this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2025
95 points (99.0% liked)

Europe

5297 readers
1694 users here now

News and information from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in [email protected]. (They're cool, you should subscribe there too!)
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)

(This list may get expanded when necessary.)

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the mods: @[email protected], @[email protected], or @[email protected].

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
 

Finland plans to withdraw from the Ottawa convention banning anti-personnel landmines

Poland and the Baltic countries of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania said last month they will withdraw from the convention

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (10 children)

Talking about "landmines" instead of anti-personal mines in the headline is pure sane-washing.

There is no treaty against the use of landmines. There is only one agains the use of anti-personal mines. And for good reasons: When have you seen armies actually marching on foot to make them relevant compared to anti-vehicle landmines the last time? Countries agreed on banning anti-presonal mines because there are very little benefits of using them, yet massiv drawbacks in the form of (often your own) population getting killed for years and decades to come from leftover mines.

PS: The same is true for cluster ammunitions btw. They were not banned because you want to be nice to your enemies but because they are unreliable and duds will kill your civilians still when the war is mostly forgotten. Also there are better (as in cheaper, safer and more effective) shrapnel-based alternatives nowadays. Unbanning those is similarly insane and basically a statement of "fuck my population, I want to use those old stocks I still have, because that's slightly cheaper then building/ordering newer ones".

[โ€“] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (9 children)

Cluster munitions and anti-personel mines are effective AF, seeing how the Ukrainian-Russian war is progressing.

The countries in question will create additional factories just for these bad boys. The old stock if any is pretty much useless.

These things are dangerous for civilians, but far less than an aggressive nation by your doorstep. Notice how all the countries border Russia?

It is useless if you have air superiority, but only US has that, and no one believes they'll honor article 5.

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (8 children)

Cluster munitions and anti-personel mines are effective AF, seeing how the Ukrainian-Russian war is progressing.

Nope. Anti-vehicle mines are effective. Anti personal mines are of little use in comparison, unless actual infantry marching of foot return.

And cluster ammunition are effective in Ukraine for the simple reason that this is the best stuff they actually got, as the US is dumping their remaining old M30 stocks on them. The few remaining ones not already converted to M31 unitary warheads. While tungsten-shrapnel-based M31A1 and A2 have replaced them in their anti-infantry and anti-light-armor role because they are cheaper, safer and more efficient...

Your argument makes as much sense as advocating that NATO countries should go back to 50+ year old vehicles because they were effective in Ukraine when those were the best they got delivered.

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Anti personal mines are of little use in comparison, unless actual infantry marching of foot return.

You mean like the foot infantry assaults that Russia is using along the entire front?

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

No, I mean the mechanized assaults that constantly fail because of mainly anti-vehicle mines and artillery, with the infantry stranded on foot then being easily picked off by drones or more artillery.

Just because it's insane for us how a country would waste living beings in constantly failing armoured assaults this way and loves to frame it as "meat waves" doesn't make this actual foot infantry assaults. Actual infantry movement (the reasons I refered to "marching") that would make anti-personal mining reasonable doesn't exist anymore and would fail for a mix of modern reconnaissance and artillery precision nowadays 100 out of 100 times.

Speaking of artillery... Have you actually seen the locations totally bombed to the ground before Russians move forward another few meters. No amount of mining with anti-personal mines would survive that well enough to actually deter soldiers. It only leaves just enough somewhat still functional explosives behind that are as likely to kill some singular enemy soldier tomorrow as some civilians in 5 years.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Speaking of artillery... Have you actually seen the locations totally bombed to the ground before Russians move forward another few meters. No amount of mining with anti-personal mines would survive that well enough to actually deter soldiers.

Artillery is actually surprisingly bad at clearing minefields. If you could just lob shells onto a minefield, why would nations everywhere develop incredibly expensive mine-clearing systems?

Minefields are used because they work. Mixed minefields are used just like castle walls, to slow an enemy and increase the defender advantage. They don't stop an enemy by itself, but purely anti-vehicle fields are easily cleared by hand, or walked across. Mixed fields are not.

Actual infantry movement (the reasons I refered to "marching") that would make anti-personal mining reasonable doesn't exist anymore

Minefields that deter strategic movement have never existed. They have always been a tactical thing, even in WW2 desert combat, which saw some of the most extensive minefield ever, they have always been tactical obstacles.

Mining the border doesn't mean spreading mines across the entire literal border. It means defending key areas with thicker fields, and probably not even that, it means keeping them ready just in case.

The thing is, yes, mines might kill civilians some time in the future. But losing a war against a genocidal foreign country will absolutely kill more.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago

why would nations everywhere develop incredibly expensive mine-clearing systems?

Because you are primarily talking about anti-vehicle mines that can be well buried and are much less sensitive.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)