The Land Mine Debate

American VoicesWorld ISSUE 32•08 Sep 23, 1997

Representatives of nearly 100 nations gathered in Oslo last week to draft a treaty to ban land mines globally. The treaty was rejected by President Clinton, who said that mines are necessary to protect certain disputed borders. What do you think?

  • “The governments of many Third World nations rely on land mines as their primary means of blowing the legs off innocent children. Without them, what would they do—saw all those legs off by hand?”

    Richard Vasquez –
    Optometrist

  • “As a military historian, I know of a far greater threat than land mines: Welsh longbows. Why, those things cut down scores of French infantrymen during the Battle of Agincourt.”

    Michelle Reyerson –
    Historian

  • “I was against land mines until I found out that we don't have any in Minnesota. Now I don't care either way.”

    Nancy Stennett –
    Student

  • “I just think it's awful that Princess Diana had to be tragically killed by a land mine in order to bring this serious issue to the fore.”

    Ken Unger –
    Landscaper

  • “Land mines are unconscionable in this day and age. From now on, the world's military powers should rely on underground motion-detecting hunter/seeker mobile cyberdrones equipped with rotating sawblades.”

    J.D. Lewis –
    Systems Analyst

  • “I'll betcha one of them land mines would really do a number on your nutsack.”

    Oscar Steinholz –
    Salesman