Interesting that Iran has started using cluster munition missiles to strike Israel. Apparently Iran, Israel and US are some of the few countries that haven't signed the international convention banning cluster munitions. Israel has also used cluster munitions against the Hezbollahs.

▲

dogma1138 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It’s because it’s one of the only things that effectively can hit Israel.

They release the submunitions at much higher altitudes than they were intended so they spread across a much larger area and thus ineffective at hitting anything other than an urban target.

But on the plus side for the Iranians they separate outside of the interception envelope of even the exo atmospheric interceptors Israel has so they actually get through even if each sub munition is only a nuance at best.

▲

Qem 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Israel has also used cluster munitions against the Hezbollahs.

Estimated around 4 million of them against south Lebanon:

https://imeu.org/resources/key-issues/quick-facts-israels-il...

https://www.hrw.org/report/2008/02/16/flooding-south-lebanon...

▲

XorNot 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Countries tend to sign munition restrictions when they don't use those munitions or are in a position where they wouldn't be useful.

The map of countries which sign the convention against landmines is extremely obvious in that context.

▲

markdown 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> are in a position where they wouldn't be useful.

No such country exists. So long as enemies are likely to put boots, wheels, or tracks on the ground in your country, landmines are extremely useful, extremely cheap, and extremely effective.

▲

cpgxiii 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The point is that almost all of the signatories considered themselves to be immune to a "real war" in their futures at the time they signed. E.g. basically all of the European signatories assumed that the end of the cold war and existence of NATO would ensure the end of any possible threat. Given that assumption, as obviously flawed as it was, signing on to a ban was cheap PR (literally cheap, too, because it meant they could divest those weapons and their delivery mechanisms to reduce defense expenditures).

	▲	breppp 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		which is exactly why european countries threatened by russia are starting to withdraw from the treaty, five had recently announced so

▲

spwa4 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You also have the large number of countries that sign treaties, then just ignore them. Iran is an example of a nation that signs UN treaties, then openly boast about violating them.

Iran signed the human rights treaties ... and openly executes gays and minors. They boast about this publicly.