|
|
|
|
|
|
by JumpCrisscross
339 days ago
|
|
|
> Drones are the modern equivalent of chemical and biological weapons We didn’t ban these because they’re an extinction threat. (They’re not.) We banned them because they’re only useful asymmetrically. Drones, on the other hand, are useful for everyone. So no bans. (I’m putting aside that we’re moving away from global arms control agreements.) |
|
|
Sorry what? Biological weapons are absolutely an extinction level threat. If you haven't watched the spread of the flu and covid every year and quickly realized that in the modern day a properly engineered bio-weapon would functionally end the human race, I'd like some of what you're having.
>We banned them because they’re only useful asymmetrically.
That's simply not true and shows either a lack of understanding of history, or an intentional perversion. The Taliban don't care about the Geneva convention, but is functionally incapable of utilizing chemical warfare to any significant degree despite the fact I'm sure they'd have loved to use it to wipe out the US military in Afghanistan for the last 20 years and the Russians before that. On the flip side, their deployment in WWI wasn't asymmetrical, both sides used the weapons and both sides agreed after watching the end result that nobody should be using them.
*If anything, drones are far, far more useful for asymmetric warfare. They can be easily acquired for cheap, there are no export controls, there's very little expertise required, and you can attach something as basic as a pipe bomb to them to do significant damage.