Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

ForumsDiscussion Forum → The United States has been developing Land Mines
12
The United States has been developing Land Mines
2008-05-04, 12:34 PM #1
This is simply unfathomable. Land mines are, in my opinion, just a step below WMDs. It's disturbing that anyone in any modern nation can consider them a viable weapon.
ᵗʰᵉᵇˢᵍ๒ᵍᵐᵃᶥᶫ∙ᶜᵒᵐ
ᴸᶥᵛᵉ ᴼᵑ ᴬᵈᵃᵐ
2008-05-04, 12:36 PM #2
Oooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Star Wars: TODOA | DXN - Deus Ex: Nihilum
2008-05-04, 12:41 PM #3
Why did we spend so much money developing a weapon that we shouldn't even need anymore? When is a landmine going to be useful in the modern age?
Warhead[97]
2008-05-04, 12:49 PM #4
You know Claymores are mines, right?
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2008-05-04, 1:01 PM #5
But not the kind that gets left lying around for 50 years to kill orphans.
2008-05-04, 1:03 PM #6
If we just surrounded every border with landmines, the world would no longer have to worry about invasions or illegal immigration.
:master::master::master:
2008-05-04, 1:04 PM #7
They can be.
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2008-05-04, 1:10 PM #8
So I take it that the new landmines are not so much like in the traditional sense where they are planted and left there for years to come, but ones that could temporary restrict an area and later easily neutralized by remote control to repositioned or rendered useless?

The horrible consequences of using landmines is that they can be easily forgotten and left there for years later. And to add to that, innocent people and children, going by their daily lives, can trigger them (and they do). While it may be splitting hairs here, if these new mines can be electrically controlled by remote access and can be easily picked up and placed, that issue would be somewhat sidestepped. Now if they put said mines in terrible locations or near populated area, yeah that would be a problem.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2008-05-04, 1:13 PM #9
This isn't that serious, but you know, sometimes it is really hard to be proud of America.
2008-05-04, 1:18 PM #10
I got the impression that these could be left in place and could be forgotten, just like any other mine. I just think that in this particular war, for example, there are not a lot of opportunities to use this kind of weapon. I don't think it'd be worth that much money spent developing a weapon like that.
Warhead[97]
2008-05-04, 1:21 PM #11
What about Diana's work?
Back again
2008-05-04, 1:21 PM #12
Originally posted by BobTheMasher:
I got the impression that these could be left in place and could be forgotten, just like any other mine. I just think that in this particular war, for example, there are not a lot of opportunities to use this kind of weapon. I don't think it'd be worth that much money spent developing a weapon like that.


You should work on your reading comprehension then.

Quote:
“The United States will continue to develop non-persistent anti-personnel and anti-tank landmines.”

HRW reports that, “New U.S. landmines will have a variety of ways of being initiated, both command-detonation (that is, when a soldier decides when to explode the mine, sometimes called ‘man-in-the-loop’) and traditional victim-activation. A mine that is designed to be exploded by the presence, proximity, or contact of a person (i.e., victim-activation) is prohibited under the International Mine Ban Treaty.”

To sidestep international opposition, the Pentagon proposes development of the “Spider” system, which consists of a control unit capable of monitoring up to eighty-four hand-placed, unattended munitions that deploy a web of tripwires across an area. Once a wire is touched, a man-in-the-loop control system allows the operator to activate the devices.

The Spider, however, contains a “battlefield override” feature that allows for circumvention of the man-in-the-loop, and activation by the target (victim).

A Pentagon report to Congress stated, “Target Activation is a software feature that allows the man-in-the-loop to change the capability of a munition from requiring action by an operator prior to being detonated, to a munition that will be detonated by a target. The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Service Chiefs, using best military judgment, feel that the man-in-the-loop system without this feature would be insufficient to meet tactical operational conditions and electronic countermeasures.”
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2008-05-04, 1:23 PM #13
Oh crap, you just reminded me, I left some landmines at my old house a few years back!
Cordially,
Lord Tiberius Grismath
1473 for '1337' posts.
2008-05-04, 1:24 PM #14
It's a terribly written article anyway.
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2008-05-04, 1:25 PM #15
Presumably from an exceptionally biased source.
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2008-05-04, 1:28 PM #16
Originally posted by Vincent Valentine:
This isn't that serious, but you know, sometimes it is really hard to be proud of America.


