posted on Jun, 15 2004 @ 12:21 AM
Okay...we already have the worst chemical weapons known to mankind. So what are we doing with them? Trying to keep them sealed up until we can get
rid of the damn things! I personally work within 1/4 mile of one of the biggest stockpiles of the stuff on the face of this planet, and I for one
will be glad to see them gone. Everyone wants to point at the US and it's chem weapons as rationale for them to have theirs, but what's the
difference? We don't want to use
them on anyone, as other nations trying feverishly to develop them do--they're just relics that we want rid
As for the development of non-lethal chem weapons, I actually think that's a good thing. One needs look no further than the incident in Moscow to
see proof that such weapons unquestionably saved lives, and have the potential do do so again in the future. Again, look no further than this
incident for proof that the US are not the only ones smart enough to realize the need for this, regardless of the same
signed agreeing not to pursue such. The end result of the action in Moscow? Did the world freak out because they violated this treaty? Did the US
political machine throw this in Russia's face? Neither of these things happened. In fact, nearly all parties applauded the use of nonlethal chems
in this situation because innocent people were saved by it's usage, as well as decidedly non-innocents near-instantaneously immobilized and
subsequently killed. It's a good thing--we need more weapons like this, as our government no doubt is aware of.
Illicit? Understandably so. Shameful? Hardly. UN inspectors?