Happiness is a warm cluster bomb

[UnseenParticipant]

Cluster bombs are not a pretty pink bow on a successful military campaign. Rather, they are an act of desperation in a war that is failing badly.

These bombs have a failure rate of 10%-15% meaning there will be live bombs just waiting for a human being to disturb and detonate them possibly for years after the end of the fighting. That’s similar to the effect of nuclear weapons would have as well as the depleted uranium munitions already in use. So supplying cluster munitions is an open invitation to Russia to counter with tactical nuclear weapons because WTH not?

We have a habit of giving Ukraine more and more stuff we pledged at the start not to give them, and now we are giving Ukraine a weapon that’s been banned by over 100 nations, and for seemingly irrefutable reasons.

The irony? It probably won’t even make a difference.

 

[RichRaelianParticipant]

Hi! I certainly hope so.

[_Robert_Participant]

All Russia has to do is go back to their own country which is 11% of the land mass of the planet. It’s just not enough for one man’s ego. Russia uses cluster bombs on towns already, so this is a fat nothingburger. Of course, there are always those who bow down in fear to dictators. They fill the history books as weak-spined cowards.

The entirety of human history is just one story of three prototypes.

• Authoritarians who wish to control, plunder, and subjugate.
• Those who coward, allow and appease them and must by definition pay a terrible price.
• Those who fight them and eventually prevail often with great sacrifice.

The story of the dictator who has an epiphany and becomes a humanitarian is the one nobody will believe and for a good treason.

[UnseenParticipant]

_Robert_ wrote:

Authoritarians who wish to control, plunder, and subjugate.

Gee. Can you think of any other government besides Russia that seeks to control (hint: it has nearly 800 military bases around the world, fights wars to secure resources that belong to other countries, and uses corporate funding to buy elections at home, and actively engages in regime changes that reflect its own interests first and the interests of the subjugated people almost as an afterthought).

Those who coward, allow and appease them and must by definition pay a terrible price.

Do you have any understanding of how Ukraine almost invited Russia into, at least, the Eastern Provinces by allowing the criminal neo-Nazi Azov battalion a virtually free rein to harass and murder the Russian-speaking majority in the Eastern province? Invoking Neville Chamberlain ignores a lot of actual facts inducing a kind of “nothing to see hear” when it comes to the reasons why many and maybe most of the population there might be better off under Russian rule. Also, there is no “definition” despite your use of the common expression. You are referring to what often happens not something which must. Every situation is different.

Those who fight them and eventually prevail often with great sacrifice.

It’s difficult to enjoy a victory when you are dead. A peace under Russia in a country that is not a proxy for another war—the economic/trade/resource war between Russia and the United States—might be preferable to inheriting a ruined land. Ruined by radioactive weaponry and unexploded cluster bombs.

[UnseenParticipant]

I see a lot of this discussion has disappeared in the server changeover. So, let’s start over.

Around 120 nations consider the use of cluster bombs to be outside the rules we want to govern war. A kind of war crime, in other words.

The excuse, “Well, the Russians have used them,” is true but it’s also true that the Ukrainians have as well.

Cluster munitions always have a failure (“dud”) rate. While “dud” means unexploded, it does not mean unexplodable. In fact, any unexploded cluster bomblet from that point forward is essentially an antipersonnel mine, so unexploded bomblets are hardly a waste, in that sense.

There is a controversy over the dud rate with figures so disparate that it’s baffling.

Marc Garlasco is senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch and the author of reports on civilian casualties in conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. He was chief of high-value targeting on the Pentagon’s joint staff during the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Here is a quote from Garlasco from a PBS article on the change in policy on cluster bombs for Ukraine:

Look, this discussion started with Ukraine stating they were only going to use American cluster munitions dropped individually from drones. Now it’s evolved into something where they’re going to use American artillery and rocket artillery, cluster munitions.

You know, I think we have to question what the reality is here and where is it going to stop. The potential for civilian harm is just too high. You know, you spoke about the dud rate, right? And these munitions, the Pentagon is now saying, well, they only have a 2 percent dud rate.

But when you look at the U.S. government’s actual figures, the Government Accountability Office, for example, it has a 23 percent dud rate. If we look at a standard volley from rocket artillery, which would be six rockets fired from HIMARS, you’re looking at over 3,800 cluster munitions.

That’s 888 duds that are on the ground that potentially could kill civilians. And we’re looking at DPICM that are fired from artillery shells, each shell would have 20 unexploded bomblets.

We had a meeting today with the National Security Council, and it was kind of one of these things where you get together and they try to make the NGOs feel happy and say, we have got a control on this, we have diplomatic assurances.

