As a former mine clearer the world does not need more mines. But as a former combat engineer mines done correctly (with proper mapping, fencing and marking) is way to control an axis. That’s why it still has its uses. Problem is 10 years down the line when the maps are lost, fencing gone and no markings.
I also heard that modern mines had some precautions as well, such as getting deactivated after a while?
Not really kept up on developments, but you can probably have a detonator that degrades. In rock blasting electronic detonaors are more and more prevalent. But might defy the purpose of being dirt cheap.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
One of the scary things of the world right now is that awful things like this seem reasonable. The whole rearming of Europe is both necessary and awful (not to mention how annoying it is that for years there mostly has been less and less money across the continent for welfare but suddenly billions of euros are conjured up for war and investment in arms companies)
(not to mention how annoying it is that for years there mostly has been less and less money across the continent for welfare but suddenly billions of euros are conjured up for war and investment in arms companies)
Conservatives in a nutshell
This is a direct consequence of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, very much like Finland and Sweden’s Nato membership.
I mean we don’t really need these kind of contracts if we only join in peace times and get out as soon as there are tensions.
Such agreements work if you have neighbors who are committed to human rights and the international law. Unfortunately, this is not the case.
That argument is only true if anti-personnel mines are an actual requirement for success. Which I doubt.
Don’t get me wrong, I didn’t want to judge the step by Poland, but to question the meaning of these treaties at all.