• giant_smeeg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hard to have a stance on this personally. On one hand I’d rather they’re not used on the other hand whatever helps Ukraine win this war the quickest.

    • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      ‘on one hand, bombing swaths of innocent civilians and kids is bad, on the other hand its my team doing it’

        • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          98% of 13,306 recorded cluster munitions casualties that are registered with Handicap International are civilians, while 27% are children

          cluster munitions are considered bad because it doesnt matter whether ukraine is planning to bomb civilians and kids, they are going to regardless

          so yes, if youre willing to accept that for the sake of owning the russians, thats exactly what youre saying

    • theinspectorst@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I see that argument and I want Ukraine to win quickly too. But if you follow that logic then there are lots of other weapons we could be sending them. I find it hard to make a case for sending them cluster bombs that wouldn’t apply just as well to sending mustard gas, nerve agent or tactical nuclear weapons - the use (or even possession) of any of which could improve the effectiveness of Ukraine’s defenders too. But the point about all of these weapons - including cluster bombs - is that civilised societies have decided that certain weapons that cause mass death and destruction are not appropriate to use in conflict no matter the scenario.

      Globally, the victims of cluster bombs are disproportionately civilians, with a huge proportion being children. All the fighting currently is happening in Ukraine so it’s Ukrainian children who are going to be getting blown up by these for decades to come after the war has ended.

      • nanoobot@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think that follows at all actually. Every weapon has a balance of harm against benefit, if you outlaw cluster bombs why not mines? Why not grenades, or regular artillery? The reason is because the defensive value outweighs the potential harm. I think it’s fairly clear that this is the case for cluster bombs too, while it is not for mustard gas.

        The US keeps them because the alternative would cost significant capability. That would need to be made up for with other weapons. Politics and appearance costs impact things too, and for nations that could never stand a chance against russia/China without US help there is a much stronger argument for earning points by outlawing them.

        The greatest risk to Ukrainian children is the Russian invasion, and the odds of Ukraine protecting them from that are far greater given these new munitions.