At 12:43 PM 8/5/01 +0200 J. van Baardwijk wrote:
>>Care to give me a figure of the number of innocent men, women, and children
>>that have died in the 50 years there have been landmines on the Korean
>>border? Care to give me the reasonable likelihood that an innocent man,
>>woman, or child will die in the future from a landmine on the Korean
>>border.
>
>How is that relevant? If one single individual dies because of those
>landmines that you don't want to remove, you have all the reason you need
>to get rid of those mines. Heck, IMHO, America's refusal to sign the
>Landmine Ban Treaty should be considered a crime against humanity.
Here we go again, Jeroen. It is called cost-benefit-analysis. Which
choice results in fewer civilian lives lost - keeping landmines in the
Korean DMZ or removing landmines from Korea altogether.
You may not be aware of this Jeroen, but a desperate North Korean assault
on South Korea is considered by America's top strategists to be one of our
most serious military risks. As Dan M. pointed out, the North Koreans have
an enormous army. It is not inconceivable that the DPRK could become so
desperate for food and supplies that the would launch an invasion, rather
than risking the complete implosion of their State. In such a scenario,
landmines may be the only hope of preventing Seoul from being completely
razed by the invaders.
>>(Here's a hint, the United States has a detailed map of where
>>every landmine is there.)
>
>Oh, I see! And of course the US has given a copy of that map to every
>individual in that area, so they can walk around those mines safely, right?
>And while they were at it, they also provided similar maps to people living
>near mine fields in other locations in the world?
This is so ridiculous, I don't know where to start. First of all, there
*aren't* civilians walking around the Korean border - because there is a
high likelihood that if you do, you will get shot. The area is completely
closed off as a *war zone*.
Secondly, the US supports the removal of landmines from almost all other
areas of the world. That's why the Landmine Ban Treaty was OUR IDEA IN THE
FIRST PLACE!!!!!!!!!!
>BTW, do you realize what you're saying? According to you, innocent people
>should die because of those landmines, because more innocent people would
>die in the event of a second Korean War. Somehow, you make it sound as if
>you think that people dying in the aftermath of a war is less inhumane than
>people dying during a war.
As noted above, I know exactly what I am saying. I am seeking to minimize
the number of innocent people who do. According to the Korean Campaign to
Ban Landmines, landmine use in Korea has resulted in 1,000 civilians either
killed or injured over 50 years. While I would like to see that number
minimized (and indeed, the US and South Korea have recently begun an effort
to remove landmines from some areas where their use is not criticial), that
number is far short of the number that would likely be killed were the
landmines not acting as a deterrent to invasion.
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
