TV Schedule

Are cluster bombs immoral?

  1. sespian
  2. related topics
The moral center of humanity slowly asserts itself. Only the most powerful are too afraid to join.

You may have missed the news: At the end of May, 111 nations, including, at the last minute, Great Britain, showing the world the power of an unleashed conscience, agreed to an international ban on cluster bombs, surely one of the cruelest and, given the nature of war today, most unnecessary weapons in modern arsenals.

Among those not endorsing the treaty and MIA at the conference in Dublin where it was debated were Russia, China, Israel and, to the surprise of no one, the United States of George Bush, that increasingly isolated moral rump state of which so many are so ashamed. Indeed, the treaty is widely seen as a “diplomatic defeat” for the U.S., so identified is the Bush administration with the sanctity of its WMD.

The official U.S. stance on cluster bombs is that they have “demonstrated military utility,” which trumps “the humanitarian concerns of those in Dublin,” which the U.S. nonetheless shares with such passion that, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates explained in a recent policy memo, “by 2018 the military will no longer use cluster weapons with a failure rate greater than 1 percent. In the interim period the U.S. will deplete its existing stockpiles of cluster munitions with a greater than 1 percent dud rate by exporting them to foreign governments that agree not to use them starting in 2018.”

Certainly there is a hellish ingenuity to the cluster bomb, which was designed for use on an open field of battle. A “mother canister,” as it is called, opens in mid-air and releases hundreds of grenade-size bombs that “spew deadly shrapnel over very large swathes of land” when they hit the ground, as explained recently in the Salt Lake Tribune by former munitions researcher Dick Devlin.

And Canadian journalist Gwynne Dyer adds: “If they exploded high enough to let the bomblets scatter properly, a few well-placed cluster bombs or shells could destroy dozens of soft-skinned military vehicles and blunt the attack of an entire mechanized infantry battalion. A few hundred could stop an army corps.”

Of course, we don’t use cluster bombs to disable massing infantries. We haven’t fought that kind of war in over 50 years. We use them now in counterinsurgency warfare, against primarily civilian populations, in such places as Kosovo (U.S.), Afghanistan (U.S., Russia), Lebanon (Israel) and, of course, Iraq (U.S.). We use them, in other words, to shred innocent bystanders.

Stigmatizing war
by Robert C. Koehler
July 18, 2008

Read complete article: http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/13/2008/31...
sespian

45 responses // Are cluster bombs immoral?

  • Considering the type of wars we fight today, cluster bombs are irresponsible and unethical. Don't we remember the number of civilians killed when Israel used them to bomb southern Lebanon during the summer of 2006?
    bishopobispo
  • if cluster bombs are immoral, so are land mines.

    the Argentines dropped planeloads of them on the Falkland Islands in that war.

    farmers were afraid to go outside their farmhouses.

    all they could do was huddle inside and listen to the explosions as their livestock found the land mines themselves.

    AND the Argies, nice folks that they were then, forgot to leave the metallic rings on the mines so that mine detectors could find them after the war was over.

    talk about immoral?

    how do you determine how to apply the term "immoral" or "moral" to a weapon of war?

    how?
    plusaf
  • I think they purposefully de-fuse some of the bomblets so that they act as land mines. Cluster bombs that explode properly should be legal, and there should be very high standards for the manufacture of Cluster Munitions.
    Dmitri_Molotov
  • In a word, yes.
    Amber_LaStrega
  • is the use of ANY bombs moral?

    Murder is murder, doesnt matter how it is dressed up.
    teddy14
  • teddy ... so totally agreed.
    Amber_LaStrega
  • well, too bad that the one using them are not signing!
    as the War crime tribunal, only US didn't sign, oldo was a smart move with what US gov has been doing last years!

    can't wait january, will put back US in track
    alexandrek
  • alex ... here's hoping!
    Amber_LaStrega
  • So it's more moral to kill your enemies with any other type of weapon?
    JohnA
  • Let me remind all of you that war and human conflict will not magically go away if (...and, hopefully, when for a wide variety of reasons,when) Mr. Obama is elected to the presidency.

    I agree the current generation of Cluster Bomb Units (CBU's) and Area Denial Munitions (ADM's)/land mines needlessly and indescriminantly target civilians, often with horrible and tragic results. But that doesn't necessarily rule out their tactical or strategic viability in future warfare.

    The military have been working on CBU's and ADM's that can be rendered inert en mass, and tracked via satellite for easier identification and disposal.
    extblues
  • There have been more deaths in wars in the 20th century than all the wars from 1 AD to 1899 combined. 100 million people have died in wars from 1914 to 1995 (? I believe...or some year after 95) 60 million of them dying during WWII.

    And people are going to play moral gods and dictate that a single weapon is immoral? Oh who cares. Add it to the millions that have already died and will continue to die as humanity becomes worse than the dark ages.
    J_Jammer
  • We should go back to the cutlass. There'd be a lot less war to worry about if you had to hack each other to bits with a sword.

    Any coward can drop a bomb.
    AceHardchester
  • There is a vast amount of difference between the wars of the past and those of the present. All wars up to and including WWll were armed confrontations against a regulated army that moved in mass. In Viet Nam we encountered for the first time an enemy that had the capability to strike and then disappear into the populace. They call this "Urban warfare". Iraq and Afghanistan are both urban wars. Cluster Bombs kill effectively, without conscience, It remains the sole responsibility of a Nations leadership to provide the conscience, and act accordingly.
    TerryA
  • Immoral? No anything is fair in war. The real question to be asked would be is war immoral?
    SilenceNoMore
  • Cluster bombs are awful. 35 years after dropping tons of them over Laos, there are still tens of millions of them that are buried in the soil and have not been detonated.

