactic of the US military in the third world.

Report this

By Bob Bentley, December 4, 2008 at 4:11 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Within their admittedly limited role, cluster munitions are highly effective. During the height of the Cold War, when so many commentators both civil and military fully expected hordes of Soviet tanks to pour through the Fulda Gap, cluster-delivered bombs, mines and so on were seen as a vital force multiplier.
Yet now we have treaties banning their manufacture and use. But I must ask, who introduced these documents? Nations able to manufacture effective cluster munitions of their own, or simply those who wish to ensure that such weapons would not be used against them? Making ‘cluster-bombs’ is really no more difficult than napalm, but getting it right, such that a consistent, repeatable pattern occurs with every drop, is far more difficult.
Therefore, I should like to introduce a weapons limitation proposal of my own. Might I suggest that a complete, 5-year moritorium be placed on the manufacture and deployment of all quantum-compression, anti-matter-based Planet Crackers? After all, I can’t make one, so no one else should either.

Report this

By Ray, December 4, 2008 at 2:13 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Just a shame we cannot get the big guns on board for these types of agreements…  :(

Report this

By msgmi, December 3, 2008 at 7:59 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Any cluster bomb producing/deploying country leader who believes that cluster bombs are a vital weapon in order to repel an enemy front is propagating denial and deception. They all have arsenals of sophisticated weapons in stock that can do the job better. Studies show that these cluster droplets do more damage to the civilian population than the enemy. The victims of these droplet should be heard and their executioners should listen. Unfortunately, the deaf & dumb leadership has to keep the cluster bomb manufacturers in business; profits rules.

Report this

By KDelphi, December 3, 2008 at 7:43 pm #

If you have questions about whether we should be a signatory, read the BBC article link here…look at the video. Designed to PRODUCE “collateral damage”!

We can expect this, at least.

Why do so many of these international stories have to come out of BBC, or UK, or Le Monde? I know we “have the internet”—but many dont! They should know about this stuff.

Report this

By skulz fontaine, December 3, 2008 at 2:27 pm #

Cluster bombs are good. They deliver a message far into the future. “We’ll kill you now and we’ll kill you later! We’ll amputate the legs of your children and, remotely of course, we’ll screw with you for generations, and we’ll walk away with our legs and dignity intact.” Cowardice, thy name is war machine!

Report this

Add Your Comment

Posts by unregistered readers are moderated. Posts by members
are published immediately. Why wait? Register today!







Number of characters remaining: 4000

Notify you when others comment on this article?


Are you a human?
Retype the word you see here.


Please read and abide by our comment policy.
By submitting this comment, you agree to this site's terms and conditions.

 
 

 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2010 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved.