It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The worst weapon of war

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:05 PM
link   
This is easy. Aids is the worst one ever used and its still killing.




posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by sugeshotcha
I agree, I think mines and cluster bombs are the worst. Especially since the US government use them to defend The Truth around Area 51.


wow are you serious..I know they have alot of security around area 51 but I didnt know they had land mines planted around it.Are you sure about this..? do you have any links? Im not doubting you just I have never heard of the u.s. military using land mines to proctect military installations in the continental u.s.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Illusion, just let me say your avatar is smokin. After that Aids is not much of a weapon if you stick with the same partner. I know how much this disturbs you ladies.
It's only transmitted through bodily fluids. Won't work for those not infected and committed.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:27 PM
link   
What generalistic crap. War is not the worst weapon. That doesn't even make since, especially out of the mouth (or fingers, in this case) of a soldier. War is the result of transgressions. Which would be worse, the world going to war against Hitler, or the world rolling over and allowing the madman to run the world? Which would be more sick? To say that war is the worst weapon is to say that you are also the worst of something. Maybe you are, but I was not. I stood for what I thought, no, what I knew was right, and had the Soviet army rolled into western Europe, it is they who would have been wrong, not me, not my squad or company or brigade, so feed that "we are all wrong so that nobody has to admit to being less right" bullcrap to some brain-dead lab rats.

As far as the actually question (you know, the question that the thread was about before some folks wanted to try their hand at teaching an adjunct philosophy class?), I agree with the idea that bio/chemical weapons are the nastiest. While I could comprehend conventional ways of dying and saw nuclear as a normal, mechanical way of dying even though it is an unconventional weapon, the whole bleeding out of your eyes and arse while doing the funky chicken on the ground so as to demoralize your comrads while they wonder if they, too, got a dose of the crap was way over the top for me; kinda took all the possible humanity right out of the concept for me. **shudder**



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by JustAnIllusion
This is easy. Aids is the worst one ever used and its still killing.


Pure speculation, no foundation.



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:28 PM
link   
land mines and bio weapons



posted on Feb, 6 2004 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

Originally posted by JustAnIllusion
This is easy. Aids is the worst one ever used and its still killing.


Pure speculation, no foundation.



Agreed, and since when was Aids a weapon of war?



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   
I will have a try at this, the worst weapon of war:




How about the weapon that did this?



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 05:03 PM
link   
The Media.




Deep



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Agree on cluster bombs, but landmines are just as sick, not to mention chemicals like VX and mustard gas and the ever so perverse napalm, and ofcourse any weapon used against an innocent party of any kind. This is a sick, sick world. But the worst and most disgusting weapon of them all: THE MEDIA. They have managed to turn war and suffering into entertainment and a source of income. They are even worse than those who were picking out the gold of the teeth of Jews, Gypsies and other "Untermenchen" during World War 2. If I had the possibility, I would destroy every bloody television in the world. Then I would use all the tabloids to start the fire uppon which all the money and belongings of Ted Turner et al could burn to ashes, then I could send those evil men naked out in the desert where they belong together with the rest of their kind


Blessings,
Mikromarius


[Edited on 15-2-2004 by Hamilton]



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Spent Urainium shells. Those things are bad. Not because of their sheer one hit killing power but the resedue they leave behind after they are fired. Ive seen this online movie about the effects of these shells in Iraq and the video is downright horendus.



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:33 PM
link   
I interpeted the title of this thread to mean the most ineffective weapon of war.

That would have to be the Maginot Line in France before WWII.



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:35 PM
link   
For the sake of this thread, I'll say Napalm.



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:45 PM
link   
The worst, or best, weapon of war, is appathy. When a nation no longer takes the time to vote, it give up control of its say to an elite few. Let them know that they will be acountable.



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   
napalm is terible but fun when you make it on you own when its not hurting others its damn fun.



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Can't wait to flame a vacant KFC.



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quicksilver
napalm is terible but fun when you make it on you own when its not hurting others its damn fun.


Never tried to make my own, Id probably end up hurting myself.



posted on Feb, 15 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   
PROPAGANDA/FEAR

Getting people all in a tizzy with threats, nothing happens, the next ones get downplayed and BOOM! were dead.



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 04:14 AM
link   
the worst weapon of war i would have to say is politicions because franly they make the orders and decide which country to attack but i agree that war is SOMETIMES necessary like ww2 but frankly the worst weapon an enemy can use is actually not havig a concience if u dont have 1 u can do anything to get the job done



posted on Feb, 16 2004 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gryffen
The worst weapon of war is war itself!



I disagree.

War is inevadable in some ways.

As if you get punched dont you punch back?

War is also is good for tech advancements.

Think if there was no war then our tech would still be in stone age.

Out,
Russian



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join