<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Dublin Conference</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/</link>
	<description>bad news from around the world + tales of redemption.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 07 Sep 2008 08:16:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Patrick Pitt</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53102</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Pitt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 01:18:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53102</guid>
		<description>Tony Stark ended up supporting government intervention ala the Patriot Act in the Civil War series.

I would avoid the Stark revelations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tony Stark ended up supporting government intervention ala the Patriot Act in the Civil War series.</p>
<p>I would avoid the Stark revelations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Smart</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53098</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Smart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 21:07:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53098</guid>
		<description>Some more information for those of you interested:

www.stopclustermunitions.org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some more information for those of you interested:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.stopclustermunitions.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.stopclustermunitions.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jclark</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53083</link>
		<dc:creator>jclark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 17:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53083</guid>
		<description>It's too bad the whole damned world can't have a Tony Stark revelation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s too bad the whole damned world can&#8217;t have a Tony Stark revelation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sarah-renee`</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53080</link>
		<dc:creator>sarah-renee`</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 17:04:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53080</guid>
		<description>I guess then they’re just another scary reality of war.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I guess then they’re just another scary reality of war.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Smart</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53077</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Smart</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 16:36:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53077</guid>
		<description>Unexploded ordinances still remain buried in some of the battle grounds from World War 1; you cannot venture off the visitor trail at some of them for this reason.  Similarly, unexploded bombs dropped from Japanese aircraft still lay on the bottom of Pearl Harbour.

So we are making more bombs (cluster and othe ingenious sorts) that, given the material we use today could arguably last longer than the ones we created for the two World Wars.  Makes you wonder; if the ones we fired off in World War 1 can hang around for over 90 years, how long can the new ones lay buried and still remain a threat?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unexploded ordinances still remain buried in some of the battle grounds from World War 1; you cannot venture off the visitor trail at some of them for this reason.  Similarly, unexploded bombs dropped from Japanese aircraft still lay on the bottom of Pearl Harbour.</p>
<p>So we are making more bombs (cluster and othe ingenious sorts) that, given the material we use today could arguably last longer than the ones we created for the two World Wars.  Makes you wonder; if the ones we fired off in World War 1 can hang around for over 90 years, how long can the new ones lay buried and still remain a threat?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Patrick Pitt</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53063</link>
		<dc:creator>Patrick Pitt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 11:37:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53063</guid>
		<description>Sorry Sarah - pride has nothing to do with it,  the weapons,in war fighting scenarios are effective, especially the anti-tank.

5% dud rate on DPCIM.  

I gotta admit, on my observer course, I was always happy to be allocated some in the event of a scenario of enemy tanks.  High Explosive (unless in a direct hit) does little to nothing to a tank.

Have to give a warning to your supported arms commander of the risk associated with using Improved conventional munitions - usually he's okay with it if he doesn't see that he'll be using that land again anytime soon. After the Fire Support Coord centre gives you clearance it's: 

"Hail Mary full of grace
hope it lands in the right place"

It's funny how everyone is talking about these things being in the ground.  The bomblets come down on little sprial type parachutes.  Consdier the risk of them getting stuck up in a tree.  One day you're walking through said forest, a strong wind blows and instead of the effect blowing up in scatters down and covers a greater area.

One should make the argument that if tanks are rarely to be used in operation tasks these days with the air superiority achieved by the States.  (I say this just over a year after Canada rented some German tanks for the 'Stan).  Though if tanks exist so then will the nature of these munitions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sorry Sarah - pride has nothing to do with it,  the weapons,in war fighting scenarios are effective, especially the anti-tank.</p>
<p>5% dud rate on DPCIM.  </p>
<p>I gotta admit, on my observer course, I was always happy to be allocated some in the event of a scenario of enemy tanks.  High Explosive (unless in a direct hit) does little to nothing to a tank.</p>
<p>Have to give a warning to your supported arms commander of the risk associated with using Improved conventional munitions - usually he&#8217;s okay with it if he doesn&#8217;t see that he&#8217;ll be using that land again anytime soon. After the Fire Support Coord centre gives you clearance it&#8217;s: </p>
<p>&#8220;Hail Mary full of grace<br />
hope it lands in the right place&#8221;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s funny how everyone is talking about these things being in the ground.  The bomblets come down on little sprial type parachutes.  Consdier the risk of them getting stuck up in a tree.  One day you&#8217;re walking through said forest, a strong wind blows and instead of the effect blowing up in scatters down and covers a greater area.</p>
<p>One should make the argument that if tanks are rarely to be used in operation tasks these days with the air superiority achieved by the States.  (I say this just over a year after Canada rented some German tanks for the &#8216;Stan).  Though if tanks exist so then will the nature of these munitions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: revisited</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53043</link>
		<dc:creator>revisited</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 May 2008 02:33:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53043</guid>
		<description>The only time a nation with a strong military will voluntarily ban a weapon system is when that system is outdated anyway.  We'll come up with a cluster bomb ban when we have something more effective.  

