If you ask me, there really is no difference between chemical and nuclear weapons. Both weapons can cause huge destruction that leads to death of human beings and animals where it hit. A chemical weapon will leave the structures and buildings but what good will those do if there will be no human beings and animals to survive and live in the place. Same difference, right?
I believe we are more familiar with nuclear weapons. We heard about these things in the news because a communist country threatened another country its always been in conflict with that it would hit it. It made the other country back off. The nuclear weapons will wipe out large areas of the country and the officials know it. Who wants that? A single, gigantic explosion will bring immeasurable heat. Everything in its wake will be vaporized and destroyed, both structures and human beings alike. Meanwhile, I know that a chemical weapon is used by armies and condemned by the world for the kind of sadistic characteristics. It won't wipe out any given place where it hit unlike the nuclear weapon but it will cause so much harm and incapacity to the human beings and animals in the place where the poisonous chemical gases are released, the kind of harm and incapacity that you know will cause death, if not so much suffering that you would be wishing for death as well.
We are living in an age where the use of technology is so advanced there is nothing impossible anymore. But we regress to times past when faced with the possibility of a war. We use nuclear and chemical weapons that we know will render the world incapacitated. We use weapons of mass destruction which can wipe out parts of the world. If only we can learn to tolerate each other...
Comments