when the photos start rolling in of terrorists with their legs blown off halfway down the shin, i bet you'll change your mind
:master::master::master:
2008-05-04, 1:43 PM #17
The real issue with land mines isn't so much their use by first world nations, but rather their use by stupid factional governments in third world countries. They tend to spam old soviet mines everywhere and forget what they've done with them. These mines that are being developed here, are for use by the US and can be remotely monitored and disabled. This effectively eliminates any chance of leaving them behind for civilians to trip over. Sophisticated mines aren't the problem. It's the wide spread availability of them in crappy third world countries that's the real issue here. Unless these are being developed for export to Africa I don't really see any problem here.
2008-05-04, 1:46 PM #18
The US is in a good group of countries who didn't sign the Ottowa Treaty.
"Flowers and a landscape were the only attractions here. And so, as there was no good reason for coming, nobody came."
2008-05-04, 1:46 PM #19
Originally posted by Obi_Kwiet:
They tend to spam old soviet mines everywhere and forget what they've done with them.


har

Originally posted by Bobbert:
The US is in a good group of countries who didn't sign the Ottowa Treaty.


Which includes Finland.

OHH
SnailIracing:n(500tpostshpereline)pants
-----------------------------@%
2008-05-04, 1:50 PM #20
We've been using landmines for like the last 10-20 years.

Claymores are mines. UH DUR.
2008-05-04, 2:11 PM #21
There are mined areas around bases in the mideast. We have gotten a lot better about removing them when we leave these days. So much so that it isn't really a problem.

So all you hippies who cry at the mention of a land mine go eat a sock.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
2008-05-04, 2:54 PM #22
but they kill people.

o.0
2008-05-04, 2:58 PM #23
"Eat a sock"
Innovative aren't we?
2008-05-04, 2:59 PM #24
Originally posted by Greenboy:
but they kill people.


Hippies kill people with stupid, every day
2008-05-04, 2:59 PM #25
Originally posted by Bobbert:
The US is in a good group of countries who didn't sign the Ottowa Treaty.


And nobody on that list could possibly be lying through their teeth could they, Africa and South America?
<Rob> This is internet.
<Rob> Nothing costs money if I don't want it to.
2008-05-04, 3:01 PM #26
Originally posted by Rob:
Hippies kill people with stupid, every day


>:(



i was making a joke

people whining about weapons killing people is pretty durr

o.0
2008-05-04, 3:41 PM #27
Kirby, relax, you are taking this way out of context. We don't emplace mines in the sadistic way you are picturing.
"I would rather claim to be an uneducated man than be mal-educated and claim to be otherwise." - Wookie 03:16

2008-05-04, 11:09 PM #28
Okay, so I got the wrong impression, but that doesn't really address my main point which was why did we spend money developing fancy new mines? Is there a valid tactical use for them now? It seems like the current situation doesn't lend itself well to a device that you leave somewhere and wait. It's not like the enemy is riding in convoys down the road, are they?
Warhead[97]
2008-05-04, 11:21 PM #29
well its kinda like having an invisible dog fence except it blows them to bits instead of a light shock

o.0
2008-05-05, 12:44 AM #30
Surely in this day and age we're past crude weapons like Land Mines?.

Then I thought of the AK-47 and realised we're not...
2008-05-05, 1:24 AM #31
all is fair in love and war
2008-05-05, 4:27 AM #32
Land mines will not be safe until they become discriminatory with whom they explode. Unless they've got little webcams attached, the victim-tripped "spider" is still a deadly, stupid piece of warfare meant to cause fear and belittlement, but is ultimately going to kill civilians.

"Spiders" are smart IEDs.
ᵗʰᵉᵇˢᵍ๒ᵍᵐᵃᶥᶫ∙ᶜᵒᵐ
ᴸᶥᵛᵉ ᴼᵑ ᴬᵈᵃᵐ
2008-05-05, 4:53 AM #33
Quote:
The US is in a good group of countries who didn't sign the Ottowa Treaty.

It should be obvious by now that the US doesn't usually sign things unless China and India sign them too. You know. The two most populous countries on the planet.

It's also hard to care about it when the article is so obviously biased.
2008-05-05, 10:02 AM #34
Hello kids.

The US does not put down mines and wait for them to kill bad guys in some ambush spot near a school.

We line the places where we sleep with them so we don't get shanked in our sleep. And when we leave we pick them up.

It's not like we are setting up surprise traps anymore. At least, the regular military isn't. There might be some long haired guys with smoking Mk48s setting landmines in caves in asscrackistan because they are playing the bogeyman, I guess, but I have a feeling that they're pretty responsible with their little mines.

I can guarantee you that nearly 100% of our landmines are discriminatory as to who they kill, because the ONLY person who is going to go cross a no-man's land, climb two razorwire fences and backflip over the laser shark moat is someone who wants to teabag me in my sleep. And that is not okay.

