Landmine policy still a crusade for some activists

At least a few people (who don't know how US doctrine describes landmine usage) are trying to shame President Obama into banning a useful defensive tool

President Barack Obama will collect his Nobel Peace Prize on Dec. 10 — two weeks after his administration announced a decision not to join the global treaty banning land mines. He shouldn't get away without having to reconcile the glow of Oslo with that deadly, heartless and inhumane decision, another sign that the president's peace prize may have been premature.
Land mines caused more than 5,000 casualties in 2008, many of them outside current war zones.
More than a third of the victims were children. If the United States can support treaties against the use of chemical weapons and other atrocities, surely it can ban devices that keep on killing the innocent years after a war is over.
More than 150 nations, including the majority of our NATO allies, have signed the treaty.
Even Iraq, Afghanistan and Colombia have signed. But not China. Not Russia. And not the United States.

OK, in all honesty, we really don't give a crap about the anti-landmine crusade. We think it's stupid and we think that as long as the mines are employed properly, 90% of the problems described by the ICBL are moot. Bottom line, we were looking for an excuse to use the image from RangerUp's totally awesome upside-down Claymore mine t-shirt. Success!

By: Brant