Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

sapiens.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 132 posts

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#71

Post by dsfyu404ed »

asdff wrote: post #17
Victerius wrote: post #2

I had several thoughts while reading this article. > Cambodia is contaminated with millions of unexploded ordnances dropped as cluster bombs by the U.S. during the Vietnam War. In addition, millions of land mines were buried throughout the country during a series of civil wars from the 1970s–1990s. Millions. I can't process numbers that large. I know what a million is, but I struggle to imagine what a million land mi…

There should be international laws where after wartime, governments are responsible for clearing out any leftover ordinances and must perform ecological cleanup. One would think the U.S. government would be in support of this because it would make wars too cost prohibitive for other nations, and the contracts would be an excellent profitmaking opportunity for the military industrial complex.

And who enforces international law? Are you gonna put on a blue helmet or make your kids do it?

There is no international government with enforcement power. International relations are governed by game theory, not law.

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#72

Post by atlasunshrugged »

raisin_churn wrote: post #42
anikan_vader wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An interesting idea, although I think the US is actually ahead of the curve on mines. From Wikipedia: >> Opponents point out that the Ottawa Convention places no restriction whatsoever on anti-vehicle mines which kill civilians on tractors, on school buses, etc. The position of the United States is that the inhumane nature of landmines stems not from whether they are anti-personnel as opposed to antivehicle but from…

Well, my comment was highly abbreviated for the sake of pithiness, but US ratification of the treaty would be more meaningful than the US simply not employing landmines itself. (NB While I place all the blame on senators for not ratifying it, technically no US president has signed it, so the Senate hasn't actually had the opportunity to ratify, but Senate leaders have made their opposition clear for decades so they d…

I'm not sure why the blame would rest on the political side. Yes, they are the ones who would ratify the treaty, but I'm sure they would be happy to do so unless the DOD was whispering in their ear (or shouting) that it would damage their warfighting capabilities. Maybe there are some special interests too but I'm skeptical the industry is big enough to have that kind of pull, whereas SecDef telling a Senator on SASC not to do this is probably enough to make a treaty a nonstarter.

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#73

Post by dsfyu404ed »

asdff wrote: post #29
midoridensha wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I've seen any examples in real life of this actually working, even though it seems to be the normal enforcement mechanism.

IMO because they don't sanction nearly enough

Sanctions aren't a magic wand. Stop waving them around like one.

Imparting economic sanctions that constitute an existential threat to a country or its government have a history of less than stellar results.[1]

[1] https://cdn-us.anidb.net/images/main/40430.jpg

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#74

Post by rqtwteye »

sw104 wrote: post #57
ggm wrote: post #30

African giant pouched rat. Cheek pouches. (not marsupial). Poor eyesight so the sniffing is presumably evolutionary advantage for the niche they'd normally occupy. Given enough time, I wonder what other social adaptive qualities could emerge in a species like this? Domestication of dogs and cats had huge longterm upsides for both species and humans. Most rats by number are now co-occupants of human space but by speci…

I've owned multiple (fancy) rats as pets in my time. The species is somewhat split into domesticated and non-domesticated. My rats would probably never have survived in the wild (due to their appearance, sand/tuxedo coloured, instead of just gray/brown), and likewise wild rats wouldn't be possible to domesticate. There's quite a few videos on YouTube of the social skills they can develop. Quite amazing animals, but i…

“My rats would probably never have survived in the wild”

I remember watching a video where they released some pet rats into the wild. They adapted very quickly and did well. These little buggers are very smart.

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#76

Post by magic_hamster »

Victerius wrote: post #2

I had several thoughts while reading this article. > Cambodia is contaminated with millions of unexploded ordnances dropped as cluster bombs by the U.S. during the Vietnam War. In addition, millions of land mines were buried throughout the country during a series of civil wars from the 1970s–1990s. Millions. I can't process numbers that large. I know what a million is, but I struggle to imagine what a million land mi…

> Millions. I can't process numbers that large.

You should read about Laos then, which has the largest amount of UXOs, and specifically the consequences, and how they got there. It's infuriating.

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#77

Post by DonHopkins »

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #72
raisin_churn wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, my comment was highly abbreviated for the sake of pithiness, but US ratification of the treaty would be more meaningful than the US simply not employing landmines itself. (NB While I place all the blame on senators for not ratifying it, technically no US president has signed it, so the Senate hasn't actually had the opportunity to ratify, but Senate leaders have made their opposition clear for decades so they d…

I'm not sure why the blame would rest on the political side. Yes, they are the ones who would ratify the treaty, but I'm sure they would be happy to do so unless the DOD was whispering in their ear (or shouting) that it would damage their warfighting capabilities. Maybe there are some special interests too but I'm skeptical the industry is big enough to have that kind of pull, whereas SecDef telling a Senator on SASC…

The Democrats are for the treaty, so the Republicans are against it, just to own the libs, no matter what the cost or consequences or morality, regardless of the facts or anything based on reality or science or humanity.

>2014: The United States under President Barack Obama mostly accepted the terms of the treaty by ceasing to acquire anti-personnel land mines and prohibiting their use outside of the Korean Peninsula.

>2020: The United States under President Donald Trump reversed the Obama policy change and restored the George W. Bush administration position on anti-personnel landlines, authorizing Combatant Commanders to employ "advanced, non-persistent landmines".

>Trump eases restrictions on land mine use by U.S. military:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-war-landmines-idUSKBN...

>2022: President of the United States Joe Biden reverses the policy of his predecessor, Trump, and continues disarmament, saying that the United States will not produce or acquire anti-personnel mines, will not support any other country in its use of these mines, and commits to destroying all existing anti-personnel mines in its possession (excluding those on the Korean Peninsula).

>Biden administration commits to limiting use of land mines:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/21/biden-land-mines-tr...

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#78

Post by n0on3 »

stavros wrote: post #67
raisin_churn wrote: post #27

I would prefer to use US senators who refuse to ratify the Mine Ban Convention. They won't need any particular skills or training, just have them wander around possible UXO sites until they find one with their foot. The great thing about this is, US senators are a 100% renewable resource.

I do think it's symmetrical that, if we use senators to clear land mines, we should use rats to ratify the convention.

I see what you did there

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#79

Post by Spooky23 »

atlasunshrugged wrote: post #72
raisin_churn wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, my comment was highly abbreviated for the sake of pithiness, but US ratification of the treaty would be more meaningful than the US simply not employing landmines itself. (NB While I place all the blame on senators for not ratifying it, technically no US president has signed it, so the Senate hasn't actually had the opportunity to ratify, but Senate leaders have made their opposition clear for decades so they d…

I'm not sure why the blame would rest on the political side. Yes, they are the ones who would ratify the treaty, but I'm sure they would be happy to do so unless the DOD was whispering in their ear (or shouting) that it would damage their warfighting capabilities. Maybe there are some special interests too but I'm skeptical the industry is big enough to have that kind of pull, whereas SecDef telling a Senator on SASC…

Senators > Generals.

The Senate has a lot of power and is insulated from the electorate in such a way as an issue like this is not a threat to them. For whatever reason, the leaders who control what makes it to the Senate floor did not send it there.

They own that - it’s their call.

Re: Using rats to clear land mines in Cambodia

#80

Post by eknkc »

So I thought from the title that they were releasing a bunch of rats to a minefield and let them trigger the mines. But apparently mines are sensitive to much larger weights and it does not work like that. Rats are trained to sense the mines via smell. Neat.
Post reply on HN