🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <23AUG199207420111@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov> packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer) writes:
>Apparently mines are being laid on the surface nowadays. A photo
>in the NY Times Friday, credited to "Brogi/Contrasto/Saba"
>is captioned 
>
>  "United Nations forces clearing mines last week in the town
>   of Banja Luka, Bosnia."
>
>It shows seven mines resting on a street, arrayed in a circle about
>15 feet in diameter. A soldier has picked up one mine. Another
>soldier is bending down to pick up another. The mines have 
>convenient handles for carrying.
>
>This is in accord with a story I saw last week about a the driver
>in a relief supply vehicle who, at a checkpoint, asked the
>soldiers to "clear the mines" so he could proceed, and
>they obliged.
>
>As far as I can tell, mines are not placed with signs next to
>them that say, for example, "This is a mine."

Er, this might be explained by the large number of snipers
in the region.  Clearly, the road is paved, so planting mines
in the ground would be somewhat problematic.  If the mines
are clearly visible, as they have to be on this kind of road,
the truck drivers/guards would have to get out and move them
before the convoy can proceed.  If there are snipers in the
region, these drivers/guards would be vulnerable when they are
using the ever convenient carrying handles.

Snipers may be less likely to fire on UN soldiers.

--
But this is.

In article <24AUG199208180727@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov> packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer) writes:
>This wasn't a problem for the Mafia who killed that Sicilian official
>last April! I recall that the news accounts said something like
>they planted "several hundred pounds" explosive "under a roadway."
>I don't know whether the road was paved, though.

Come on, Packer! You're reaching now. If you had read the entire post (or
it may have been another one---it's hard to keep up with all the rebuffs
to your tired tirades), you would have realized that the mines could
have been _purposely_ placed _in_the_road_.

We'll go through it again, slowly.

	Faction A uses a lot of sniper attacks against Faction B.

	Faction A wants a lot of Faction B to be out in the open
	so their sniper attacks work.

	Faction B wants to quickly drive armored vehicles through
	possible sniper areas to avoid being out in the open.

	Faction A wants Faction B to get out of their moving armored
	vehicles, so Faction A puts mines in the roadway.

	Faction B wants to go through the area, but they cannot just
	drive over the mines as if they were normal blockages.

	Faction B must get out of their vehicles to either disarm the
	mines or move them out of the way.

	Faction A opens up with sniper fire.

Get it? This explains all your "misgivings" about the picture. Now
get a life.

-- 
|~~\ rian        2000 Powers Fy Rd. |  "You can't call me 'Booger' anymore,
|--< _____       Suite 200          | 	  I'm too cool." 
|__/   |         Marietta, Ga 30067 |  "Yeah...you can't call me 'Skidmark'
       | roxell  (404)933-7600      |     anymore, either."

In article <496@audfax.audiofax.com>, brian@audiofax.com (Brian Troxell) writes...
>it may have been another one---it's hard to keep up with all the rebuffs
>to your tired tirades), you would have realized that the mines could
>... 
>	Faction A uses a lot of sniper attacks against Faction B.
>... 




Sometimes it's hard to tell what's a "tirade" and what's not...