'Cluster munitions' enquiry
- Thread starter moono
- Start date
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Idiot.
Now, the main point: If you're going to say on one line that you don't need to be precise with bunker busters and then on the next claim that you can just drop the stuff in.
If you know where the tunnels are you can go in on foot and use cratering charges to get entry, then you can move along the tunnels and rig them for destruction properly. Bunker busters aren't bloody magic, and unless you're going to bomb every single building in the town you're "clearing" then you'd need to send in the infantry anyway.
You mean to collapse the tunnel, either way you still need to know where the tunnel runs, if you know that then you can blast your way in with cratering charges. They aren't magic.rachamim18 said:
No they aren't, you get grenades (hand and other) and artillery/mortar smoke rounds, there's probably airborne deployed stuff too. But It's not phosphorous in tracer rounds.
Now, the main point: If you're going to say on one line that you don't need to be precise with bunker busters and then on the next claim that you can just drop the stuff in.
If you know where the tunnels are you can go in on foot and use cratering charges to get entry, then you can move along the tunnels and rig them for destruction properly. Bunker busters aren't bloody magic, and unless you're going to bomb every single building in the town you're "clearing" then you'd need to send in the infantry anyway.
Absolutely right, and that's another reason why war itself is illegal. The laws which govern behaviour are humanitarian laws which exist anyway, not specifically 'rules of war'. Conventions exist so that one side adheres to them out of fear of the other side following suit. Of course, the conventions are broken when the other side cannot follow suit, such as the Zionist intimidation of the Palestinians.
The fact that so much has been made of their pathetic home-made rocket response is an indictment of the western, Zionist-dominated, media.
rich!: You should know then that you are providing one minor blurb out of context. I did provide the relevant text that has proven the issue by preventing even an attemt to indict on the issue. The Article you seem to want to discuss is merely a statement excluding rationalisation of any armed action on the basis of the Convention, nothing at all about prhibiting or allowing of a paticular action.
Bob: Again, all you need is an approximate idea. Cratering charges only are feasible with exact Intel AND no intermediate non-combatant institutions and civilians. Those areas are warrens that have no linear construction. Also, cratering chareges will only work to a maximum depth and Hezbollah and AMAL have dug mighty deep.
I did not say tracers had phosphorous.
I never said that one can take a laissez faire attitude with any ordnance in any situation. I will say though that in aiming of Bunker Busters you do not need the linear layout or even depth really. You just need an approximation.
"Go in on foot." Ahhhh...therein lies the whole crux of this problem. The entire reason Olmert and his morrocan lapdog [I should be careful] waited so long with their junior vcersion of Shock and Awe was to minimise IDF casualties. they did not want to send us trekking in. Look at Bint J'bail. they announced on the first night that we had taken it. 5 days later they were still trying to back pedal from it.
It was a murderous foot campaign and to have sent us anywhere near those systems would have ratcheted up all tallies. We are currently at like 10 to 1, 10 being our winning figure. Had we entered the systems it would have flip flopped within a day and skyrocketed.
Teqniq: Yes, it is a bit lauhgable but there it is. some genius soemwhere put his stamp on oit and it is now universally accepted. Gets as much reading as my Lebanese Handbook [83 version].
Bob: Again, all you need is an approximate idea. Cratering charges only are feasible with exact Intel AND no intermediate non-combatant institutions and civilians. Those areas are warrens that have no linear construction. Also, cratering chareges will only work to a maximum depth and Hezbollah and AMAL have dug mighty deep.
I did not say tracers had phosphorous.
I never said that one can take a laissez faire attitude with any ordnance in any situation. I will say though that in aiming of Bunker Busters you do not need the linear layout or even depth really. You just need an approximation.
"Go in on foot." Ahhhh...therein lies the whole crux of this problem. The entire reason Olmert and his morrocan lapdog [I should be careful] waited so long with their junior vcersion of Shock and Awe was to minimise IDF casualties. they did not want to send us trekking in. Look at Bint J'bail. they announced on the first night that we had taken it. 5 days later they were still trying to back pedal from it.
It was a murderous foot campaign and to have sent us anywhere near those systems would have ratcheted up all tallies. We are currently at like 10 to 1, 10 being our winning figure. Had we entered the systems it would have flip flopped within a day and skyrocketed.
