Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Sorry to burst your bubble, but WW2 was not actually an "ABSOLUTE WAR". Very, very intense? Of course. But not absolute.

For example during WW2 all of the major participants had chemical warfare weapons. Several, including Germany, had significant stockpiles. (Germany actually had the most effective stockpiles, though they seem to have not believed this at the time.)

The only significant use of chemical warfare was by the Japanese against other Asian countries that did not have chemical weapons. Nobody else dared use those weapons on each other for fear of the response.

And so it has remained. A lot of countries have chemical weapons. There have been a lot of wars between countries armed with them. There have been a number of threats that they would be used (for instance Iraq threatened to use them on Israel during the first Gulf war). And yet the only time they get used is against opponents who are not similarly armed. (For instance Iraq fought a bloody war against Iran without using chemical weapons - then used them on parts of its own population who they thought had been disloyal in the war.)

This fact gives me hope that we will continue to not use nuclear weapons as well.



the main point i got was that retaliatory power was the disincentive to use weapons of mass destruction. Provided that relatiatory power exists, peace will ensure.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: