Country usually don't wage war just to destroy (Seeing Ukraine, not so sure anymore). But to own and use the land. This allow to keep the territory futureproof. While for the defender it's even more logic.
Long live mines are only useful around long term places: military base, korean border, ...
> You wouldn’t ever give your enemy deliveries of repackagable charges.
Where did you get this preposterous idea? Do you imagine a major military will send out it's soldiers to collect labdmines on purpose to dissasemble them and take out tiny amount of explosive? And after loosing dozens of soldiers and huge amount of time to get explosives of dubious age and quality, do what with it?
I literally said the complete opposite of that by saying the mines have to self-destruct. They still need to explode. Try another read of the original post.
I worked with an EOD group in OIF. Where do you think IEDs come from? You think farmers and merchants are mixing ANFO in their huts? No, it's all seconardy explosives they we "donate".
Tell me more.
Tell me whwne I am wrong:
You don't lay down square miles of landmines in a conflict against insurents, i.e. Taliban. You only do area denial against real militaties.
In a conflict between any real militaties, like the recent Russia vs Ukraine, no-one is wasting their time making IEDs.
Any detonator explosive to set of a main charge must be reliable for dozens of good reasons. Over time an as a required condition. Asking for something decays or approaches an unreliable state after time is a non-starter.