Banning Cluster Bombs: Light in the Darkness of Conflicts

[polly7]

By Rene Wadlow
Toward Freedom
Thursday, Mar 18, 2010

In a remarkable combination of civil society pressure and leadership from a small number of progressive States, a strong ban on the use, manufacture, and stocking of cluster bombs will come into force on August 1, 2010 now that 30 States have ratified the Convention on Cluster Munitions. The Convention bans the use, production, transfer of cluster munitions and sets deadlines for stockpile destruction and clearance of contaminated land. The Convention obliges States to support victims and affected communities........."

........"The failure rate of cluster munitions is high, ranging from 30 to 80 per cent. But “failure” may be the wrong word. They may, in fact, be designed to kill later. The large number of unexploded cluster bombs means that farm lands and forests cannot be used or used with great danger. Most people killed and wounded by cluster bombs in the 21 conflicts where they have been used are civilians, often young. Such persons often suffer severe injuries such as loss of limbs and loss of sight. It is difficult to resume work or schooling."


......."We can play an active role to encourage the States which have signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions to have their Parliaments ratify. A more difficult task will be to convince those States addicted to cluster bombs: USA, Russia, China, Israel, India and Pakistan. The ban may discourage their use by these States, but a signature by them would be an important sign of respect for international agreements and world law. Pressure must be kept up on those outside the law.

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_58941.shtml

[polly7]

1. k & r because I am wondering why banning these horrors are of

seemingly no interest at all. Is it because we don't care that hundreds of children pick them up to play with and either die, or blow limbs off? (I have plenty of testimonials to it) Would it be different if these children were in NA? Hell, we bitch because China's painting our children's toys with dangerous paint. Or, is it because we know the farmers who hit one with a hoe ten years later or unearth one with a cultivator and end up dead ....... well, they're not us, either so who gives a crap. All in the name of winning, taking ....... taking....... taking ......... using the most horrible ways imaginable, guaranteed to kill and maim more civilians (mostly children).......... it just doesn't matter.

My friends and I skimmed the net a bit one night to educate ourselves on the numbers and effects of these 'better' bombs, every one of us ended up in tears. This just needs to stop. It's monstrous.

[Echo In Light]

2. Pro-war types defend/justify their use all the time

k/r

[mopinko]

4. did you ever see that commercial?

where the upper class white girls are playing soccer, everyone smiling, then a cluster bomb goes off, and a kid gets killed? it is very sobering.

[polly7]

6. Good point.

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

19. Modern US cluster bombs do not work this way.

Yes, cluster bombs that virtually every other country uses are a problem. US cluster bombs are designed very differently and have been for many years. We outlawed the 1960s era designs for our own military a long time ago.

Basically, all the bad things usually attributed to cluster bombs have no relevancy to modern US cluster bombs. They don't work the way they work in most other countries. They aren't indiscriminate mini-bombs, the bomblets are not designed to ever get near the ground. The "bomblets" actively search for large military vehicles to attack and self-destruct while falling if they can't find one.

[wuushew]

21. Cluster Bombs in Afghanistan

The United States-led alliance began its air campaign in Afghanistan on October 7, 2001. While the Pentagon has been reluctant to talk of specific weapons used in the bombing, U.S. military sources have told Human Rights Watch that the Air Force began dropping cluster bombs within a matter of days. During the first week of the campaign, it is believed that Air Force B-1 bombers dropped 50 CBU-87 cluster bombs in some five missions. CBU-87 cluster bomb use has continued after the first week, and it is believed that other airplanes joined B-1s in dropping cluster bombs on both fixed and mobile targets.

Human Rights Watch has called for a global moratorium on use of cluster bombs because they have been shown to cause unacceptable civilian casualties both during and after conflict. Cluster bombs have a wide dispersal pattern and cannot be targeted precisely, making them especially dangerous when used near civilian areas. Cluster bombs are usually used in very large numbers and have a high initial failure rate which results in numerous explosive "duds" that pose the same post-conflict problem as antipersonnel landmines.

United Nations officials have stated that on October 22 U.S. cluster bomb submunitions landed on the village of Shaker Qala, near the city of Herat in western Afghanistan, killing nine civilians and injuring fourteen. The head of the United Nations Mine Action Program in Afghanistan (U.N. MAPA) noted that villagers are afraid to leave their homes after encountering the yellow soda can-like objects characteristic of CBU-87 submunitions that were left scattered in the village after an air strike on a nearby military camp. He called upon the United States to provide information on the types of ordnance dropped on Shaker Qala and elsewhere.

On October 25, the U.S. for the first time publicly acknowledged using cluster bombs. In response to a media question, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Richard Myers said, "Yes, we have used cluster bomb units…. There have not been a great number of them used, but they have been used."

