Biological Warfare

[Sniper no Sniping]

What are your opinions and knowledge on this. Should we fight with diseases? Or not, as it could just backfire on us. Also what are some man made diseases you know. As far as i know:

Lyme Disease
Anthrax
AIDS (Controversal)

Discuss!

[Pillz]

What are your opinions and knowledge on this. Should we fight with diseases? Or not, as it could just backfire on us. Also what are some man made diseases you know. As far as i know:

Lyme Disease
Anthrax
AIDS (Controveral)

Discuss!

No, fighting at all is a terrible idea, let alone with gasses we can't directly control. A bullet is more precise than gas and more effective, unless you've got them in an enclosed space.

[Dante]

Administrator Comment

POST REMOVED

Or the snipe them. Or copy deadlands and make a city buster. (There went all human life) Or ambush them on their way out.

[Jorgen]

Please stop talking about gasses, makes it sound like you don't know the difference between chemical weapons and biological ones.

Well I don't really know, it really depends on the disease and what the disease does and if it is containable. You could potentially make a disease that puts everyone into a coma, without a massive amount of other effects, that way a war could be stopped incredibly quickly and also with a minimum amount of deaths.
Obviously that is an incredibly cheap method of winning though, but I dunno think of the possibilities.

[Old Crow]

Please stop talking about gasses, makes it sound like you don't know the difference between chemical weapons and biological ones.

Well I don't really know, it really depends on the disease and what the disease does and if it is containable. You could potentially make a disease that puts everyone into a coma, without a massive amount of other effects, that way a war could be stopped incredibly quickly and also with a minimum amount of deaths.
Obviously that is an incredibly cheap method of winning though, but I dunno think of the possibilities.

Problem, it'd hard to knock out people temporary, usually when it is forced it can cause long term damage and if you put people into a coma there is a chance they never wake up from it.

Bio weapons have only one reason to exist, that is to kill as many people as possible and to terrorize the population. There is no benefit, no good side, its all bad. That is why they are restricted and why most people don't want to use them. If they ever became fair game for warfare then we could easily destroy our population. That is why any use has to be contained and the user needs to be severely punished.

[Blackllama]

If the shit spreads it could end up all over the country, and possibly move to others.  Unless it can be completely controlled, it seems like a bad idea, at least nukes can't spread all over the world.

[Boxman]

AIDS (Controveral)

I'm just going to touch on this a tiny bit with this link, which will further explain as to why people think it's controversial to begin with.

http://www.houseofpaine.org/bonziebean/blog/?p=77

[Cortez (Mr. T. FOO!)]

Smallpox, durr.

[Jorgen]

Please stop talking about gasses, makes it sound like you don't know the difference between chemical weapons and biological ones.

Well I don't really know, it really depends on the disease and what the disease does and if it is containable. You could potentially make a disease that puts everyone into a coma, without a massive amount of other effects, that way a war could be stopped incredibly quickly and also with a minimum amount of deaths.
Obviously that is an incredibly cheap method of winning though, but I dunno think of the possibilities.

Problem, it'd hard to knock out people temporary, usually when it is forced it can cause long term damage and if you put people into a coma there is a chance they never wake up from it.

Bio weapons have only one reason to exist, that is to kill as many people as possible and to terrorize the population. There is no benefit, no good side, its all bad. That is why they are restricted and why most people don't want to use them. If they ever became fair game for warfare then we could easily destroy our population. That is why any use has to be contained and the user needs to be severely punished.

I agree, forcing a coma is often a side effect of way more ominous effects from a biological bomb. However it is very possible to affect a human beings chemical balance, maybe affecting their melatonin production making it physically impossible for them to stay awake, and even less likely that they would be able to aim properly or to attack (then have a cure already made to wake them up).
Dear Old Crow remember the first part of critical thinking, nothing is black and white, everything has it's advantages and disadvantages. With the technology we have now the only thing that comes out of a bio bomb is death and evil, but in the future it is not unlikely that it could be an integral part of non-violent warfare.   
Also I know there are flaws with my design, but it is definitely possible to see a positive side of it.
When it comes to ABC-weapons the Atomic ones are quite clearly the worst, seeing as they don't only hurt human beings, they also ruin every aspect of the world. However it seems every1 is capable of seeing the advantages in having them, so why are you unable to see advantages in the Bio part?

