Why Don’t We Use Chemical Weapons Anymore? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Don’t We Use Chemical Weapons Anymore?

#81

Post by iudqnolq » Sat, Oct 08, 2022, 3:33 AM UTC

sillystuff wrote: post #65

wormslayer666 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's disingenuous to pretend that the chemical weapons of the WW's and the massive cold war stockpiles of VX or sarin are in the same class as deliberately nonlethal lachrymator agents used in riot control. The fact that chemical weapons treaties technically ban pepper spray in the same manner as nerve gas doesn't mean it's a massive evil of police overreach -- there's plenty of low-hanging fruit on that topic withou…

GP isn't wrong though. Tear gas of the type used by civilian police forces against the general population is illegal to use in war. It is a war crime to use it. Tear gas was developed by France and used on the battle field in WWI before being used for "crowd control". https://www.kumc.edu/school-of-medicine/academics/department... . "Riot control agents, including tear gas and other gases which have debilitating but…

This is one of those sayings that's technically true but misses the point by a mile.

A wounded soldier is a greater burden than a dead soldier, so a possible tactic would be to deliberately wound. Some people thought that was especially amoral, so they added a rule against it to what they called international law.

So most police weaponry is illegal under international law, but it's illegal because it's less deadly than the permitted alternative.

Re: Why Don’t We Use Chemical Weapons Anymore?

#82

Post by worthless-trash » Sat, Oct 08, 2022, 6:25 AM UTC

bombcar wrote: post #39

worthless-trash wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think its creativity limiting the actions, its factors of capability, reliability and gullibility of those carrying out the actions. Batman style "poisoning the water supply" isnt really a viable option due to the complexities of pulling it off successfully.

Anyone who is not directly involved in the various things like water supply doesn’t realize all the safety measures and such that in place to prevent accidental contamination- which also help detect and prevent intentional damage. The total number of terrorists is small, and their ability is limited. But that may not always be the case.

Exactly this.

Re: Why Don’t We Use Chemical Weapons Anymore?

#83

Post by djbebs » Sat, Oct 08, 2022, 12:43 PM UTC

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #71

swayvil wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it isn't blind trust. Good arguments will be made. Extremely plausible lies uttered by trustworthy authorities and echoed by your friends and peers. Don't imagine that even you are immune. Does believing it make you a bad person? Of course not. You're only doing what's right and sensible.

Indeed. Large parts of the west went through this process less than 20 years ago in the run up to the invasion of Iraq. And something like half a million died. It’s not like this is just a theoretical exercise.

They're going through it now.

Just go on reddit and you'll see several videos of Ukrainian drone dropping bombs on clearly wounded Russian soldiers and you'll see a whole comment section celebrating the war crime.

Re: Why Don’t We Use Chemical Weapons Anymore?

#84

Post by int_19h » Sun, Oct 09, 2022, 11:26 PM UTC

StanislavPetrov wrote: post #78

samatman wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That same page makes it perfectly clear that white phosphorus is not considered a chemical weapon. My degree is in chemistry. Phosphorus is indeed a chemical, so is lead. You are either deluded, which is unlikely, or deliberately lying in the hope of winning an argument. The latter is more likely to be the case: therefore, I have contempt for you. We won't interact again.

It is a chemical and it is used as a weapon, but according to you it is not a chemical weapon. If lead was being somehow weaponized and dropped on human beings by the military with deadly effects it too would classify as a chemical weapon. I have contempt for abject stupidity, and in an ideal world would never have to interact with anyone like you, but the world is far from ideal.

Lead is also a chemical and is used as a weapon, but it doesn't make bullets chemical weapons.