Each CBU-87 cluster bomb contains 202 individual submunitions, also called "bomblets," designated BLU-97/B. The CBU-87s are formally known as Combined Effects Munitions (CEM) because each bomblet has an antitank and antipersonnel effect, as well as an incendiary capability. The bomblets from each CBU-87 are typically distributed over an area roughly 100 x 50 meters. They can be dropped from virtually any U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps aircraft.

Recent experience in Kosovo, and before that in the Gulf War, has shown that the exact "footprint," or landing area, of the CBU-87's bomblets is difficult to control and that an initial failure-to-explode rate of some 7 percent can be expected.


http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/arms/cluster-bck1031.htm

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. There is a mix of both types

Some are the older contact type, others are sensor fused or mines with timed safeties.

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

35. The US hasn't dropped mines in decades.

Seriously, that hasn't been done for at least 20 years. The US is obnoxiously careful (from a soldier's perspective) about their use of mines. Even back then, the mines were usually sensor-fuzed so that animals and unarmed civilians wouldn't be killed -- we would test our own stuff, impressively sensitive. The military requires a fantastically detailed paper trail for every mine and has for decades. I used to be involved.

US mines aren't much of a problem and haven't been for a really long time. We've been using time-limited mines and sensor-fuzing since back when the electronics weren't very clever. Current sensor-fuzing is vastly smarter.

As a point of casual interest, US mine field details are immediately sent back to Washington D.C. and end up in the hands of the State Department. While the mine fields deactivate themselves shortly, the excruciating location detail is transmitted to the appropriate foreign embassies so that those countries can clean up the deactivated mines that were left behind.

[truedelphi]

3. K & R for a very good topic. n/t

[joycean]

5. Cluster bombs are immoral

because they are completely useless as a strategic weapon; their only purpose is to target civilian areas. Their use should be a war crime. Just like gas.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. Actually stupid statements like yours are immoral

There are targets where submunitions are the best tactical solutions. If they are not available there will be more death and destruction when larger unitary weapons are used instead. If we choose to eliminate submuntion ordnance, we are choosing more carnage in combat.

[joycean]

8. Have you even heard of the CCM?

Cluster bombs are not effective strategic weapons. Let's look at that sentence. I'm not saying they aren't effective at killing people, I'm saying they aren't effective in a strategy, because you can't count on them to actually hit a specific target. They usually end up hitting civilians instead, and often fail to explode on impact, creating a prolonged danger to the area where they land. That's why the CCM treaty (Convention of Cluster Munitions) was signed in 2008. You think I'm somehow magically the only idiot stupid enough to think these weapons are immoral? My brother is a Ranger in the 82nd Airborne, and he thinks cluster bombs are retarded. I guess we're both idiots, along with the 104 countries that signed the CCM treaty. We're all just well below your intellect, I suppose.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

10. Of course, do you realize that It does not have the status of the various Geneva Accords

What you are ignoring is that there are specific targets sets (mostly soft targets including artillery in the open) that cluster munitions are the most effective effective solution. There are other solutions that are not as effective and/or cause much more damage to nearby people and things. Those who have signed up to not using them have also signed up for more death and destruction, especially in built up area. May they sleep well at night during the next urban conflict.

You and your brother need to do some better research. Your claim of usual hitting civilians and often fail to explode is specious. The failure rate of older sub munitions is demonstrated under 10%, IMI (Israel)is advertising a new model under 1%. Whether or not civilians are impacted by them is mostly a function of target location. In Lebanon Hezbollah operated out of densely populated areas, using the residents as human shields. The IDF could have used conventional munitions but the carnage would have been that much worse.

BTW, The use of the word "retarded" when referring to people is considered a slur...

[polly7]

12. Bull.

Who would defend cluster bombs when most of the rest of the world believes them to be a war crime?


I have quite a few links and pictures from sources I've made sure to verify, I could post, but they're too graphic. Do you defend DU and its effects too? White phosphorous in Fallujah???

[joycean]

24. I'm just glad you are here...

To be the resident expert on munitions. What would we do without you? Never mind that the rationale of saving lives with targeted munitions is fallacious. Never mind empirical evidence supporting the claim that cluster bombs save lives does not exist. I guess we, my decorated veteran brother and the 104 countries that agreed with the CCM, are just plain wrong. We just need us some learnin.

Also, I guess it is a good thing I used the word 'retarded' in reference to the use of cluster bombs, not to people. I'm also grateful that you were here to point that out to me. Whatever would I have done otherwise?