Reafis, I am trying to figure out how the AK-47 and land mine are related.
Epstein didn't kill himself.
2008-05-05, 10:18 AM #35
Originally posted by Spook:
Hello kids.

The US does not put down mines and wait for them to kill bad guys in some ambush spot near a school.

We line the places where we sleep with them so we don't get shanked in our sleep. And when we leave we pick them up.

It's not like we are setting up surprise traps anymore. At least, the regular military isn't. There might be some long haired guys with smoking Mk48s setting landmines in caves in asscrackistan because they are playing the bogeyman, I guess, but I have a feeling that they're pretty responsible with their little mines.

I can guarantee you that nearly 100% of our landmines are discriminatory as to who they kill, because the ONLY person who is going to go cross a no-man's land, climb two razorwire fences and backflip over the laser shark moat is someone who wants to teabag me in my sleep. And that is not okay.

Reafis, I am trying to figure out how the AK-47 and land mine are related.

This makes perfect sense to me. As long as all mines are accounted for, I don't have a problem with them being used for defense. Anyone who snipes in CoD4 will tell you the importance of letting mines watch your back ;)

AK-47s and landmines are related because :downswords:, obviously.
2008-05-05, 10:29 AM #36
Spook, how do you guys make sure you pick them all up after? Do you map out the field when you place them? Can they be set to send some sort of signal? Or are they all physically wired up so it's a case of following the cable back afterwards?
The unfortunate thing is that even remotely controlled mines, if left behind, become UXOs which can be dangerous for decades. The iron harvest around Normandy and Flanders still kills farmers from time to time after a war almost 100 years ago.

The article blows it out of proportion though. There's a difference between mining a zone around your base for security and scattered mining of vast swathes of land as has happened in Angola, Bosnia etc. One is common sense and manageable, the other is short-sighted long-lasting terrorism.
I thought cluster bomblets were the bigger American-manufactured danger to civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq. I've heard a lot of stories about how the bomblets have a terrible detonation rate; and are brightly covered and plastic looking which makes them attractive things to pick up to kids.
2008-05-05, 10:34 AM #37
Addressed to the Original Topic:

Who cares?
2008-05-05, 10:53 AM #38
Recusant: Specifically, some of them were visually indistinguishable from the food packages dropped on Afghanistan leading to hilarious situations like families and children sprinting towards cluster bombs because they're hungry. But the United States military's solution to the United Nations declaring napalm use a war crime was to come up with another substance that has the exact same properties but a slightly different formula so I'm not sure if this was a horrible accident or if some ordinance supplier thought it would be a wonderful joke.

Spook: When you guys go camping do you pack up your trash or do you throw it in the campfire? Er. When you dismantle a base do you detonate the mines or do you retrieve them? A lot of explosives become less stable as they age, which is a large part of the risk with old mines. I know you guys keep pretty damn accurate maps but given the nature of the beast I think it would be pretty easy to miss a couple.
2008-05-05, 10:57 AM #39
Originally posted by Recusant:
Spook, how do you guys make sure you pick them all up after? Do you map out the field when you place them? Can they be set to send some sort of signal? Or are they all physically wired up so it's a case of following the cable back afterwards?
The unfortunate thing is that even remotely controlled mines, if left behind, become UXOs which can be dangerous for decades. The iron harvest around Normandy and Flanders still kills farmers from time to time after a war almost 100 years ago.


These new mines will help with that.
2008-05-05, 11:33 AM #40
Originally posted by JediKirby:
Land mines will not be safe until they become discriminatory with whom they explode. Unless they've got little webcams attached, the victim-tripped "spider" is still a deadly, stupid piece of warfare meant to cause fear and belittlement, but is ultimately going to kill civilians.

"Spiders" are smart IEDs.

When did you turn into SAJN?

No, it's ultimately not going to kill civilians. That's the point. The default mode on these things is to be operator detonated. The operator can then observe who's crawling through the trip lines (Webcam? Seriously? UAVs man), if it's questionable, there are less-than-lethal rounds to detonate instead of simply killing them. If the control unit is knocked out, the weapon detonates. If the control station is knocked out, the weapon detonates. If the weapon is set to "battle override" which means it's a victim-activated weapon, by-golly, that weapon still blows itself up after a pre-determined time. If you need that to be sooner, all you need to do is fly an AC-130 over, and let it broadcast destruct signals.

The way I see it, these weapons are safer than just about any mud-humper with PTSD and an itchy trigger finger.

[Edit - I'd also like to point out how brain-numbing the phrase "Smart IED" is.]
omnia mea mecum porto
12

↑ Up to the top!