The reality is, when we asked them, how did you come to these new numbers, were there tests, how were the tests completed, did you have them done under hermetically sealed manner, or was it actually a field test in a war, as I have seen and covered in the past? And they were unable to answer our questions. It just was unacceptable.

So, who do you believe? Do you believe a military spokesman who’s saying the dud rate is roundabout 2% give or take or The Government Accountability Office which places it at as high as 23%? Ten times higher.

[UnseenParticipant]

I just saw a video in which Pres. Biden explained that despite being “reluctant” to use this munition, it was necessary because we are running out of artillery shells to give them. (I guess we need to keep some to kill Chinese soldiers with if China tries to absorb Taiwan.)

But to me, besides an admission that the war isn’t going well, it also means that if we’re now willing to admit that we can no longer supply non-criminal munitions, it’s reasonable to ask how low are we willing to sink, especially using the excuse “Well, the Russians do it.” (BTW, so have the Ukrainians, so they aren’t on the side of the angels there, either.)  Chemical/biological weapons? Tactical nukes? We’re already preparing to send depleted uranium antitank shells, which are not very healthy.

When ammunition made from depleted uranium strikes a target, the uranium turns into dust that is inhaled by soldiers from both sides near the explosion site. The wind then carries dust to surrounding areas, polluting local water and agriculture, making these munitions, in a way, a form of chemical warfare that will have ruinous effects on Ukrainian agriculture after the war, no matter which side wins.

So, how does this end short of a massive nuclear exchange that devastates major cities and military targets in both the U.S. and Russia?

[NoelParticipant]

Cluster Munitions. Lets take a look at this shit.

The M483 artillery shell and the longer range M864. These are Dual Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions shells, DPICM’s or cluster munitions.

Condemn by over 100 nations. Reason being that, like land mines, unexploded “bomblets” delivered by such artillery can hang around for months and sometimes years after battle. Result? Civilian casualties.

Cluster munitions have been used by both Russia, who uses them to target civilian populations and Ukraine who have used up their Soviet era stockpile defending themselves against Russian aggression. Difference is that not one Ukraine fired cluster munition was used to target civilians. The same can’t be said for Russia who exclusively targets civilians.

Condemning these things is understandable. They’ve been know to lead to civilian deaths in a few countries in Africa and the middle east. Cluster weapons have been used to terrorize civilian populations in Syria where 1,435 civilians-including 518-kids have died due to their indiscriminate use. Both Russia and the Russia controlled regime of dictator Bashar al-Assad have blanketed entire cities with these munitions. Russia has use them in attacks on Ukrainian cities.

For the Russians, the deaths of civilians due to these weapons isn’t a fault: That’s a feature.

The reason these munitions have developed such a bad rep comes down to 1) How Russia is using them. 2)How Russia is building them. Not only are they deploying these shells in urban situations where the bomblets in each shell are likely to be encountered by civilians and their shells have the highest rate of duds but can still detonate when walked on at a future date. There have been reports of Russia deliberately coloring the bomblets so that they look like toys. The dying from these weapons are real.

But there are legitimate reasons why these munitions were developed. They are really effective at dealing with dug in forces in defensive positions.

The shells the U.S. is sending Ukraine are dual purpose. They can be used on tanks and on troops. The M483 contains 88 M42 and M46 grenades. Thats what they are referred to but we Ordinanceman call them bomblets. A single bomblet can penetrate armor. One shell can possibly take out multiple tanks or hardened targets if they are within the radius of the bomblets dispersal. With that said they are one of the most effective ways to neutralize personnel who are dug in because they can detonate above a trench.

Ukraine is making it clear that for the counteroffensive to be effective, it needs improved air support and dual-purpose shells. Western planes are unlikely to arrive until around the end of the year. So for Ukraine to turn the gains it has made so far into a definite victory before the fall rains once again make forward progress difficult, cluster munitions are the best bet.

Russia has blanketed the entire front with Ukraine with anti tank and anti personnel mines. I doubt that once hostilities are over their humanity is going to intercede and give someone the location of those 10’s of thousands of mines. It’s going to be up to Ukraine to do that. While they’re at it they will also have to collect any duds from cluster munitions.

BTW: The majority of those numbers from civilian deaths are the result of the campaigns of terror Russia has waged in places like Syria.

I don’t hear a big outcry against Russia laying miles of mines or indiscrimately targeting civilians as i do about supplying Ukraine with cluster bombs in their war effort. Remember, Ukraine does not want to destroy their own cities or kill their own cititzens and they definately are not going to target Russian civilian populations and risk the ire of their Nato benefactors.

Props to M.Sumner for most of this diatribe on DPICM’s.