[Old Crow]

Please stop talking about gasses, makes it sound like you don't know the difference between chemical weapons and biological ones.

Well I don't really know, it really depends on the disease and what the disease does and if it is containable. You could potentially make a disease that puts everyone into a coma, without a massive amount of other effects, that way a war could be stopped incredibly quickly and also with a minimum amount of deaths.
Obviously that is an incredibly cheap method of winning though, but I dunno think of the possibilities.

Problem, it'd hard to knock out people temporary, usually when it is forced it can cause long term damage and if you put people into a coma there is a chance they never wake up from it.

Bio weapons have only one reason to exist, that is to kill as many people as possible and to terrorize the population. There is no benefit, no good side, its all bad. That is why they are restricted and why most people don't want to use them. If they ever became fair game for warfare then we could easily destroy our population. That is why any use has to be contained and the user needs to be severely punished.

I agree, forcing a coma is often a side effect of way more ominous effects from a biological bomb. However it is very possible to affect a human beings chemical balance, maybe affecting their melatonin production making it physically impossible for them to stay awake, and even less likely that they would be able to aim properly or to attack (then have a cure already made to wake them up).
Dear Old Crow remember the first part of critical thinking, nothing is black and white, everything has it's advantages and disadvantages. With the technology we have now the only thing that comes out of a bio bomb is death and evil, but in the future it is not unlikely that it could be an integral part of non-violent warfare.   
Also I know there are flaws with my design, but it is definitely possible to see a positive side of it.
When it comes to ABC-weapons the Atomic ones are quite clearly the worst, seeing as they don't only hurt human beings, they also ruin every aspect of the world. However it seems every1 is capable of seeing the advantages in having them, so why are you unable to see advantages in the Bio part?

The reason why I see no advantages is because somebody has yet to make something non lethal that works. It has either been used as a terror weapon or something to deny the enemy territory, nothing else. Yes in the future it may be possible that there is something that somebody comes up with but for now nothing has came about. There are many more non lethal weapons out there that are either fully tested or are coming online such as the microwave machine, or the sound amplifier or that green laser that causes temporary blindness and nausea, all proven to overload the sense but all the effects are temporary, none are permanent unless you feel like running towards the sound amp and blowing your ear drums out.

[Pillz]

Deploy 50+ remote control drones; have them all shoot tranquillizers at the enemy, have human team come in and clean up.

[Jorgen]

Deploy 50+ remote control drones; have them all shoot tranquillizers at the enemy, have human team come in and clean up.

Well actually the bio bomb I was thinking off is more or less aimed as a way to stop the united states or countries like USA (not saying I hate USA or that I would wish it upon them).
Seeing as 90% of the united states are patriotic and owns a gun, which is a reason America has avoided many wars on their homefront actually. A bio bomb like this could put all of the people out of ability to rebel, then it could be dealt with.

[Old Crow]

Deploy 50+ remote control drones; have them all shoot tranquillizers at the enemy, have human team come in and clean up.

Well actually the bio bomb I was thinking off is more or less aimed as a way to stop the united states or countries like USA (not saying I hate USA or that I would wish it upon them).
Seeing as 90% of the united states are patriotic and owns a gun, which is a reason America has avoided many wars on their homefront actually. A bio bomb like this could put all of the people out of ability to rebel, then it could be dealt with.

As in if the people of the United States were to rebel? There is a chance that it could happen but there are 300 million of us scattered around the entire nation, so it would be hard to get us all

[Pillz]

Even with nuclear bombs and napalm you could only neutralize so many of us, sure targeting every major city is somewhwere to start but only another super power country could manage even that. We have anti nuke and the such tactics also, so gettng more than one "bombs" out at a tome would be hard.. Maybe not but either way nobodies taking america, unless russia and china teamed up and managed to ge all those people over here.. lol but as far as I'm concerned we should never develop such things. The best we can do is make the army and marines carry tranq rifles and guns, replace RPGs with Jorgens bbiobomb launchers, etc. Make war a non lethal thing, so we can stop slaughtering millions over the squabbles of our leaders..

[Cortez (Mr. T. FOO!)]

Actually a nuclear winter would effectively kill everyone and everything if not by the explosion or radiation from a lack of food.