    We are still killing and injuring people in Laos with our weapons 35 years after the war.

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/articl...
    jefftego
  • Didn't the UN want to ban cluster bombs and only the USA, China and I think Russia, voted against it?
    Bravura
  • war is immoral. period.
    Cluster Bombs are not the first 'bomb' the US has voted in keeping, lets look at landmines, in 1997 a treaty banning the use of landmines was created(1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction (1997 Mine Ban Treaty).) Guess who didn't sign it?
    oh yeah, us, and to this day we have not signed it.
    check out the names of the 37 countries ( including USA) that has NOT signed a ban against landmines http://www.icbl.org/treaty/snp
    i really really do not understand this. at all. Cluster bombs and landmines kill thousands of people every year even after the wars we used them in are over.
    Bravo Government for killing thousands with your landmines and clusterbombs, Bravo.
    absentbree
  • I agree with silencenomore. War is immoral, and everything that is involved with it.
    Egnatius212
  • War is hell!
    CharlieG
  • Weapons (as the pro-gun lobby repeatedly tells us) are not moral or immoral in and of themselves....it's the people who use them and the situations that make moral or immoral.

    Would it be immoral to drop a cluster bomb in the middle of 1,200 Nazis marching toward France? Probably not.

    Would it be immoral to drop a cluster bomb (or several!) on a residential neighborhood in Baghdad because we suspect ONE terrorist might be walking down a crowded street? Without question that would be an immoral act.

    Would it be immoral to use mustard gas on our enemies in World War I? That's kind of sketchy, but an arguement could be made that it's okay.

    Would it be moral to use mustard gas to kill 25 suspected terrorists living in an apartment complex with 200 other innocent people? That would be immoral.

    Fighting decentralized, unorganized insurgents hiding in a civilian population requires different tools than the tools you would use fighting, say, a Soviet military batallion.

    Are we using the right tools and techniques in Iraq or are we fighting the civilian insurgency as if it were a Soviet army?
    crob80227
  • War is immoral.
    JanforGore
  • So we're going to draw lines in the sand about the morality of weapons, now?
    SuperLayne
  • No, just inaccurate!
    iknew
  • But surely you could dispute that all bombs are immoral...
    Should we fight with swords?
    thekingbeyond
  • I'm surprised by the callousness of some these comments. For Christ's sake, these bombs kill a lot of innocent people. Have some respect for that.

    Now, anyone who has ever seen a cluster bomb attack, KNOWS how effective they are. There pretty much isn't a more effective anti-personnel weapon, so I'm against the ban.

    But to use it in a situation like this, and with such a low standard of duds, is unacceptable. Cluster bombs are NOT meant to take out insurgents. You'd take out all the innocent people too. They're meant for large scale, open battlefield conflicts; NOT occupational skirmishes.

    You don't drop cluster bombs on the people you're trying to liberate, that's just common sense. Just more evidence to show how much we really care to "win hearts and minds."
    Saladin
  • sespian
  • Aren't all bombs immoral? Thats why they are so much fun
  • Bombs are immoral...period.
    mattnull
  • lets just switch not Nukes and Hyrobombs.. :)
    kewal91
  • China and Russia wouldnt sign, so we had not other choice.
    clayjj05
  • Gotta pick the right tool for the job.

    You can try to use a chainsaw to remove a splinter from your finger, but you might cause more problems than you started with!

    And isn't that the trouble we're having in Iraq?

    Clusterbombs may have a strategic purpose against an armored tank division in the middle of the desert -- but I'm pretty sure the insurgents don't actually have any tanks.

    Should the US have clusterbombs?

    Sure. Why not? If we ever have a war with China and Russia they may come in handy.

    Should we be using them against the insurgents in Iraq? I don't think so.

    You gotta admit it does seem like overkill.
    crob80227
  • http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=BMYnWTd8v8M

    badass
    clayjj05
  • Killing is Killing, bombs are bombs.

    AFAIK, food is dropped with a parachute... Only B53's (atomic bomb) is dropped with a Parachute I think. To allow the B52 to run away.
    petarro
  • Yes, but if all immoral weapons are banned, what'll we do? Shout at each other from the other sides?
  • You guys act like the U.S. is using these on a regular basis in Iraq against civilian targets . They used them in the initial liberation of Iraq, but its small arms that are used in the cities not cluster bombs. The reason the U.S. will not sign the treaty is because of the stance that China and Russia have why should we give up a great tool for suppressing large scale light armor when they will not. Get real people the world is not all roses and cupcakes other countries out there want to hurt the U.S. and everyone living here. Just be thankful we have brave military personell that are willing to defend your right to call them baby killers.
    sephig
  • cluster bombs are completely immoral, though going through the list trying ban one immoral weapon at a time isn't going to save any more lives.. More needs to be done to highlight the immorality or *all* weapons of war that targets or effects civillians.
    purplefox
  • Talking about cluster bombs being immoral is just plain stupid. They are not any more immoral than any other weapon that has ever been created in the history of mankind.

    As it has been stated before the US isn't using them wholesale all over Iraq and Afganistan. I hate to say it but more civilians in Iraq are being killed by IED's and insurgent attacks than by the odd unexploded cluster munition.

    Cluster bombs immoral? No they are effective.
    Abamanation