[polly7]

14. Bingo. Thank you. n/t.

[polly7]

9. Best tactical solution???

"Cluster munitions are canisters that can be launched from air or ground that contain hundreds to thousands of individual submunitions or ‘bomblets’. These bomblets can blanket an area as large as ten football fields by ten football fields, killing anyone within 50 meters of each bomblet and can easily pierce through buildings and armour. Although cluster munitions are supposed to explode on impact, they have a high failure rate and the remains of the unexploded devices are referred to as explosive remnants of war.

The humanitarian effect of cluster munitions is not a new issue. They have had a horrific impact on civilians in most of the conflicts in which they have been used, including those in Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, Laos and most recently Lebanon. In addition to killing on impact, the presence of unexploded submunitions has made farming a dangerous activity and hindered development and re-construction in many countries. Clearance of these weapons is often hindered by lack of resources which means they are left to kill and injure indiscriminately for decades."

http://www.redcross.ca/article.asp?id=21881&tid=001



No, it's a solution that says we don't give a * how many civilians are mutilated or killed.

"an area as large as ten football fields by ten football fields, killing anyone within 50 meters of each bomblet".

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Your citation is more hyperbole than fact

No weapon carries that many bomblets and their effectiveness is clearly overstated. Read up on WCMD, JSOW, Tomahawk, MLRS etc to get some real facts. The failure rate is less than 10%, less than 1% in newer designs.

[polly7]

16. Take off. I get my 'facts' from many places I've researched and trust, I don't need your

opinion, or really even give it any credence at all. Anyone who defends them really is just making excuses for unnecessary death and suffering ...... not someone I'll rely on for much at all - especially information on the 'facts' regarding cluster bombs.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

20. I suggested you look up the true technical data, since they matter in this discussion

Range, effectiveness, quantity etc. Basic verifiable facts that what you quoted seems to ignore.

[polly7]

23. I've looked up link after link, basic verifiable facts.

Facts obviously believed by most of the world. Check out this video, it's not that graphic compared to many others. According to it ... cluster munitions were made during the cold war in the event of conflict, to kill the most enemy as possible. That never happened. Now, they're used against poor nations with no recourse, why? You have all the answers, why are they used?

http://media.xwave.ch:8080/ramgen/icrc/2008/video/cluster2/cr-f-00990-Convention-CM-ENG_ICRC.rm

[ProgressiveProfessor]

33. Apparently not...lets look at the accuracy of the data you believe is correct:

100's to 1000's in a canister
1000 by 1000 yard coverage
Lethal Anti personnel radius of 50 meters


CBU/87 202 BLU-97/B submunitons 200m*400m 5% dud rate in operational use
(http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/cbu-87.htm)

CBU/97 Smart (sensor fused) CBUs. May not be covered by the CCM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBU-97_Sensor_Fuzed_Weapon

TLAM-D: 166 BLU-97/B

MLRS M26 Round uses M77s submunitions a shaped anti armor charge and a 4 meter anti personnel radius. It covers .23 sq km (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m26.htm)

JSOW (AGM-154A) 145 BLU-97/B CBU.

None of the above does 1000 yard by 1000 yard coverage.
None of the CBUs have 50m anti personnel kill radius
None have 1000 CBUs.

I am not saying there are not duds and that they are not dangerous. UXO always is. However, what you have cited are indeed not factual in terms of capabilities.

The controversial CBU is clearly the BLU-97/B and it should be. Its an older design and the least sophisticated. Its being replaced with newer sensor fused CBUs to address the UXO issue among other things.

In another post I laid out why they were used.

[joycean]

29. You must be

a first person source, since I'm not seeing any citations to back up your refutation of the claims of the Red Cross. I take back everything I've said, you must work for the DoD, or be an ex-Army officer. How dare we question your authority on these matters? Never mind, of course, that we weren't solely discussing the armament of the United States military. Never mind that we might be talking about other militaries with other munitions, including cluster bombs that are not SFW's with EFP.

[cali]

11. then Senator Leahy is stupid and immoral. He's spent decades trying to get

them banned.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

15. Leahy is trading one kind of destruction for another...

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

17. Ignoring that you are clueless...

...about how and why cluster bombs are deployed, the US only uses sensor-fuzed cluster bombs. The bomblets actively target military vehicles during descent and self-destruct before they even hit the ground if no vehicles are within the sensor's field of view. They are not designed to target people. By the way, cluster bombs are a tactical weapon, not strategic, that solves a very specific type of tactical problem.

Most other countries do not use cluster bombs like this. The US does, jabbering of the ignorati notwithstanding.

[polly7]

18. What kind of tactical problem would that be?

How many small children can be goaded for decades to play with these little wonders?

How much farmland can be made unuseable? How many women get their arms blown off in their gardens?