[UnseenParticipant]

Noel wrote:

But there are legitimate reasons why these munitions were developed. They are really effective at dealing with dug in forces in defensive positions.

And so, the reasons about 250 nations regard their use as criminal are just dumb? And if effectiveness is to be the overriding standard for the use of weapons, hell, why not mustard gas, whose effect on the civilian population years and decades into the future would be much smaller?

[_Robert_Participant]

Gee. Can you think of any other government besides Russia that seeks to control (hint: it has nearly 800 military bases around the world, fights wars to secure resources that belong to other countries, and uses corporate funding to buy elections at home, and actively engages in regime changes that reflect its own interests first and the interests of the subjugated people almost as an afterthought).

Ask yourself why that is. Did the US want to be involved in WW1 and WW2? Did the attempt at isolationism work out real well? Those bases are there because those countries want them there, just like how they want to join NATO.  Like it or not, it is a global economy and oh it’s so easy to join in with the whole mindless anti-evil corporation, anti-capitalism, elections don’t matter troupe as if a dictatorship is the better solution. You can always escape the evil corporations and go to Russia, where you can freely speak your mind about the government and special operation and enjoy the corruption-less system they have there. I’m sure it’s easy to be a homosexual there.

Do you have any understanding of how Ukraine almost invited Russia into, at least, the Eastern Provinces by allowing the criminal neo-Nazi Azov battalion a virtually free rein to harass and murder the Russian-speaking majority in the Eastern province?

Right, that’s what the gullible FOX watchers believe.  Moscow has been paying the so-called separatists off for years and years, trying to cause a civil war and hey that does not in any way allow for invasion and attempted permanent occupation by another country. Speaking of Nazis, look up how Wagner got its name, LOL. The US North did what it had too to keep the nation intact and here it’s much worse, a total invasion and attempt to kill the leadership in Kyiv.

It’s difficult to enjoy a victory when you are dead. A peace under Russia in a country that is not a proxy for another war—the economic/trade/resource war between Russia and the United States—might be preferable to inheriting a ruined land. Ruined by radioactive weaponry and unexploded cluster bombs.

Many would rather be dead than live under the boot. Ukranian soldiers have a reason to fight, Russian soldiers are just walking dead meat. Since Putin has been made to look weak by Yevgeny Prigozhin, there has to be a purge now so Putin can keep control. Gonna be lots of window accidents and heart attacks.

If you lived in Russia and made that post, you would be arrested before midnight tonight.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by  _Robert_.

[NoelParticipant]

Unseen said: the reasons about 150 nations regard their use as criminal are just dumb? And if effectiveness is to be the overriding standard for the use of weapons, hell, why not mustard gas, whose effect on the civilian population years and decades into the future would be much smaller?

Point taken. You missed the entire exercise though. Over 100 nations are against the use of Cluster Munitions, that’s true. The reason isn’t because countries like France, Germany, and the U.S. are using them to indiscriminately bomb civilians. It’s because Russia is the only country in possession of these munitions that indiscriminately bombs civilians. That’s a fact.

The United States has not used these munitions for quite some time. They have stockpiles sitting in magazines and, with assurances from Zelenski that they would use them responsibly, they are starting to supply them to Ukraine. No new cluster munitions are being produced.

BTW: Munitions, despite all the care taken to set their fuses, do sometimes not explode. Take a walk through Fallon, Nevada’s U.S. Navy bombing range if you don’t believe me. But be warned, the mosquitos there are as big as dogs. Most Naval flights, if not all, that take off a carrier, do not return with unexploded munitions on their wing stores. Makes sense. So what happens to these munitions, they’re dumped, preferably out at sea.

Tell you what though, If you really have a really deep and overriding feeling about cluster munitions and the harm they cause, you might want to have this conversation with Russians. Last I looked America and Nato and Ukraine were not dropping bombs and firing missiles into population centers. But you know who is? Russia.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by  Noel.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by  Noel.

[UnseenParticipant]

@robert

Almost too much there to respond to. Let’s start with this. I’ll answer more as I get time, unless you keep posting, but I see there are other posts by other people wanting to hear from me.

I’m going to set WW1 aside because I know much less about it beyond how The Great War started stupidly with a bungled assassination. We wisely didn’t want to be in WW2 until the attack on Pearl Harbor, but while one can learn from the past, one can also be imprisoned by it. Ever heard that saying, “The generals are always preparing for the last war”?

Are you actually taking the position that if we don’t fight the Russians in Africa, we’ll hiave to fight them in Nebraska or the streets of Chicago? The Russians who bungled their blitzkrieg into Ukraine that now they are hiding in foxholes?

