DBWI: No psychoactive chemcial weapons

Like it says on the tin. Suppose that particular type of weapon had never been developed. Would there be different outcomes for the wars in which they were used IOTL? At the very least I'd imagine a higher body count, since more soldiers and civilians would be getting killed, instead of just rendered emotionally or epistemologically incapacitated for a limited period of time.

I read an interview with Dr. Leary, a psychologist who played a key role in developing the USA's arsenal. He said that before he went to work at DuPont, he had had a midlife crisis in which he seriously considered becoming a beatnik and taking LSD for the rest of his life.
 
Like it says on the tin. Suppose that particular type of weapon had never been developed. Would there be different outcomes for the wars in which they were used IOTL? At the very least I'd imagine a higher body count, since more soldiers and civilians would be getting killed, instead of just rendered emotionally or epistemologically incapacitated for a limited period of time.

I read an interview with Dr. Leary, a psychologist who played a key role in developing the USA's arsenal. He said that before he went to work at DuPont, he had had a midlife crisis in which he seriously considered becoming a beatnik and taking LSD for the rest of his life.

Well, we would not have had the boom in hemp products since studying marijuana led to the side effect of greater focus on that.

Mexico doesn’t like to admit it, but they benefitted a lot from this research given the peyote, shrooms and marijuana supplies are numerous there.

We also wouldn’t have that peace March where hippies and soldiers walked in arms and the former were considered “pacifist patriots”.
 

ASUKIRIK

Banned
at the flip aide possession of psychoactive drugs are now treated thebsame with guns. aka need background checks, stored in safe storage, and they are banned from some places as they could incapacitate someone relatively quickly.

maybe if not weaponized, psychoactive drugs would be more widespread?
 
at the flip aide possession of psychoactive drugs are now treated thebsame with guns. aka need background checks, stored in safe storage, and they are banned from some places as they could incapacitate someone relatively quickly.

maybe if not weaponized, psychoactive drugs would be more widespread?

Yeah though it depends where. They're loosening restrictions since they're remembering that alcohol could be weaponized too.
 

ASUKIRIK

Banned
Yeah though it depends where. They're loosening restrictions since they're remembering that alcohol could be weaponized too.
alcohol need to be either directly injected to bloodstream or dispersed in very large dose to be effective...

and Pure Alcohol has better destructiveness as Air Fuel bomb
 
Soldiers not being subjected to psychoactive substances and reporting similar hallucinations would butterfly away the entire shamanic revival across the western world. This could lead to a continued focus on materialist rationality, but I believe it more likely that the need for some sort of spirituality would manifest either as a resurgence of traditional Christianity as a factor in politics, or increased interest in other religions such as Islam or Buddhism.
 
Soldiers not being subjected to psychoactive substances and reporting similar hallucinations would butterfly away the entire shamanic revival across the western world.

Well, that's the happy side of the pill. On the other side, Russia's use of weaponized PCP in Afghanistan gave rise to to some pretty horrible psychoactive blowback among the population. And then the Russians wondered why they had all these bizarre death-cults sprouting up on their border.
 
Yeah though it depends where. They're loosening restrictions since they're remembering that alcohol could be weaponized too.

The Alcohol arguement? Yah, I suppose that's the one they're using in Europe. I hear its still pretty controversial over there though, especially after your revitalized version of the Religious Right (Being more "Old Fashioned" for the Christians and fundimentalist for your Muslim migrant population) has started to embrace old Prohibition/limited drinking over the past few decades. Here in the States, its really the Farm and Rural lobbies that are making the big push alongside loosening our own regulations on Nitrate-based fertilizers. The market for soybeans has already become so over-saturated since the limits were placed on fertilizer purchases when we were brutually reminded THOSE could be terror-weaponized, and now that the shocks worn off there's hope on getting a steady supply of (far more profitable) high-fructose corn syrup again.

I doubt that will get passed though. The health benefits in America have just been far too noticable.
 
The Alcohol arguement? Yah, I suppose that's the one they're using in Europe. I hear its still pretty controversial over there though, especially after your revitalized version of the Religious Right (Being more "Old Fashioned" for the Christians and fundimentalist for your Muslim migrant population) has started to embrace old Prohibition/limited drinking over the past few decades. Here in the States, its really the Farm and Rural lobbies that are making the big push alongside loosening our own regulations on Nitrate-based fertilizers. The market for soybeans has already become so over-saturated since the limits were placed on fertilizer purchases when we were brutually reminded THOSE could be terror-weaponized, and now that the shocks worn off there's hope on getting a steady supply of (far more profitable) high-fructose corn syrup again.

I doubt that will get passed though. The health benefits in America have just been far too noticable.

Th corn syrup one I doubt given how Mexico is also limiting their corn production on that.

Granted, the Religious Right movement toward there has been weakened with alcohol due to the ties of mobsters and such.

No one wants Prohibition back since it would not accomplish anything
 
Top