What should scare the fuck out of you is when the US agrees to a nuclear weapons ban.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The only time a nation with a strong military will voluntarily ban a weapon system is when that system is outdated anyway.  We&#8217;ll come up with a cluster bomb ban when we have something more effective.  </p>
<p>What should scare the fuck out of you is when the US agrees to a nuclear weapons ban.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: satchboogieca</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53017</link>
		<dc:creator>satchboogieca</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 20:40:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53017</guid>
		<description>I used to visit Ipperwash base in the dunes, before it was returned to First Nations.  This is in Ontario, near Grand Bend.

They ALWAYS warned us about playing in the dunes and NUMEROUS signs were up saying NOT to touch anything you find.

They didn't plant mines, thankfully, but the military training involved live ammunition and many munitions (grenades, unspent bullets etc..) did in fact remain in the dunes.  Not 300/yr but many people were injured or killed as a result of kids finding something they know little about.

Anyhow, the provincial park used to do, as well as the military for provincial park visitors, demonstrations so families can school their kids in "if you find something do not touch it."

They were often hidden in the sand so yes, sometimes curiosity was not to blame, but still the warnings helped.

While not a jungle, think of yourself as being 8 yrs old, running with your cousins and friends, jumping from dune top to dune bottom, rolling down the hills... things happen.

What should have been done is sweeping for the weapons, and I think they did a little, when they had spare cycles or someone they didn't like in the military.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I used to visit Ipperwash base in the dunes, before it was returned to First Nations.  This is in Ontario, near Grand Bend.</p>
<p>They ALWAYS warned us about playing in the dunes and NUMEROUS signs were up saying NOT to touch anything you find.</p>
<p>They didn&#8217;t plant mines, thankfully, but the military training involved live ammunition and many munitions (grenades, unspent bullets etc..) did in fact remain in the dunes.  Not 300/yr but many people were injured or killed as a result of kids finding something they know little about.</p>
<p>Anyhow, the provincial park used to do, as well as the military for provincial park visitors, demonstrations so families can school their kids in &#8220;if you find something do not touch it.&#8221;</p>
<p>They were often hidden in the sand so yes, sometimes curiosity was not to blame, but still the warnings helped.</p>
<p>While not a jungle, think of yourself as being 8 yrs old, running with your cousins and friends, jumping from dune top to dune bottom, rolling down the hills&#8230; things happen.</p>
<p>What should have been done is sweeping for the weapons, and I think they did a little, when they had spare cycles or someone they didn&#8217;t like in the military.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stormydog</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53013</link>
		<dc:creator>Stormydog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 20:20:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53013</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the reminding us of this Matthew. I am ashamed to say that the UK – among others – is still insisting that we need them "for military purposes" and is also seeking a "transition period" of up to fifteen years until they find an alternative...shame on the world.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the reminding us of this Matthew. I am ashamed to say that the UK – among others – is still insisting that we need them &#8220;for military purposes&#8221; and is also seeking a &#8220;transition period&#8221; of up to fifteen years until they find an alternative&#8230;shame on the world.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sarah-renee`</title>
		<link>http://www.matthewgood.org/2008/05/the-dublin-conference/#comment-53012</link>
		<dc:creator>sarah-renee`</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 20:19:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.matthewgood.org/?p=2529#comment-53012</guid>
		<description>Great nations throughout history have taken pride in their weapons arsenal.  These weapons are just another one of those achievements that we’re supposed to be proud of.  That’s very sad.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great nations throughout history have taken pride in their weapons arsenal.  These weapons are just another one of those achievements that we’re supposed to be proud of.  That’s very sad.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
