+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 61

Thread: Why are chemical and biological weapons banned?

  1. Default Why are chemical and biological weapons banned?

    I do not endorse their use, but then I would sooner live in a world minus the killing, and the weak justification given for it, however, to the best of my knowlege, chemical and biological weapons are banned, or at least their use is banned.

    Of course, as with all laws, there are those that work to break it, with both Israel and the US military accused of having used white phospherous as a weapon.

    However, it seems strange to me that we specifically ban the use of chemical weapons, yet the use of a whole range of terrible bombs, and other weapons is entirely accepted.

    Yes, of course chemical and biological weapon use has the potential to be so very bad, however, would it really be any worse than the deaths and disabilities caused by those weapons NOT banned? Heavens, Russia and the US have enough nuke war heads to blow the planet up, several times over, they are legal, yet, there is this moral high ground over chemical or biological weapons.

    And what really constitutes a chemical weapon, anyhow?

    Sometimes these buzz phrases are put out in the media, and we don't examine them properly.

    Could it be argued that police officers using pepper spray or mace, during riots, are using a weapon that relies on chemicals?

    Also, it means we can look at fantastic (but true) stories, such as this, in awe!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_bomb


    The "halitosis bomb" and "gay bomb" are informal names for two theoretical non-lethal chemical weapons, which a United States Air Force research laboratory speculated about producing, which involved discharging female sex pheromones over enemy forces in order to make them sexually attracted to each other.

    Or this...

    The ever-ingenious inventors at Israel's weapons research and development directorate have created a schoolboy's dream: the ultimate stink bomb, with a disgusting smell that lingers in its victim's clothing for up to five years.

    The foul-smelling liquid squirted by angry or frightened skunks at their victims was analysed by Israeli defence scientists and a synthetic version created for use in a weapon they call the "skunk bomb". Fired with great care, and from a respectable range, it is designed to force civilian protesters to disperse. Security forces would not be keen to arrest the victims, and they would be equally unwelcome at home.

    When soldiers try to control crowds, or take action against guerrillas hiding in urban areas, there is a high risk of damage to property and people near by. Military weapons are designed to kill, and are often too powerful to use under these circumstances, as Israel Defence Forces have discovered in their clashes with Palestinian crowds. After years of using rubber bullets and tear gas, plus small arms, Israeli forces have been under pressure to create less-than-lethal weapons with which to target Palestinians. The skunk bomb is one example

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...ol-546665.html
    Manis Friedman;
    "I donít believe in western morality, i.e. donít kill civilians or children, donít destroy holy sites, donít fight during holiday seasons, donít bomb cemeteries, donít shoot until they shoot first because it is immoral.
    The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: "Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle)."

  2. Prosper.com, finance, financial, investing, lending, borrowing, banking, credit card, payday, borrowers, lenders, debt consolidation, Prosper, investment, personal loans, personal loan, investors, investment opportunities, debt consolidation

  3. Default

    A lot of it is a reaction to the horrible things that happened during World War I, still. Of course, by that logic, we should also ban machine guns.

    I think (somewhat cynically perhaps) that biological and chemical weapons have been banned by the arms-dealing countries and their alliances because some biological and chemical weapons are cheaper, in terms of dollars-per-deaths, than nuclear weapons.
    Be free.

  4. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daybreaker View Post
    A lot of it is a reaction to the horrible things that happened during World War I, still. Of course, by that logic, we should also ban machine guns.

    I think (somewhat cynically perhaps) that biological and chemical weapons have been banned by the arms-dealing countries and their alliances because some biological and chemical weapons are cheaper, in terms of dollars-per-deaths, than nuclear weapons.
    Well, yes, that is my pattern of thought.

    It would be entirely noble if the ban extended to any weapons that caused maim or death to potential innocents, yet, on one hand, we seem to have this international agreement (in theory), for ethical reasons, while at the same time retaining lots of weapons that likely hurt and kill more people.
    Manis Friedman;
    "I donít believe in western morality, i.e. donít kill civilians or children, donít destroy holy sites, donít fight during holiday seasons, donít bomb cemeteries, donít shoot until they shoot first because it is immoral.
    The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way: "Destroy their holy sites. Kill men, women and children (and cattle)."

  5. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Napier View Post
    Of course, as with all laws, there are those that work to break it, with both Israel and the US military accused of having used white phospherous as a weapon.

    ]
    White phosphorous is NOT a chemical weapon. I don't know why that is so hard to understand.

    By the way, the U.S. still keeps fire bombs in its arsenal. They call them that because in the Vietnam War napalm got a bad reputation.

    But in general, chemicals and biologicals are considered a WMD and a no-no because their area effects are difficult to limit and they kill humans with no regard for military, civlian, combatant, noncombatant.

    You can't precisely target any kind of chemical or biological weapon.

  6. Default

    Yeah, WP is not a chemical weapon. It's used in smoke grenades, not sure if we still use it in artillery rounds.

