|
|
|
|
|
|
by pclmulqdq
456 days ago
|
|
|
On that point we agree, that the world's leading militaries don't need them. However, they are a tool that increases the effectiveness of other militaries. I disagree with him that the specific combined arms shock doctrine is what make those militaries the world's leading ones. Those militaries are leading because they have the best people, weapons, and training, and a combined arms shock doctrine fits with their culture. |
|
|
Sure. Which is why the world's leading militaries banned them. OP said we banned chemical weapons "to avoid escalating to more dangerous chemical agents." There is simply no evidence we were that high minded.