| This may be somewhat poorly timed, in light of the recent chemical weapon attack in Syria, but here we go anyway: I don't think chemical weapons are all that bad. Yes, they're bad when used against innocent civilians. But I would argue that all weapons are bad when used against innocent civilians. That's not the issue I'm addressing. I just don't think poisonous chemicals, when used to defeat opponents in a war, are worse than say the kinetic energy of a bullet or the chemical reaction energy of an explosion. It's odd to me that we draw the line here. I'll admit that chemical weapons are generally harder to focus on a small area since their delivery method hinges on poisoning the air. And it's true that chemical weapons are usually invisible, and that they cause a fair amount of suffering before death. But I still think it's weird that the entire world gets up in arms at the idea of chemical weapons, but nobody bats an eye when we use chemically-propelled high-velocity chunks of metal to cause tissue damage and blood loss. #politics |