Comment

Ted Nugent: If You're on Welfare You Shouldn't Be Allowed to Vote

86
Obdicut (Now with 2% less brain)12/04/2012 2:48:00 pm PST

re: #80 Political Atheist

Obdicut,

Where did you get a definition of WMD’s that excludes chemical weapons? I looked around and found a bunch of definitions that include them. Wiki Brittanica, FBI…

From common sense.

WMD means a weapon of mass destruction.

Chemical weapons are markedly less efficient at killing people that conventional weapons. If you spend the same money and effort on, say, shelling the shit out of somewhere, you’ll kill more people than if you’d used chemical weapons.

Nukes, on the other hand, are far more efficient than conventional weapons. Some biological weapons would be, too, theoretically.

Nukes are the only actual WMDs. The other weapons are terror weapons. The distinction is an important one, and I really hate that the Bush administration eroded that and that the Obama administration has done nothing to correct it.

Shorter version: If chemical weapons are WMDs, then so is a 155 mm Howitzer, or a B-17 flying fortress dropping bombs in WWII.