You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] AmaleksHairyAss ago 

If the story is right the US isn't refusing to get rid of its arsenal, it's just plagued by high costs. And I strongly suspect neither country is actually getting rid of chemical weapons and programs that can make them.

0
1

[–] fl3x [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

There are international bodies that oversee these things. The information they referenced is public domain. If you search my comment history I provided it for someone else already.

Of course that doesn't mean they don't have hidden labs in 18-wheelers like Sadaam.

"High costs" my ass. When have "high costs" ever stopped the US from doing ANYTHING?

They don't want to do it and aren't going to do it until they feel like it. It's a stupid attempt at posturing by a dying and corrupt empire puppet-nation.

Once you know how to build a fire, it's kind of obvious to say that just because everyone agrees to put out their fires doesn't mean they can't make fires again. I'm not sure what your point there is. You both sides to burn books, kill scientists, and destroy all manufacturing capabilities? Chemical weapons are trivial to make. The point is to de-escalate. People can always make knives, they can always build bows, axes, hammers, and weapons of war. When you've built up a stock-pile in the heat of the moment and then after some time agree to destroy them it's a show of good will that you're truly sincere about not using them.