What a fantastic ad.

[gerryhatrick]

watch here.

I'm speechless.

[Argus]

watch here.

I'm speechless.

I'm never speechless.

Emotional arguments win no sympathy from me. Landmines are no different than any other weapon when used responsibly.

[BubberMiley]

Yeah, compassion is for babies (and Liberals).

[geoffrey]

watch here.

I'm speechless.

I'm never speechless.

Emotional arguments win no sympathy from me. Landmines are no different than any other weapon when used responsibly.

I disagree. Landmines should be completely banned at the manufacturing stage. They are one of the few weapons that can never be used responsibly.

[gerryhatrick]

I'm never speechless.

Emotional arguments win no sympathy from me. Landmines are no different than any other weapon when used responsibly.

When used responsibly? You mean, when armies go and dig up every last one they plant?

It's a powerful ad, you must admit. Soccer mom?

And the final text is absolutely correct. It is not an "emotional argument" to say that nations like the US wouldn't tolerate them if they were knocking off thier own kids.

[Argus]

watch here.

I'm speechless.

I'm never speechless.

Emotional arguments win no sympathy from me. Landmines are no different than any other weapon when used responsibly.

I disagree. Landmines should be completely banned at the manufacturing stage. They are one of the few weapons that can never be used responsibly.

Nonsense. They are used and have been used responsibly by western militaries for years. When we plant a mine we map it, and then dig it up after the need has passed. We don't throw them about like bird seed, then move on. Why should western militaries be unable to use what is sometimes an effective weapons because of the irresponsible use by third world riff-raff? The Russians and Chinese, btw, refuse to sign the land mine treaty.

As I recall, the whole idea of the Ottawa treaty was one of political self promotion for some Liberal idiot whose name I quite ironically forget. It's another example of Canada nobly "standing up for what's right" on an issue which calls for no sacrifice from us.

[gerryhatrick]

Nonsense. They are used and have been used responsibly by western militaries for years. When we plant a mine we map it, and then dig it up after the need has passed. We don't throw them about like bird seed, then move on. Why should western militaries be unable to use what is sometimes an effective weapons because of the irresponsible use by third world riff-raff? The Russians and Chinese, btw, refuse to sign the land mine treaty.

You are wrong on many levels.

It's not important that "western militaries" dig up what they plant. Besides the fact I highly doubt the truth of that in all cases, it's irrelavent.

The fact that they are thrown about like bird seed by "third world riff-raff" is enough of a reason to ban them.

Are you aware of the definition of a WMD? Land mines, being indiscriminate and killing multiple people over periods extending past the conflict are a WMD.

If the USA was courageous and principled enough to join in a ban I AM SURE they have the technology to replace the advantage served by landmines. Do you doubt that?

If they joined the fight against them and threw thier weight/influence behind getting rid of them the supply would dry up in many areas of the world.

As well, your point about the Russians and Chinese is unclear. Are you saying it's OK for the USA because those nations haven't signed?

The USA is attempting to increase it's stature in the world. Acknowledging the incredible civilian pain that landmines cause and working to get rid of them and pledging not to use them would go FAR to increasing that badly damaged stature.

And your final comments - unquoted above - politicizing this issue are disgusting. You should be ashamed.

Is it only "Liberal idiots" who care about the killing and maiming of innocent children and other civilians? By that can we assume that "Conservative idiots" don't give a sh$t about that? Come on, it's not a Liberal/Conservative issue, don't try to make it one.

[ceemes]

Nonsense. They are used and have been used responsibly by western militaries for years. When we plant a mine we map it, and then dig it up after the need has passed. We don't throw them about like bird seed, then move on.

Bullshit, sorry people, but this is utter bullshit......we are still digging up mines from WW1 for christs sake, in Vietnam and Cambodia people are still getting blown to rags from mines and other ordinance used by all side. Hell, they are still snagging left over WWII sea mines off both the West and East coast of North America.

I was stationed at CFB Calgary back in the early 80's and partook in Operation Bi;bo. Bilbo was the operation where the CAF cleaned up the old bombing and live fire ranges of CFB Calgary prior to returning the land back to the Sarcee First Nations Reserve. We dug up all manner of old mines, bomb, mortar bombs and small arms rounds. We even found an old tank that got lost during a training exercise dating back from the early 50's.

