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: 4
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2004 @ 08:54 PM
link   
The worst weapons in my opinion are


1) the nuclear bomb.

I would say that, because...


Even if you nuked a perticular area...

The clouds of toxic chemicals and radiation would be pulled around the globe, making people sick



2)Cluster bombs

Because like some of you said, many of them dont explode, and some person walks by and starts playing soccer with it... (we know the result)


3) The land mine

Tons of em never get stepped on, so afterwards some person walks by and gets blown up. I also heard that an elephant stepped on a mine. and half of its foot got shredded


poor animal


Although I do say this: Cluster bombs ARE pretty cool, and they could do some serious damage to the enemy.




posted on Apr, 2 2004 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Im amazed that Catfish was the first one to write the nuke.. Or did I miss anyone?

I think that the nuke and biological # are the worst kind of weapons..



posted on Apr, 2 2004 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Other than the obvious war conclusion...i'd have to say humans...



posted on Apr, 2 2004 @ 01:05 PM
link   
i find the dread 'plate of overcooked spaghetti' pretty ineffective.
the 'open bar and massage parlour', and the 'bong' also seem lacking in military strength.



posted on Apr, 2 2004 @ 03:22 PM
link   
thorn u make a good point but humans are cappable of love,friendship and varios other things
but i have to say war is the most horrible weapon of all
i know an old saying it goes "weapons dont kill people. its the people that kill people." i personaly believe this
but sometimes war is neceseary and must be done to protect others all we can do is think about colateral damage and trying to limit the wars



posted on Apr, 2 2004 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Worst WoW: Rheotoric.



posted on Apr, 3 2004 @ 03:22 AM
link   
HUH? wha? i missed the point there



posted on Apr, 3 2004 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Helix
Im amazed that Catfish was the first one to write the nuke.. Or did I miss anyone?

I think that the nuke and biological # are the worst kind of weapons..


oh ya, I missed chemical weapons. What a dumb way to fight a war, with GERMS.



posted on Nov, 28 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   
1.The claims against DU projectiles have generally been contradictory and don't stand up to scientific rigor. There are many other things to explain gulf war syndrome such as the reactions to anti-anthrax drugs we gave soldiers, as well as other things.
2. War is not a weapon of war, war is not used within war, war is war, therefore grypyth's comment is logically invalid. Also come on people, you're not "clever" or "deep" for saying something like "the human mind" or "the media", you just sound like you couldn't come up with a real answer to the question. The only esoteric answer that truly makes sense here is propaganda, which is generally a very terrible weapon of war, but only in riling up one's own people to do bad things, it has generally proven inneffective against enemies.
3. AIDS is not a weapon, never has been, and if you're stupid enough to believe it is, I'm not wasting my effort trying to convince you otherwise.
4. Nuclear weapons are actually not terrible weapons of war as generally they act as a fairly effective detterent and are mainly used to scare people, not as a practical weapon.
5. VX is pretty nasty, but honestly, there are many worse ways to die. With VX, you die within less than a minute, sometimes under 10 seconds. Whereas if you get shot in the lung, you could bleed to death over ten to fifteen minutes. Also, as chemical weapons have only been used twice in any major war (WWI and the Iraq-Iran War) I would have to say they do not top the list.
6. The JDAM is not a terrible weapon of war, it is actually fairly nice, as far as weapons go of course.
7. I would have to say the people who said anti-personell landmines probably have the best answer so far. Anti-Personell landmines were carelessly places throughout many major conflicts and many many many civillians have suffered as a result, this is probably one of the best arguments. As generally civillians are hurt on a wide scale with these weapons unnessacarily, this is a good argument, as well as the fact that landmines have been used very commonly in every major war since their inception.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join