Who is the enemy?

China is enjoying a lot of success building friendships in Africa by helping them, not by building bases. There are an estimated one million Chinese nationals in Africa, not manning military bases. They are engineers, scientists, educators, and other people who are helping Africa raise itself up. They will join in partnerships to build things, but with a 40% interest in the project, not a controlling interest. Which country’s approach do you think is more wise?

By contrast, we get into Africa through the classic “offer you can’t refuse” approach. Take our weapons and our help keeping yourselves in office in exchange for giving us nearly free rein to set up and move about as we please.

[UnseenParticipant]

Noel wrote:

The United States has not used these munitions for quite some time. They have stockpiles sitting in magazines and, with assurances from Zelenski that they would use them responsibly, they are starting to supply them to Ukraine.

We have no accurate accounting of what happens to weapons we give Ukraine. We do know that a lot of them never reach the battlefield but instead are sold on the black market, which means they will likely be used on Americans someday. But what the hey… Ukraine was known as the most corrupt country in Europe before the war. More corrupt, even, than Russia. Our troops can now look forward to being killed by American-made cluster munitions.

It’s because Russia is the only country in possession of these munitions that indiscriminately bombs civilians. That’s a fact.

Oh, come on. Are you not at all familiar with America’s actions in Syria? When Russia kills them, they’re “innocent civilians,” when we do they are “unavoidable collateral damage.” Maybe we don’t do it with cluster bombs, but that makes little difference to a here today gone tomorrow Syrian civilian.

The United States has not used these munitions for quite some time. They have stockpiles sitting in magazines and, with assurances from Zelenski that they would use them responsibly, they are starting to supply them to Ukraine. No new cluster munitions are being produced.

No new ones being produced. And they age just like wine, getting better over time. According to the Government Accountability Office, they have a 23 percent dud rate. A military spokesman says they have only about a 2% dud rate. Somebody is either lying or ridiculously badly ill-informed. I covered this fairly extensively in a former post. Me? I don’t believe a damned thing a military PR guy is told to say.

Tell you what though, If you really have a really deep and overriding feeling about cluster munitions and the harm they cause, you might want to have this conversation with Russians. Last I looked America and Nato and Ukraine were not dropping bombs and firing missiles into population centers. But you know who is? Russia.

Russia, Russia, Russia. Ukraine is not so squeaky clean. It sometimes sets up operations in urban settings which seem to have two purposes. Either they will have Russia think twice about attacking them there (which typically doesn’t work because…Russia) or it will create a PR piece they can use against Russia when it attacks them there.

BTW, setting up a base in an apartment building, hospital, or school is a war crime. Russia does it, yes, so does Ukraine.

Anyway, you didn’t supply an adequate answer to why Sarin nerve gas* wouldn’t be better than cluster munitions. More effective on the battlefield and once it’s done it’s done. No lingering after effects killing Ukrainian children.

* BTW, I’ve changed over to Sarin because I discovered that mustard gas is only an irritant and only kills at most 2% of the time whereas Sarin is many times more effective. How effective depends on many factors so there is no set kill rate, but whatever it is, it is generally far more effective than mustard gas. We know this from its use in Syria, allegedly by Syria, but who knows?

• This reply was modified 1 year, 7 months ago by  Unseen.

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Unseen,

Your number of nations that ban cluster bombs went from 100 to 120 to 250.

One, there are not 250 nations on the Earth, but 206.

Two, I highly doubt that 44 nations just sprouted out of the ground in the length of time from when this thread started.

Three, if a weapon has a dud rate of anywhere from 2 to 23 percent and is a threat to civilians, I would think that is all the more reason to make them where they aren’t duds and are more precisely targeted against aggressors such as Putin and his Putineers.

Now, I’m just a Citizen Dabbler and Perpetual Scholar with a fondness for Electronics, but the thought occurs:

Why not make cluster bombs where they have a redundant, digital, Spread Spectrum Transmission (SST) Radio Frequency (RF) Transciever that serves as a trigger and tracing device?

The SSTRF Transciever would recieve a digital signal to set off the explosive if impact didn’t set it off, reducing the number of duds.

And if it still didn’t explode, the SSTRF Transciever could, after a certain amount of time, send out a digital signal of its location, then ground drones could triangulate the signal, dig out the explosive, then set it off, avoiding any loss of either innocent life or maybe even combatants. Using drones would beat using human bomb-squad personnel and again, save lives.

Because the signal would be digital and Spread Spectrum, the enemy could not set the explosive off while it is in friendly hands, nor could they trace it to reverse-engineer it for their own nefarious ends. It would be a vast improvement that would save untold innocent lives.

