We destroyed our chemical arsenal because it had very little strategic value. The fact that we still retain cluster bombs, land mines, and nuclear war heads should suggest to you that the motives could not have been primarily humanitarian.
And if the damage from using every WP weapon in our arsenal would be less than even a ‘small, crappy chemical attack’, then that’s likely just because we prefer other incendiaries for large-scale operations. We killed hundreds of thousands of people using firebombs. Calling to mind the Aum Shinrikyo incident as an example of a ‘small, crappy chemical attack’ I would say that you’re probably just wrong, here, as well.
I thought it was for religious freedom (the freedom from British rule came later didn’t it?).
Not that that’s not horribly ironic too, but still.
Ha!
Yes, I suppose we’ve definitely got a production and resource distribution issue as well, don’t we?
We should use the bombs on the OTHER bombs! There we go!
Efficiency + 1!
1 Like
Emigration from England was for religious purposes for many.
I specifically mentioned the later fight “to remove themselves from a dictatorial ruler”.
Sorry, wasn’t trying to be pedantic, just thought it was doubly funny 
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
