the human penis.
lots of aids.
lots of aids.
whatever they used before swords was used a lot longer.General-Idea wrote:
Swords were used for thousands of years. And they killed millions.
Re-read what I posted.S.Lythberg wrote:
disease can be a weapon, ancient armies would throw corpses down wells to infect the enemy people, rather than attempt to fight them head on. The technique (or similar) was used at least until the 1700's and probably later.
Perhaps intentionally, but that method is what initially brought the plague to Europe, and unleashed smallpox on Native Americans, and we know how that ended.FEOS wrote:
Re-read what I posted.S.Lythberg wrote:
disease can be a weapon, ancient armies would throw corpses down wells to infect the enemy people, rather than attempt to fight them head on. The technique (or similar) was used at least until the 1700's and probably later.
I said naturally occurring disease. Besides, I addressed the corpse/carcass throwing in an earlier post. The numbers killed by that are minuscule in comparison to other weapons.
So...FEOS wrote:
If disease accidentally kills millions (say, the Black Death in the Middle Ages) then it is by definition not a weapon--man did not use it against another man. For a bug to be considered a weapon, it must be employed by man with the specific intent of harming his fellow man. For example, the smallpox-laced blankets given to the Native Americans. In that case, smallpox was indeed used as a weapon. Smallpox infestations wiping out entire communities in the Middle Ages...not a weapon.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
A prime example of "too little statistical information" is found in a book titled "Armies of Pestilence: The Impact of Disease on History" by R. S. Bray. I also recommend it to anyone who thinks that disease is not a weapon, even if mostly accidental.B.Schuss wrote:
There is simply too little statistical information available to tell, and the "human factor" isn't even taken into consideration...
Just saying disease--specifically, naturally-occurring disease--is a weapon shows a clear misunderstanding of what a weapon is (and what it is not).
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/weapon
Not all-encompassing, but a good framework from which to proceed when you're talking about whether or not something is a weapon.
Bottomline: Just because something caused massive death (ie, swine flu in the early 1900's) does not mean that it is a weapon. It has to be packaged in some way so that it may be used intentionally by one against another.
No, but good catch on my argument.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
So...
If a gun accidentally discharges and kills a man, it's not a weapon?
Last edited by daddyofdeath (2007-11-29 03:08:45)
djphetal wrote:
the index finger.
I thought they were designed to sell more games like bf2 or cod4.FEOS wrote:
No, but good catch on my argument.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
So...
If a gun accidentally discharges and kills a man, it's not a weapon?
What was the gun designed for? The taking of life. The same cannot be said of naturally-occurring disease.
Yes it is. Disease can be used for whatever purpose. MRSA, SARS, can all be seen as weapons.Gawwad wrote:
It's not a weapon.nighthawk843 wrote:
Disease is the greatest weapon in history. It has killed billions and will continue to do so.
The AK47 is truly a weapon of mass destruction. Forget Nukes and shit - people get killed by this rifle all over the world.DonFck wrote:
AK47. That's my guess.
Most manufactured, most sold, most used in politically unstable countries.
Or the lack of it,..toutinette wrote:
Inteligence...........................................