I actually hope somebody’s evesdropping that can use this idea to make war less senseless and deadly, even if it is unavoidable.

I also hope someone is evesdropping who can convince people to stop the “pause” in AI development. Areas like this are where AI, Automation, and Mecha-Electronics are needed the most, to work where humans can’t and to save human lives.

[NoelParticipant]

Unseen: Anyway, you didn’t supply an adequate answer to why Sarin nerve gas* wouldn’t be better than cluster munitions. More effective on the battlefield and once it’s done it’s done. No lingering after effects killing Ukrainian children.
* BTW, I’ve changed over to Sarin because I discovered that mustard gas is only an irritant and only kills at most 2% of the time whereas Sarin is many times more effective. How effective depends on many factors so there is no set kill rate, but whatever it is, it is generally far more effective than mustard gas. We know this from its use in Syria, allegedly by Syria, but who knows?

“Sarin is widely considered a weapon of mass destruction. Production and stockpiling of sarin was outlawed as of April 1997 by the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993, and it is classified as a Schedule 1 substance.”

Cluster munitions have not been outlawed… Yet. The only country to have used chemical weapons in recent times is… drum roll please… wait for it… RUSSIA. They used them in Syria.

Unseen: We have no accurate accounting of what happens to weapons we give Ukraine. We do know that a lot of them never reach the battlefield but instead are sold on the black market, which means they will likely be used on Americans someday. But what the hey… Ukraine was known as the most corrupt country in Europe before the war. More corrupt, even, than Russia. Our troops can now look forward to being killed by American-made cluster munitions.

Now how do we know about “weapons to Ukraine on the black market?” References?

They, Ukraine, is on track to join Nato, so they are not going to “kill Americans” in their own clic. Not unless they really don’t want to be part of Nato. According to you joining NATO is what all of this is all about.

That dud rate mostly applies to Russian built cluster munitions since they (and Ukraine, who had stockpiles from the old Soviet days) are the ones using them the last 20 or so years.

Unseen: “America’s actions in Syria? When Russia kills them, they’re “innocent civilians,” when we do they are “unavoidable collateral damage.” Maybe we don’t do it with cluster bombs, but that makes little difference to a here today gone tomorrow Syrian civilian.”

But the topic is cluster munitions.

Unseen: “Somebody is either lying or ridiculously badly ill-informed. I covered this fairly extensively in a former post. Me? I don’t believe a damned thing a military PR guy is told to say.”

You mean like the government accountability office?

Unseen: “Russia, Russia, Russia. Ukraine is not so squeaky clean. ”

But Ukraine is the country being invaded by the Russians to the North of them. Why so much animosity towards the country doing the defending and none towards the aggressor with the overwhelming means to put it’s boot on their necks? Russia has committed war crimes. They are on video. Whole villages in Ukraine massacred and buried in mass graves; that’s documented and cataloged. They are fucking evil and it’s on video and on the internet.

Let me be clear, I’m not on a crusade to change hearts and minds about war, Ukraine, Russia, politics, and especially religion. But stating something without looking at three sides of the story is counter productive to finding the TRUTH. Unseen, you have presented cogent answers to the topic of the dangers of Cluster Munitions. I don’t see how anyone can build a defense for Russia’s actions, not just in The Ukraine but in Syria and Africa to name a few.

Until we start seeing video of Ukraines army killing innocent civilians and dumping their bodies into mass graves I think supporting their effort to oust the invaders is the right thing to do. When we find that they are indiscriminately dropping cluster munitions on population centers in Russia then I’ll have to rethink my support of that effort.

[NoelParticipant]

The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) is an international treaty that prohibits all use, transfer, production, and stockpiling of cluster munitions, a type of explosive weapon which scatters submunitions (“bomblets”) over an area. Additionally, the convention establishes a framework to support victim assistance, clearance of contaminated sites, risk reduction education, and stockpile destruction. The convention was adopted on 30 May 2008 in Dublin,[6] and was opened for signature on 3 December 2008 in Oslo. It entered into force on 1 August 2010, six months after it was ratified by 30 states.[2] As of April 2023, a total of 123 states are committed to the goal of the convention, with 111 states that have ratified it, and 12 states that have signed the convention but not yet ratified it.[3]a

Countries that ratify the convention will be obliged “never under any circumstances to”:[7]

Use cluster munitions;
Develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile, retain or transfer to anyone, directly or indirectly, cluster munitions;
Assist, encourage or induce anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under this Convention.

The United States, Russia, and The Ukraine are not signatories to this agreement. Further, the agreement states that nations that are still using these munitions can still be supported by the signatories of the agreement. The Truth.

[Author]

Posts