Chemical weapons, bad; conventional weapons, good? What the hell kind of logic is that? The world has given the Good Housekeeping seal of approval to bullets, bombs, nuclear weapons, missiles and a plethora of devices designed to kill and maim people in the most brutal ways but it will not give the thumbs up to some other ways of destroying life? Where is the logic in this? Are they really concerned over the suffering that people will experience during their last moments of life? Are we all mad? Does anyone think that someone who has had his or her face blown off by an approved weapon experiences an acceptable amount of suffering? How insane is the human race? Doesnâ€™t anyone else see the absurdity in this?
If you are going to permit killing, then permit killing. Stop trying to look like some sort of civilized humanitarian. Itâ€™s embarrassing to watch adults talk about which weapons are OK to use while they are obliterating living beings! There is no word in the English language that can accurately describe the levels of absurdity and hypocrisy this issue represents.
A Dutch business man is going to face charges because he sold Saddam Hussein chemical weapons but Donald Rumsfeld, who facilitated arming Saddam to the teeth, will surely get a high paying job at a weapons manufacturer when he leaves the Bush/PNAC administration.
Did you ever hear George Carlinâ€™s comedy routine about the 7 dirty words that we are not allowed to say on TV? The same routine can be performed about weapons.
Imagine that someone is going to kill you and the only unacceptable aspect is this would be if the murder weapon used is not listed in the official catalogue! Unreal! I can not possibly express how insane this is! If it was not so horrific it would this would be laughable! Think about it!