Thread: Weapon of mass destruction

i'd have done it yesterday.

n i'd make 2 just to play it safe.

I must admit I'm a little puzzled by your posts. Based on what you said in the other thread about animals, I figured you wouldn't just because it would lead to more death. That's why I sort of avoided most loopholes by saying the war wouldn't end, etc. I'm curious whether you're reasoning is what which I expected, though. Care to expatiate a little?

I'd make it as big and deadly as possible.

Sure because it would bring peace. At least to me, I know it is harsh but it is war. Although I hate war. There is a good side too, all mass destructions weapons, since the invention of gunpowder have good aplications too. Nuclear power gave us a better understanding of the atom and a possible source of energy. Biological and chemical made us understand how infectious diseases spread and how to avoid dangerous chemicals that would cause cancer and other problems. Gps was a military thing, airplanes too, computers were invented to break secret codes. Many technologies we only have because of the war.

I am a WMD in action. Seriously ... I'd do what ever I had to do to protect those people I considered to be "MY" people. Most likely I'd go where ever the WMD was being created and destroy the site with the creative minds behind the project along with it.

I know that wasn't an option ... you're looking for "would I create a WMD of global destructive qualities or not?" to save my own. Within the narrow confines of your question ... yes. Givin a little lattitude I'd do my first answer.

Originally Posted by BoneCrusher

I am a WMD in action. Seriously ... I'd do what ever I had to do to protect those people I considered to be "MY" people. Most likely I'd go where ever the WMD was being created and destroy the site with the creative minds behind the project along with it.

I know that wasn't an option ... you're looking for "would I create a WMD of global destructive qualities or not?" to save my own. Within the narrow confines of your question ... yes. Givin a little lattitude I'd do my first answer.

I'm glad you addressed the prompt at hand. I had to make it narrow in scope or risk never having it actually answered. Interesting response, though. But what if there were multiple sites working on it? What if you couldn't find out where or who was involved (likely, since it would be so important)?

I would just get a group of women, maybe 50,000+, and let them hang out with each other for 6 months. Once their cycles matched up, I would send them to that country 1 day before their menses and let them nag the men of that country to death.

Then, once all of the men were gone from that country, I'd open a bed and breakfast there.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

I'm glad you addressed the prompt at hand. I had to make it narrow in scope or risk never having it actually answered. Interesting response, though. But what if there were multiple sites working on it? What if you couldn't find out where or who was involved (likely, since it would be so important)?

With current sat tech a misqueto couldn't fart without we catch it in high res frame by frame multi format detail. Within 10 minutes we'd know what he ate for lunch ... so no I would not worrie about multiple sites or repeat offenders and it'll cost them a lot more to build a site than it will cost me to blow it up.

Originally Posted by BoneCrusher

With current sat tech a misqueto couldn't fart without we catch it in high res frame by frame multi format detail. Within 10 minutes we'd know what he ate for lunch ... so no I would not worrie about multiple sites or repeat offenders and it'll cost them a lot more to build a site than it will cost me to blow it up.

Well against the satellite technology they invented something to block it, ceiling.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

I must admit I'm a little puzzled by your posts. Based on what you said in the other thread about animals, I figured you wouldn't just because it would lead to more death. That's why I sort of avoided most loopholes by saying the war wouldn't end, etc. I'm curious whether you're reasoning is what which I expected, though. Care to expatiate a little?

i'm also the same woman that would exterminate most of the prison population overnight if it were up to me, rip out n eat the heart of anyone that harms my kids n put a red white n blue face on this whole fucking planet if that's what needs to be done to even begin to stem the flow of ignorance that results in things like men having sex with infants because they think it will cure aids, little girls having their clitorises hacked off and vaginas sewn shut.... 50,000 dogs clubbed to death, eating seal penises to give you a hard on... i have a low tolerance for idiocy.

I most likely would but it would be hard to live with the guilt of creating something that potentially killed millions of people. The guilt would probably eat me alive.

Originally Posted by Vieope

Well against the satellite technology they invented something to block it, ceiling.

You keep on believing that young bunny... ... as long as you do not become an evil bunny your ceiling will not develop any issues.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

Here's the situation:

You're the best scientist your country has. Your country is involved in a war. The government asks you to create a weapon of mass destruction. You are the best person to do the job in your country. The enemies have already begun to create similar weapons. Would you create the weapon and defend your country, knowing that if you refused your country would be unable to beat the other in making the weapon, and quite possibly killing most of your fellow countrymen? Remember, you're the best person for the job. If you refuse, the others who would work on the project would be unable to beat the enemy in the creation. You're the only one that stands a chance in doing so. Refusing to do so will not end the war. Agreeing to do so won't necessarily end it either.