These explosives were placed during various training exercises under controlled conditions and still they got forgotten or lost. Mines placed in active war zones are not so well marked or noted. Their general location maybe marked on a map at the time, but as soon as the battle moves away from the area, they are quickly forgotten as other concerns take over.

Landmines are silent and patient killers....they can sit for decades waiting for a victim, and they do not discriminate.....young or old, friend or foe, mines dont give a damn.

[Shady]

Emotional arguments win no sympathy from me. Landmines are no different than any other weapon when used responsibly

You're absolutely right. This argument to ban landmines is based soley on emotion. After all, if one really wants to combat (pun intended) the deaths of innocent civilians, why not fight (pun intended) to ban the use of bombs and missiles used in airstrikes? And those types of weapons, along with artillery shells are also still being uncovered from WWI and WWII. In the end, all you end up doing, is tying the hands of yourself and your allies, while the bad guys ignore the laws and rules.

[Hicksey]

Emotional arguments win no sympathy from me. Landmines are no different than any other weapon when used responsibly

You're absolutely right. This argument to ban landmines is based soley on emotion. After all, if one really wants to combat (pun intended) the deaths of innocent civilians, why not fight (pun intended) to ban the use of bombs and missiles used in airstrikes? And those types of weapons, along with artillery shells are also still being uncovered from WWI and WWII. In the end, all you end up doing, is tying the hands of yourself and your allies, while the bad guys ignore the laws and rules.

[sarcasm]We've created our own enemies, remember? We deserve what we get, remember. We need to tie the hands of our leaders to make sure it comes to be.[/sarcasm]

[geoffrey]

Western governments build these things and sell them to terrorists and questionable militaries throughout the rest of the world. Can't be allowed to happen.

[cybercoma]

Ahwell, to make an omelette you've gotta break a few eggs.

[JMH]

watch here.

I'm speechless.

It's certainly compelling as it was intended to be so.

My only problem with such an add is that it's a movie..........propaganda for a specific cause (however well meaning).

Land mines in the grand scheme of things, are not the BIG problem of this world nor are they a mensionable problem in this world when compared to the other issues that people like you and myself wish to change.

[tml12]

I have to go with the middle ground between Argus and Geoffrey here.

I agree that the commercial was awful and that land mines should not be used...in most cases.

First, there are ways of using a metal detector, etc. to determine if metal is underground. That should have been the job of the individuals who constructed the soccer field.

I don't believe land mines should be used but they are effective in dealing with wartime events. I guess it is a moral line that is hard to cross...

[Shakeyhands]

not sure how any of you could agree that landmines are a good thing... seriously.

It makes sense that you would call the video out for playing on emotions, it should. It should put it in front of you for you to understand. I don't think any of us are really affected by the reality of forgotten mines, when we don't see little Cambodian children, for instance, hobbling around on crutches with one leg or worse.

[tml12]

not sure how any of you could agree that landmines are a good thing... seriously.

It makes sense that you would call the video out for playing on emotions, it should. It should put it in front of you for you to understand. I don't think any of us are really affected by the reality of forgotten mines, when we don't see little Cambodian children, for instance, hobbling around on crutches with one leg or worse.

Why didn't they inspect the field before giving the kids the OK to play...

[Shady]

Western governments build these things and sell them to terrorists

No. You're wrong. Absolutely wrong. What do you think, that landmines are some fantastic new technology that only Western Countries have the luxury of possessing? Oh, and by the way, most terrorist's weapons are Chinese and/or Russian.

not sure how any of you could agree that landmines are a good thing... seriously

I don't think anyone here believes that landmines are a good thing. Whoever said that? Tanks aren't a good thing, either are bombs or missiles. War isn't a good thing. However, that's not the issue.

[gerryhatrick]

My only problem with such an add is that it's a movie..........propaganda for a specific cause (however well meaning).

Why is that a problem for you? Do you have a problem with anti-drug commercials (commercial, not "movie" I would say)??

Land mines in the grand scheme of things, are not the BIG problem of this world nor are they a mensionable problem in this world when compared to the other issues that people like you and myself wish to change.

Wah?

A. You must be unaware of how many civilians are injured or killed by landmines every year.

B. It is an issue I would like to change. It's more than "mensionable".

[gerryhatrick]

Why didn't they inspect the field before giving the kids the OK to play...

