lihmalahmalehma

Well, why the fuck does any country without an immediate conflict coming up maintain an army?

For a moment earlier it sounded like you were concerned with people losing limbs to mines, and there I would agree if mines were planted proactively.

But you're just offended by defense.

Tanks and goodbye!

What I mean is marked on a map, so I guess "mapped". I'm not operating with my native language here.

Now you have circled us back to the question you dodged before. You said there's no invasion. No invasion => No mines. What is the problem?

Mines are cheap and due to geography, they would be a relatively effective defense. For that reason, signing them away with the treaty was called a mistake even back then. Public opinion was about fifty-fifty for a long time and there was never enough political will to seriously consider withdrawal, or even for the opponents to be particularly vocal about it.

So why now? The full scale invasion in Ukraine was a shock that kicked the ball rolling. The topic became hot immediately and there was also a petition that collected signatures very fast. That took some time, but it's how we got here.

Edit: improved my bad explanation.

Then what's the problem?

Wrong. If nobody invades, the mines don't get laid out in the first place.

If it does come to that, the positions are ~~marked~~ mapped and they will get cleaned out. The reason for the treaty was that in some places mines were just spread willy nilly.

I still haven't seen your explanation for how this is actually an offense, but keep moving that goalpost 👍

If nobody invades, there's no problem, no?

lemmy is the kind of place where people get offended by defense. and I don't mean what americans call "defense" but actual defense

We have epstein files.

There are no epstein files.

Epstein was a hero.

You don't learn muscle memory from books. Just go to watrr and try to float.