|
Wahh. Mines are deployed to kill people, and they do a very good job of it. The purpose is to deny an area to use, and if you get blown up then they are doing their job. Of course, the main argument against their use is that they are quite capable of blowing up after they have no strategic use.
Obviously the way to prevent this is not to quit using mines, but to make better ones! My personal favorite is a concept where you have "smart" mines with radios, GPS, and a number of small explosive charges that allow them to "hop" themselves around. This minefield could be deployed from an airplane and assigned a particular area to deny; they would all radio to their mates and form a distributed network, determine their positions using GPS, and calculate how they should move to best cover the assigned area. Mines outside the area would hop in, and those inside would minimize clumping. Clearing a narrow path through the field would be impossible as the mines would redistribute themselves to cover gaps or depleted fronts!
Lastly, they would be extremely useful in a tactical sense. You could mine an area in just 15 minutes, hold it for however long is required, and then switch it off for a few hours as you rush armor and troops across it. Recovery would be a snap too, as with the right passcode they could transmit the exact position of every mine for retrieval.
But nooo, everyone is against weapons research and development and wants us to go back to pure melee so the world will see that violence is wrong, then settle all our differences in a sane and logical manner while laughing over how we used to fight. Then we can all have cake and ice cream while playing in the backyard and barbecuing tofu.
Why is it the people who are "horrified" by violence and so sure the world has no idea what is going on have little to zero personal experience? Could they perhaps be projecting their ignorance onto others, and seeking to educate them as a roundabout way of comforting themselves?
|