2006-09-17 00:31:15 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
What people seem to forget is that weapons are not only used during battle, but also for training. In fact there are more war exercises then wars, so we might as well think about environmentally friendly weapons.
2006-09-17 03:18:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hmm - there seem to have been several variations on this question posted in the last few minutes.
No. Wars happen. Sad but true. They will continue to happen. Fact.
Many current weapon technologies leave very nasty after effects that remain in the environment decades after the actual conflict has finished. Depleted uranium, defoliants, chemical weapons etc etc. So developing weaponry that does not continue to damage people and the environment long after the original deployment has to be a sound sensible move. How can you disagree?
2006-09-17 07:37:30 · answer #2 · answered by Avondrow 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I dunno.. the EPA should investigate the amount of emissions that come from guns. I wonder if anyone has ever investigated the impact of gun powder exhaust on the environment. So when a predator comes into my house in the middle of the night I am going to think twice before I shoot him. The gun might be good for my safety but very bad for environment.
2006-09-17 07:36:21 · answer #3 · answered by Joe K 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, its just like saying "a viable corpse." Its an oxymoron, and I can't believe anyone was moronic enough to come up with a label like that. Dr Strangelove, maybe?
2006-09-17 07:36:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you suggesting that less lethal and less polluting weps not be developed and then used? I fail to see how that can be a bad thing.
2006-09-17 08:05:34 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You mean like my farts, Fez (although roses not minty)
Property was always more important than people - what's the use of acquiring land you can't make any use of?
2006-09-17 07:51:29 · answer #6 · answered by kittyfreek 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
you mean a nuclear weapon that leaves behind a fresh minty scent in the air!!!
2006-09-17 07:46:16 · answer #7 · answered by Fez 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They still kill people so why try to safe it when someone is bound to find a wespon bigger and more distructive
2006-09-17 07:35:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's funny though! Sums this country up.
2006-09-17 08:19:36 · answer #9 · answered by LongJohns 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, you are not alone. Poeple are part of the environment too.
2006-09-17 07:36:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