- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
You must log in or # to comment.
Sucks but cluster bombs are already being used against Ukraine in Ukraine so no sense in denying them to Ukraine.
and worse, chemical warfare has been used unsuccessfully by the Russians.
That sounds a lot like a race to the bottom. Where do we draw the line? Ukraine has already claimed some Russians have used lewisite. If the Russians started using Sarin gas again too, would that also warrant using it in return?
The people who suffer from cluster bombs are only the people in those geographical areas and their families. Not just the soldiers, the people who will have to experience their children accidentally killing themselves with unexploded ordinance long after the war has ended. There are good reasons The Convention on Cluster Munitions has been signed by 123 countries.
And there are so many more economic and legal strategies that can be used before this. Strategies that would affect Russian leadership instead of just more efficiently maiming their conscripts. Things like actively preferencing US companies that don’t still sell products in Russia.
I am so deeply not ok with the cluster bomb decision, even if I am completely unsurprised by it. I call bullshit on the pretend hand-wringing by Biden.
I am not enjoying humanity’s gradual selfdestruction at all, I think I’ll go back to bed.
This was obviously a very specific exception due to the fact that Ukraine will be dealing with the long-term consequences of unexploded ordnance including cluster munitions whether we supply them or not. Pretty absurd to make this a slippery slope to supplying chemical weapons.
Attempting to weigh benefits against risks and asking for whom these benefits and risks apply is not absurd.
Adding more unexploded ordinance to existing unexploded ordinance does not reduce the number of future deaths and injuries which will result. That is, unless there are solid estimates of how many lives escalating violence will save through ending the war more quickly. I don’t see much of anything to suggest cluster bombs are more effective than other available strategies right now. We do have plenty of evidence about how awful they are and will continue to be though. UN conventions backed by the Red Cross don’t just appear for minor concerns.
Either humanitarian reasons are sufficient or they aren’t, and the message the US government is sending here is that they aren’t.
Clearly Ukraine and the US have weighed the benefits and risks and still transfered the weapons, but you’re entitled to second guess their choice while you enjoy not having to worry about Russia invading your country and dropping cluster bombs on you.
I live in a safe country because war forced my family out of their homes. This is why I’m heartbroken the line hasn’t been drawn at cluster bombs, and it’s why I want to know where the line is drawn. But, I understand your position and I won’t belabour the point further.
Sorry Ukraine broke your heart by choosing to return fire in kind.
The United States has pledged to help with the aftermath so if there are unexploded cluster bombs we will at least clean up our mess.
Like the messes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, etc.? I admire your optimism, and I wonder if the locals there would rate the US’s cleaning services 5 stars on Yelp.
We did clean up Kuwait and Iraq. Syria is mostly due to Russia. Somalia is a hellscape of their own making. Yemen is Saudi Arabia’s mess.
War is hell. Take every advantage to destroy your enemy.