Teqniq: Yes, it is a bit lauhgable but there it is. some genius soemwhere put his stamp on oit and it is now universally accepted. Gets as much reading as my Lebanese Handbook [83 version].
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
So now they use .50 calibre smoke rounds? Twollock.
You're avoiding the point. Or unable to understand it, either way it's a waste of time.
What an enlightened groupo. So Fuchs, phosphorus does not run down? Genius, it is why we use it on foxholes. Have you even seen combat?
Bob: the 50 cal in question is an incedinary round.
Bob: the 50 cal in question is an incedinary round.
rachamim18 said:
I thought you provided your own paraphrase rather than the text?
Anyway, the bit I was quoting was at the end of the section which says "erm, if you're going to attack a civilian area, then you must..." and, as you point out, says the military objective must absolutely outweigh the civilian deaths.
I can't see how "making lots more terrorists out of the next generation" is a valid military objective, though - unless I'm mis-understanding the point of the Israeli incursions?
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
So it's a hollowed out .50 calibre bullet that splatters on what it hits and burns? It could be that Israel is the only nation to use such a stupid idea in combat, or it could be that you don't have a clue. What you're thinking of is tracer rounds, which aren't made using white phosporous (or any other kind either).rachamim18 said:
Oh and white phosphorous sticks to things and burns on contact with oxegen, i'd find it rather hard to pour that anywhere.
Fuchs66
Ring a ding
Yes, why?rachamim18 said:
Phosphorus is a solid that spontaneously ignites in the presence of oxygen, in weapons the burster charge spreads particles over the immediate area of impact producing an aerosol cloud and igniting combustable material that it comes into contact with. Any pooling or flowing effect is essentially negated by the fact that the phosphorus content is spread over a wide area in small particles and combusts rapidly. The aerosol cloud (smoke) produced may settle in low ground in conditions where it wont be dispersed ie windstill but your clutching at straws if that's what you meant.
So I say again your talking crap pal.
Fuchs66
Ring a ding
@ Bob
He is correct to say that there are 50 cal rounds that contain a certain amount of phosphorous. These are usually armour piercing/incendiary rounds used for long range sniping/material destruction weapons such as the Barrett. Not that I have any personal experience with such bits of kit, just from reading around and what I've heard.
He is correct to say that there are 50 cal rounds that contain a certain amount of phosphorous. These are usually armour piercing/incendiary rounds used for long range sniping/material destruction weapons such as the Barrett. Not that I have any personal experience with such bits of kit, just from reading around and what I've heard.
dylanredefined
Not a house elf a tiger
Ran out of smart bombs had to use whats left in the box ?dweller said:
rich: Yes, I usually DO paraphrase as find it easier to retain the thought. In this case, I was referring to the vercity and quality of your source material. If you are using the Convention to prove a point it is worthwhile and relevant to include all parts pertaining to said point, yes?
As for the point, as you have recognised, and I have said several times, it is highly interprative.
As formaking a new generation of terrorists, they don't need us, there are a million other causes not to mention that our mere existence is the rationale most lean on.
Rune: You have a great point except that the ordnance in question was best for the job when the job was running. Yes, now that the job has ceased it does leave a new set of problems to grapple with but in war one must deal with whatever problem presents itself at its given time.
T&P:"Lebanese killed by thoousands of unexploded bombs." What of the more than 1200 missing and unexploded Hezbollah missiles laying all over northern Israel? Any thoughts on that?
In general: On Phosphorous... The poster who claimed it melded on contact is correct. However, had he actually utilised it as opposed to reading about it he would see that despuite the Merck factoid, it pools at the lowest surface. We have used it in this manner since my first turn and probably years before that. As the poster did say, once on you, you can only get it off with a kinfe cutting your skin. If for example a coverman was zeroing in on a trench, he'daim for the upper ridge. The trench becomes hell on earth. I do not kno0w what I am talkimg about? Maybe. But this has been the better part of my life since I was 16 and am now almost 40 so I at least have the subjective expereince to back it. As for knowledge, my peers evidently have confidence in me as to have promoted me this turn.
Bob: You cannot "pour" it but when released from the shell it pools. [edited to add two letters in last sentence]
As for the point, as you have recognised, and I have said several times, it is highly interprative.
