03-04-2003 02:49									#1
	Chemical Weapons - What's the big deal anyway? Put an end to popups!

This thread is inspired by the attack on Imran about his being tasteless for his Chemical Weapons thread...

I don't particularly see what the big deal is about chemical weapons compared to, say, cluster bombs anyway...

So they can kill innocent people in a horrible manner - so do cluster bombs. If one is allowed, why not the other?

The point is that they both kill people indisciminately, but then we are talking about war anyway...

BUT, Chemical Weapons are relatively easy to clear from a battlefield after a war, whereas US clusterbombs are still killing civilians as far afield as Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Serbia and Iraq on a weekly basis!

Also what is a 'chemical weapon' anyway? Napalm? Fuel Air Bombs? Aren't they part of the US arsenal?

Personally if Chemical Weapons are banned, I think we should ban cluster bombs as well...

Or we could just unban those Chemical Weapons...?

Last edited by MOBIUS on 03-04-2003 at 03:18

	03-04-2003 02:58									#2
	Tired of ads?

I guess chemical weapons are considered a big deal only when they are "weapons of mass destruction"

	03-04-2003 03:04									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

btw, cluster bombs are bad mkay and should be banned, just like anti personell mines (ottawa convention)

	03-04-2003 03:09									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Nope. Against the Rules of War.
But hell, everything the Hussein regime does is against the rules.

Don't get me started on how to retaliate.

Ever see Butch Cassidy amd The Sundance Kid ?
Butch (Paul Newman) is challenged to a knife fight for leadership role.
He wants to get the rules set, and his adversary says, "Rules? No rules in a knife fight!", and Butch kicks him square in the nuts.

And there you have it. No rules? That works both ways.

Last edited by SlowwHand on 03-04-2003 at 03:15

	03-04-2003 03:10									#5
	Increase Your PM Length

Dead is dead. I don't know why chem or bio weapons are to be condemned when a nuke will kill you just the same.

	03-04-2003 03:11									#6
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

its like two man during middle ages fighting and saying "hey no kicking in the balls".... It was created because somebody didnt want to lose by being kicked in the balls, so he pushed to add this into "honor system".

	03-04-2003 03:13									#7
	Support Apolyton

Chemical weapons are banned because they were ungentlemanly over eighty years ago. They're 'weapons of mass destruction' now because of scary names and public ignorance.

	03-04-2003 03:16									#8
	Put an end to popups!

Eventually Rules of war will be so ridiculous that injuring a personnel on the other side would be considered immoral.... in war!!!! (but by that time Im sure we'll have ummanned vehicles and robots have war for us).

And one day some genius is gonna say "hey I can kill these people! and I can win!"

	03-04-2003 03:16									#9
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Gangerolf I guess chemical weapons are considered a big deal only when they are "weapons of mass destruction"

But they don't actually 'destroy' anything - buildings are left standing, many leave their victims looking as though they're just sleeping or unconscious...

Cluster bombs OTOH, destroy buildings and turn people into a broken bloody smear of gore. They also destroy a countries economy for decades by making whole regions too dangerous to farm or develop and draining their hard currency into paying for mineclearing these areas...

I think at the very least, the US should send in minesweeping teams to pick up their sh*t after the conflict is over!

The point about anti personnel mines is a salient one - because in many terrains that is precisely what unexploded cluster bomblets become. If the one is banned, then why not the other???

	03-04-2003 03:19									#10
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I think things such as MOABs and daisy cutters should be banned as illegal weapons of mass destruction. But anyway, America isn't really a country known for observing rules.

	03-04-2003 03:19									#11
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I think it is a good rule mainly because:

quote: Chemical Weapons are relatively easy to clear from a battlefield after a war

Is not always true. Nor is the fact that they kill ppl, most of the time they torture ppl before they kill them... Rahter "inhumane". Yet, all is fair in love, war, and the love of war.

	03-04-2003 03:23									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

They were rather banned because of assured ease on the overall humanity, expense and speed of war for either of opposing sides. Having a constant chemical soup wafting about your troops and citizens is an *extreme* blanket element that no side feels comfortable they can gain an advantage with (while both using it), so a mutual cancellation of such an element to make it less psychologically horrific and speed the overall campaign of war up was seen fit. Of course gas masks are now readily available, but chemicals outside linger a constant horrific psychological threat and expense to the effort.

Now when one side can see use of these weapons knowing the others can't respond the same, the advantage is tempting.

	03-04-2003 03:29									#13
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Oops, I may not have made myself clear in the first post and have edited it.

I wouldn't blame Saddam for one second if he used them - assuming he has any left...

quote: Is not always true. Nor is the fact that they kill ppl, most of the time they torture ppl before they kill them...

Halabja (sp?) is perfectly habitable now, in the sense that the chemical effects are gone AND the town was left standing afterwards...

And having a wicked piece of scorching shrapnel sticking out of your stomach while you struggle to keep your innards in as you slowly bleed to death is not 'torture'...

	03-04-2003 03:33									#14
	Put an end to popups!

For sure. Destroying buildings is much the worse.

	03-04-2003 03:41									#15
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Chemical weapons were banned because of their special menace...they kill people so cheaply, they threaten arms dealers' profits.

	03-04-2003 03:56									#16
	Tired of ads?

Chemical weapons were banned because of their special menace...they kill people so cheaply, they threaten arms dealers' profits.

	03-04-2003 04:03									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: threaten arms dealers' profits.

	03-04-2003 04:07									#18
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I agree with the geenral notion that chemical weapons are not in any way inherently worse than most conventional weapons. The one aspect in whinyou can say they are worse is that they are more likely to main and cause long term health issues than the average piece of hot metal will.

I also agree with the sentiment that cluster munitions that leave small mines lying aorund are inherently more dangerous than some run of the mill bomb and that they are liable to cause great civilian harm in the future.

At the same time, even if the rules are the result of haphazard agreemnts o evr the decades and thus soemwhat starnge, they are the rules, and as for now, chems. are banned, cluster bombs not. The thing to do then is to demand the banning of cluster munitions, not to question whether chemical weapons should be allowed or not.

On another note: every day without the Iraqis using WMD, specially the closer we get to baghdad, the more often I hope people ask this admin., why not? The excuse of WMD and terrorist is how the convinced the majority of Americans to back this enterprise and thy must be held strictly liable if what they said turns out to have been highly deceptive.

	03-04-2003 04:13									#19
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Chemical weapons are far more indiscriminate. If you care about hurting civilians, you shouldn't be a chemical wepaons fan. They also have the capability to kill en masse with no chance for surrender, etc., and people find that objectionable.

	03-04-2003 04:16									#20
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: The excuse of WMD and terrorist is how the convinced the majority of Americans to back this enterprise and thy must be held strictly liable if what they said turns out to have been highly deceptive.

The issue wasn't that he "had" them, but was "developing" them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was even said that these weapons may not be within his borders at the time, but the evidence that they were developing them was.