    Anyway chem/bio weapons are a strange monster. I guess they really didn't need to be banned because, as we learned in WWI, mass deployment of them is just insanity. You might damage the enemy, or the wind may just push it right back on you! CS could help in a firefight, but then you're forcing your troops to mask up which is extremely limiting. You can't talk, see, breath as well, etc while wearing a mask. If we didn't have optics shooting accurately would be nearly impossible!

    As for napalm, guess we never signed that treaty though most other nations have. Oh and then there's agent orange and other herbicides, not sure how those work out with the chem weapon deal.

    Anyway there's some (*)(*)(*)(*), do with it what you will.
    If you support domestic spying, the extrajudicial killing of US citizens, the PATRIOT Act, the TSA, our overly militaristic foreign policy, and the militarization of our police, then you are a bigger threat to our freedom and our way of life than the terrorists that these measures were originally created for.

    We don't live in a vacuum, things happen for a reason. Find the reason, find the solution, ignore the reason, continue the problem.

  7. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by My Fing ID View Post
    Yeah, WP is not a chemical weapon. It's used in smoke grenades, not sure if we still use it in artillery rounds.

    Anyway chem/bio weapons are a strange monster. I guess they really didn't need to be banned because, as we learned in WWI, mass deployment of them is just insanity. You might damage the enemy, or the wind may just push it right back on you! CS could help in a firefight, but then you're forcing your troops to mask up which is extremely limiting. You can't talk, see, breath as well, etc while wearing a mask. If we didn't have optics shooting accurately would be nearly impossible!

    As for napalm, guess we never signed that treaty though most other nations have. Oh and then there's agent orange and other herbicides, not sure how those work out with the chem weapon deal.

    Anyway there's some (*)(*)(*)(*), do with it what you will.
    Well, Agent Orange is a defoliant. It isn't going to kill you in the near future if you sprayed it in your face accidentally. Sure, there is an elevated cancer risk but that isn't until years down the road.

    I've used the same stuff before years ago on the farm.

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Napier View Post
    Well, yes, that is my pattern of thought.

    It would be entirely noble if the ban extended to any weapons that caused maim or death to potential innocents, yet, on one hand, we seem to have this international agreement (in theory), for ethical reasons, while at the same time retaining lots of weapons that likely hurt and kill more people.
    It's a strange balance. Land mines are another item that is/trying to be banned. We're trying to develop land mines that kill themselves after a period of time to prevent civilian casualties after a war has been fought. Many countries have a problem with old mines.

    Anyway the common theme seems to be getting rid of 'dumb ordinance' and going for stuff that's under human control. Yeah civilian casualties happen, but in theory you'll end up with less.
    If you support domestic spying, the extrajudicial killing of US citizens, the PATRIOT Act, the TSA, our overly militaristic foreign policy, and the militarization of our police, then you are a bigger threat to our freedom and our way of life than the terrorists that these measures were originally created for.

    We don't live in a vacuum, things happen for a reason. Find the reason, find the solution, ignore the reason, continue the problem.

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayton3 View Post
    Well, Agent Orange is a defoliant. It isn't going to kill you in the near future if you sprayed it in your face accidentally. Sure, there is an elevated cancer risk but that isn't until years down the road.

    I've used the same stuff before years ago on the farm.
    That's true, I just didn't know how far reaching the terms were for chemical weapons. DU is another one up for argument. I haven't seen it be an issue but there are conflicting accounts.
    If you support domestic spying, the extrajudicial killing of US citizens, the PATRIOT Act, the TSA, our overly militaristic foreign policy, and the militarization of our police, then you are a bigger threat to our freedom and our way of life than the terrorists that these measures were originally created for.

    We don't live in a vacuum, things happen for a reason. Find the reason, find the solution, ignore the reason, continue the problem.

  10. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by My Fing ID View Post
    That's true, I just didn't know how far reaching the terms were for chemical weapons. DU is another one up for argument. I haven't seen it be an issue but there are conflicting accounts.
    Depleted uranium is a toxic heavy metal. It doesn't fit the definition of chemical or even as some have laughably claimed, nuclear weapon.

    People forget that there are a lot of toxic, dangerous, and deadly substances used as weapons that are NOT WMDs. Because their dangerous toxicity is only a secondary (and unintended) effect.

  11. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dayton3 View Post
    Depleted uranium is a toxic heavy metal. It doesn't fit the definition of chemical or even as some have laughably claimed, nuclear weapon.

    People forget that there are a lot of toxic, dangerous, and deadly substances used as weapons that are NOT WMDs. Because their dangerous toxicity is only a secondary (and unintended) effect.
    Heh, I don't know why anyone would say DU is a chem weapon, and especially don't get why they'd call it nuclear lol! It is its own issue. You don't want that stuff messing up the nation you used them in nor your own men. To be honest I'm curious why we even use the stuff. Surely we have non-DU rounds that can go straight through a T-72.
    If you support domestic spying, the extrajudicial killing of US citizens, the PATRIOT Act, the TSA, our overly militaristic foreign policy, and the militarization of our police, then you are a bigger threat to our freedom and our way of life than the terrorists that these measures were originally created for.

    We don't live in a vacuum, things happen for a reason. Find the reason, find the solution, ignore the reason, continue the problem.

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks