this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2023
317 points (95.7% liked)

World News

39142 readers
2669 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The logical end of the 'Solution to bad speech is better speech' has arrived in the age of state-sponsored social media propaganda bots versus AI-driven bots arguing back

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's because they aren't.

Chemical weapons cause severe agony, but tend to kill a limited number of people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

According to the UN:

Weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) constitute a class of weaponry with the potential to:

  • Produce in a single moment an enormous destructive effect capable to kill millions of civilians, jeopardize the natural environment, and fundamentally alter the lives of future generations through their catastrophic effects;

  • Cause death or serious injury of people through toxic or poisonous chemicals;

  • Disseminate disease-causing organisms or toxins to harm or kill humans, animals or plants;

  • Deliver nuclear explosive devices, chemical, biological or toxin agents to use them for hostile purposes or in armed conflict.

So, they were WMDs

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Iraq had those same stores of chemical weapons since the 1980s and was in the slow and arduous process of dismantling them (it had dismantled something like 90-95% of its WMDs by 2003 and was not stockpiling replacements). Given the lack of new production, many of the chemical weapons supposedly in Iraq's stockpile would have turned harmless due to the short shelf life of chemical weapons.

By and large, people used this imagined idea that Iraq was still developing nuclear weapons as the justification for the invasion. American media ran stories about how aluminum tubes "used for uranium enrichment" were being imported by Iraq. American media brought out Iraqi defectors of questionable credibility who talked about Iraq's burgeoning nuclear capability. American intelligence claimed that Iraq was actively seeking nuclear weapons development. Of course, all of these claims were entirely false.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

By this definition, 9/11 proves that a jumbo jet is a WMD. I don't know if I can call a jumbo jet a WMD.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

9/11 only had its effect because they hit the twin towers, chemical weapons can kill entire areas

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't understand the point you're making. If airplanes hitting a building can do the same damages chemical weapons.....

Chemical weapons can kill entire areas just like planes hitting buildings. I'm a licensed pilot.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

what killed people was the damage to the buildings not the planes themselves, if the twin towers had been a chemical plant (especially one making something like phosgene, mustard gas or chlorine gas) in the middle of NY, the death toll would have made 9/11 look like a wet fart

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The chemical plant cannot be a WMD.

Places cannot be WMD. This is inherent in the word weapon a weapon is not a place. The w in WMD makes it not a place

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

hey, I was arguing with the logic of planes are a WMD because 9/11, pointing out that if plans would be a WMD because the WTC towers collapsing killing a lot of people, a chemical plant would be way worse.

but in effect a plane is not much different from the larger cruise missiles

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

No, jet didn't kill millions.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Didn't need to kill a millions. I'm just saying that the jet hitting a building kills as many as a chemical weapon can.

Chemical weapons not going to kill more people than 9/11.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Didn't need to kill a millions.

WMD definition requires killing millions of people.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How is a chemical weapon going to kill a million people???

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Spray a liter of Novichok over NYC. Done.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How the fuck are 14 155mm shells filled with mustard gas from 1980 and a few kilograms of expired growth media going to kill millions of people?