Stolen lives, limbs and livelihoods

* Mine deaths and injuries over the past decades now total in the hundreds of thousands.

* It is estimated that there are between 15,000 and 20,000 new casualties caused by landmines and unexploded ordnance each year. That means there are some 1,500 new casualties each month, more than 40 new casualties a day, at least two new casualties per hour.

* Most of the casualties are civilians and most live in countries that are now at peace.

* In Cambodia, for example there are almost 40,000 landmine survivors recorded between 1979 and 2002. These are the survivors. Some 18,000 people were killed in this period. More than 60 % of the total casualties, numbering some 57,000, were civilians (source: Landmine Monitor Report 2003).

"Working Legs" - close-up of an Angolan farmers prosthetic leg. Leuna. Angola, 1997. Credit: Tim Grant

Development disaster

* Landmines deprive people in some of the poorest countries of land and infrastructure.

* Once there is peace most soldiers will be demobilized and give in their guns, mines however don't recognize a cease-fire.

* They hold up the repatriation of refugees and displaced people.

* They also hamper reconstruction and the delivery of aid.

* Assistance to landmine survivors can be an enormous strain on resources.

* Landmine casualties deprive communities and families of breadwinners.

* Mines also kill livestock and wild animals and wreak environmental havoc.

Landmines are everywhere

* Every region in the world is mine-affected.

* More than 80 countries are affected to some degree by landmines and/or unexploded ordnance.

* Nobody knows how many mines are in the ground. But the actual number is less important than their impact: it can take only two or three mines or the mere suspicion of their presence to render a patch of land.

* Some of the most contaminated places are Afghanistan, Angola, Burundi, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Cambodia, Chechnya, Colombia, Iraq, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

* Some countries with a mine problem don’t provide much public information about the extent of the problem such as Myanmar (Burma), India or Pakistan.

Sorry if that's all too "emotional" for any of the tough guys here.

[geoffrey]

Well saying all regions have them is lying outright, Canada doesn't have mines, niether does the US... I hate when otherwise good causes over-exaggerate things to prove their point.

They are a problem however. I don't see the big deal with banning them, I don't think mines are that good of a strategic weapon against most armies that transport troops with planes and the such anyways.

[YankAbroad]

Without being too snippy, Canada's opinion on military strategy doesn't hold much water these days. When Canada says "we don't think you need these for a military," it's not a compelling argument because Canada has effectively liquidated its military capability over the last 15 years or so.

I'm not saying that I think landmines are lovely things -- I don't. But I certainly wouldn't want the US to abandon that technology when countries like Russia, China and Iran happily deploy them. Unilateral disarmament in such an environment is tantamount to suicide.

Canada really doesn't have to worry about that, since if anyone ever attacked Canada, the USA would defend the country (and with land mines, if necessary).

[Spike22]

Now how do we show this video to the rest of the planet that are poor as dirt and whose regimes use these weapons?

Having seen the effects mines cause they should be eradicated.

[geoffrey]

Without being too snippy, Canada's opinion on military strategy doesn't hold much water these days. When Canada says "we don't think you need these for a military," it's not a compelling argument because Canada has effectively liquidated its military capability over the last 15 years or so.

I'm not saying that I think landmines are lovely things -- I don't. But I certainly wouldn't want the US to abandon that technology when countries like Russia, China and Iran happily deploy them. Unilateral disarmament in such an environment is tantamount to suicide.

Canada really doesn't have to worry about that, since if anyone ever attacked Canada, the USA would defend the country (and with land mines, if necessary).

I argue their effectiveness still though Yank. They are an outdated weapon. The US just flies their boys right on over the minefields.

[gerryhatrick]

Now how do we show this video to the rest of the planet that are poor as dirt and whose regimes use these weapons?

Having seen the effects mines cause they should be eradicated.

This commercial is meant for the USA. Notice the "soccer mom"?

The hope is to get the US behind the cause. The Bush admin has backed away from treaties.

[YankAbroad]

The US just flies their boys right on over the minefields.

But the Chinese don't, because they don't have the planes.

They're still a weapon with some uses, which is why they're maintained in the arsenal. It's not just because George Bush hates treaties -- Bill Clinton kicked off US opposition to the treaty.