As formaking a new generation of terrorists, they don't need us, there are a million other causes not to mention that our mere existence is the rationale most lean on.
Rune: You have a great point except that the ordnance in question was best for the job when the job was running. Yes, now that the job has ceased it does leave a new set of problems to grapple with but in war one must deal with whatever problem presents itself at its given time.
T&P:"Lebanese killed by thoousands of unexploded bombs." What of the more than 1200 missing and unexploded Hezbollah missiles laying all over northern Israel? Any thoughts on that?
In general: On Phosphorous... The poster who claimed it melded on contact is correct. However, had he actually utilised it as opposed to reading about it he would see that despuite the Merck factoid, it pools at the lowest surface. We have used it in this manner since my first turn and probably years before that. As the poster did say, once on you, you can only get it off with a kinfe cutting your skin. If for example a coverman was zeroing in on a trench, he'daim for the upper ridge. The trench becomes hell on earth. I do not kno0w what I am talkimg about? Maybe. But this has been the better part of my life since I was 16 and am now almost 40 so I at least have the subjective expereince to back it. As for knowledge, my peers evidently have confidence in me as to have promoted me this turn.
Bob: You cannot "pour" it but when released from the shell it pools. [edited to add two letters in last sentence]
T & P
|-o-| (-o-) |-o-|
1200? Don't you mean 12?rachamim18 said:
Way to miss the point anyway.
All ordeanance is prone to suffer from unexploded units to varying degrees. Cluster bombs however are entirely on a league of their own. They're banned/boycotted by most nations in the world for that very reason. The incredibly high number of unexploded small objects that are not going to be found easily by any disposal team- only by local kids. Unlike missiles and rockets, I'm sure you'll agree.Cluster bombs are fucking despicable WMD. End of.
T and P: No, the number is over 1200. Why would you ever think other wise. In fractions, it is a full 1/3rd that are AWOL. I do not have the figure since the operation began as to how many have been located and/orr detonated ut 1200 was the number.
Sorry. I disagree with you as for the utility of cluster munition and submunition. It has its place and does its job.
Moono: Would you like a link? It is all over the Israeli press. LEt me know and I'll oblige. Also the operation for recovery [of them].
Sorry. I disagree with you as for the utility of cluster munition and submunition. It has its place and does its job.
Moono: Would you like a link? It is all over the Israeli press. LEt me know and I'll oblige. Also the operation for recovery [of them].
rich: You believe it qualifies as a war crime but reality says something totally different. They are legal.
Moono: There is no document legalising anything, only documents making things illegal. As far cluster munitions, simply do a search on HRW and you will see their report on it admitting that the munition and submunition is legal. The use of them is what is governable and Israel's use is what is being debated. The enforcable document is in the Geneva Conventions and is easily interpreted in Israel's favor. It basically comes down to, does the military objective outweigh the risk to civlians. In other words, did the c.o. believe the objective was that important? This is why noone will ever get an indictment out of it.
Now, you want a reference for the unexploded Hezbollah munitions across northern Israel? I was talking from subjective expereince as it was an IDF operation but lo and behold, I have found you a mainstream article that says it fine enough:I do nott "do" hyperlinks but you can find it on YNet, dated 8/16/06, in an article entitled "Calm is Back: Search for Katyushas is On" by Sharon Rofee-Ofir. It says, in short, of the 3,970 Hezbollah missiles fired into Israel, 2,000 are unaccounted for.
A troubled soul in artillery? Sounds like a moron. Whatever. Funny how they never have a name. Maybe he was one of the 5% in Israel who did not want the war....it means nothing.
Now, you want a reference for the unexploded Hezbollah munitions across northern Israel? I was talking from subjective expereince as it was an IDF operation but lo and behold, I have found you a mainstream article that says it fine enough:I do nott "do" hyperlinks but you can find it on YNet, dated 8/16/06, in an article entitled "Calm is Back: Search for Katyushas is On" by Sharon Rofee-Ofir. It says, in short, of the 3,970 Hezbollah missiles fired into Israel, 2,000 are unaccounted for.
A troubled soul in artillery? Sounds like a moron. Whatever. Funny how they never have a name. Maybe he was one of the 5% in Israel who did not want the war....it means nothing.
Similar threads
- Poll