What would you do?

I'd build a better defense, like something to track and shoot down their weapon and avoid all of the chaos...

Originally Posted by Vieope

Well against the satellite technology they invented something to block it, ceiling.

And against that they invented...

Originally Posted by maniclion

I'd build a better defense, like something to track and shoot down their weapon and avoid all of the chaos...

Who said it was a missile? What about biological warfare? It could be brought in by anyone and released at any time. You'd have to have some serious nanotechnology snoopers as well. That's quickly becoming an area of growing interest.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

Who said it was a missile? What about biological warfare? It could be brought in by anyone and released at any time. You'd have to have some serious nanotechnology snoopers as well. That's quickly becoming an area of growing interest.

Who said I said it was a missile, the word like implies a simile...right now I am shooting down your argument with this metaphor....

Originally Posted by maniclion

Who said I said it was a missile, the word like implies a simile...right now I am shooting down your argument with this metaphor....

If you want to argue semantics, that wasn't a simile. A simile is a comparison using like or as, not using the word 'like' in a sentence. The way you used it was to provide an example. And it wasn't an argument, it was a response. There's quite a difference.

However, it's difficult to 'track and shoot down' biological warfare or nanotechnology. 'Track and shoot down' implies that something is flying. I don't know of too many other weapons of mass destruction that fly except for missiles. But I'm not an expert.

is the guy carrying the biological weapon bringing it here in a submarine? if not we need to track his ass n shoot him down before he gets here.

Originally Posted by BoneCrusher

You keep on believing that young bunny... ... as long as you do not become an evil bunny your ceiling will not develop any issues.

Sure they have those heat sensitive cameras so they can find some unusual heat or somekind of advanced ground penetrating radar but it cant go through all metals, pretty much like x-ray cant go through all materials.

Originally Posted by Little Wing

is the guy carrying the biological weapon bringing it here in a submarine? if not we need to track his ass n shoot him down before he gets here.

Easier said than done. What if he's coming by boat? What if he flew to South America and is somehow driving all the way here? How do you track something with 1/1000th the volume of a cubic millimeter? How do you track something like the influenza virus? It's mind-boggling that there are people actually working on solving situations like these as we type.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

Easier said than done. What if he's coming by boat? What if he flew to South America and is somehow driving all the way here? How do you track something with 1/1000th the volume of a cubic millimeter? How do you track something like the influenza virus? It's mind-boggling that there are people actually working on solving situations like these as we type.

I think nothing happened so far it is because there are a lot of good people in this world and instead of destruction, we prefer to be healthy.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

If you want to argue semantics, that wasn't a simile. A simile is a comparison using like or as, not using the word 'like' in a sentence. The way you used it was to provide an example. And it wasn't an argument, it was a response. There's quite a difference.

However, it's difficult to 'track and shoot down' biological warfare or nanotechnology. 'Track and shoot down' implies that something is flying. I don't know of too many other weapons of mass destruction that fly except for missiles. But I'm not an expert.

You can track a pig through the dense under brush here in Hawaii but I don't remember the last time I saw pigs fly....

You said that we know the enemy is working on a weapon and need to make a better one, well if we don't know what the weapon is how do we know if ours is better? Answer that one wise guy......

And these days the only smart strategy against a viral war would be antiviral, not another virus since people travel in and out of countries at war or not and it's too damn hard to track them....

Originally Posted by maniclion

You can track a pig through the dense under brush here in Hawaii but I don't remember the last time I saw pigs fly....

You said that we know the enemy is working on a weapon and need to make a better one, well if we don't know what the weapon is how do we know if ours is better? Answer that one wise guy......

Please quote where it says the weapon must be better. You're basically trying to make one before you get hit with one. I don't recall comparing the weapons and can't seem to find it anywhere.

Again, you can't be sure what they're going to do. It could be a missile, it could be a virus, maybe nanotechnology, or even something I'm not thinking of.

i think it's ten ton blocks of water

Originally Posted by Little Wing

i think it's ten ton blocks of water

So you propose a giant umbrella system over the entire United States, obviously.

Originally Posted by Squaggleboggin

Please quote where it says the weapon must be better. You're basically trying to make one before you get hit with one. I don't recall comparing the weapons and can't seem to find it anywhere.

Again, you can't be sure what they're going to do. It could be a missile, it could be a virus, maybe nanotechnology, or even something I'm not thinking of.

Maybe not better, but you said similar so there must be some intel.....I'd work in the intel field and try to find out what they were doing so then we could protect against it, same reason I chose to be in communications in the Navy I'd rather prevent tragedy instead of cause it....