Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoender
As such the Ottawa treaty (International Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Treaty) resulted in the fact that anti-personnal mines are considered by many as falling under that article (Countries such as USA, Russia, China, Israel, Egypt... didn't sign the treaty). The signing countries (among which you find Australia) ban themselves from using it and, in the eventuality of a war that they win, grant themselves the right to prosecute anyone for using them.
(SNIP)
As a matter of fact, Leg you are right because no treaty has ban the use of .50 so far (I don't know if some countries have done it individually). That doesn't make it a false rumor as well as it gives you the legal ground to go to court. However, I'm sure that those who made (or some of those reading) the treaty might have had paper sheets in mind as well.  (This was what I wanted to point out, sorry if the lack of time had made me miss the point). |
The US reserves the right to keep minefields between US troops and however many semi-starving North Korean troops are on the other side of that border, but the policy after the treaty went into effect is that we cannot even train to emplace anti-personnel mines unless stationed in South Korea.
As for the .50 cal being inhumane -- it's probably more humane than smaller weapons, given that a torso hit is going to be significantly more consistently lethal than a hit from a smaller caliber round (and even more so compared to artillery, grenades, etc.). You can't experience unnecessary suffering if you're dead.