What tactical use could they possibly have but to kill the largest number of people possible? 10 football fields? How tactical is that? Seems amazing to me that an area that size would be known to have all those 'terrerists' gathered together like that.

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

22. Light infantry units

Light infantry units that are spread out over large areas are very resistant to traditional heavy infantry techniques like bombing and artillery. Because US cluster bomblets are sensor-fuzed (read: each bomblet actively seeks military vehicles to destroy), it solves the problem of destroying a unit that uses sparseness as a defense against heavy weapons. Increasingly, most combat is light and mobile like this. People are only killed by them to the extent they are proximate to a vehicle that the weapons target. They aren't explosive fragmentation weapons, they use explosively formed penetrators designed to punch holes in armor.

Small children playing with them is a load of crap unless we are talking about decades ago with weapons that the US military banned many, many years ago. The US cluster bombs never touch the ground. They are sensor-fuzed weapons individually targeted at vehicles that blow up while falling. If they do not sense a military vehicle, they self-destruct in flight. Notice that they target military vehicles, not individuals. The kinds of sensors they use are pretty useless for targeting individuals.

[polly7]

25. A load of crap, eh?

I guess limbless children wouldn't matter much 'over there'm where there is plenty of evidence that in FACT, it's not a load of crap. Obviously, you know more than the Red Cross and all other countries who have wanted them banned. You really should get in touch with reality. Catch up.

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

36. Don't conflate the US with other countries.

Western European countries, such as all those NATO countries in Afghanistan, use conventional old-style cluster bombs. Hell, it might be Vietnam era bombs we sold them years ago.

The US is unique in that it has invested for decades in sensor-fuzed, deactivating cluster bombs and mines. We work with a lot of countries that do not. Civilian-safe weapons of this type cost something like 5x the dangerous kind. No one else wants to spend the money. We have a big defense budget, we can afford it.

[wuushew]

27. Incorrect, there are many "dumb" bomblets

like the BLU-97/B submittion which is widely used.

I am willing to listen to your viewpoint, but please supply relevant documentation.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

30. Artillery, dispersed unarmored troops, irregulars concealed in terrain, rocket launchers, SAMs,

Open supply points, refueling locations, aircraft on the ground...they fall into the category of soft targets. OF course I am speaking of the general CBU not those designed as mines or anti armor seeking rounds.

Those kinds of targets would require much more tonnage to destroy using unitary munitions with commensurate collateral damage due to blast, shrapnel, and misses/targeting problems. That is a nice way of saying more people getting killed and infrastructure being destroyed. Those who oppose CBUs forget about that part of the equation.

Everyone seems to think that these are CBU munitions are used willy nilly. They are not. The are a specialized tool for specialized circumstances. They are a small part of the arsenal for western nations. They get used when its a serious fight and overall produce better results with less civilian casualties when looked at in total.

The argument that the IDF over used them in Lebanon is a fair topic for discussion.

[joycean]

26. In addition to the other refutation

you seem to think that we are only talking about what the United States military uses. How about talking about Israel, for example, using cluster bombs in highly populated civilian areas and then justifying it because 'criminals shouldn't be allowed to hide indoors'.

[polly7]

28. Kosovo, Lebanon, Laos, Cambodia ........

http://media.xwave.ch:8080/ramgen/icrc/2008/video/cluster2/cr-f-00990-Convention-CM-ENG_ICRC.rm

Posting again because I believe for the deniers, it's a good video if they're at all interested. I can't believe the denial that they cause misery for decades and hurt children is even being argued here.

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

34. No denying that.

We sold most of our Vietnam era inventory to western Europe and countries like Israel. Hell, that is why they still use them. A lot of modern, "enlightened" countries use CBU weapons we sold them that we were no longer allowed to use.

If I remember correctly, we eventually stopped exporting most weapons the US no longer is allowed to use in the 1990s and 2000s. We used to ban our own use a long time ago but would still sell off our excess inventory of weapons we were not allowed to use to Europe and other countries. We no longer do that for the most part.


What really chaps my hide about the whole thing is that the US is quite literally the only adults in the room. We invested a lot of money in producing very expensive, civilian-safe alternatives that no one else wants to buy because they are too expensive. We use them ourselves but no one else does. For once, the US are the "progressives" on the world stage and all that happens is that the US gets slandered for it by the very countries that took their sweet time giving a damn. It just reeks of disingenuousness and some kind of weird guilt transference.

In this particular case, I am with the US telling the rest of the dirtbags to piss off. They are disparaging the only country that gave enough of a damn to invest a ton of money in making their arsenal safe for civilians.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

31. Not entirely true

The US inventory has a mix of smart CBUs and contact fused ones. The BAT family is an example of smart CBUs. Not sure the CCM even covers them.