What if bioweopons replaced nuclear weapons?

Number one problem: desease dont stay contained in a radius blast. In a few months/years, the super plague you throw on your ennemy can infect your own nation.

Bio weapons tend to be dangerous even stocked and can accidentally ''detonate'' if something puncture or damage their conteiners.
Plus, the Bioweapon fabrication need a high tech lab that constently make new ''batch'' of desease since otherwise your ''warhead'' would be dead after a few years (and even then it is still dangerous)


The only desease I can think of that could work is anthrax and even then, after antibiotic, its efficacity drop down.
 
What a great question. Bio weapons lack the visual signature of nukes, lack that visceral reaction one gets seeing the small shacks and plastic dummies getting destroyed in black and white, don't leave the charred outlines of their victims on the sides of stone buildings for all to see for years to come. They're sneakier and easier to ignore by the masses. On the other hand, they have persistent effects and area effects even greater than nukes in the long run. Seem more user friendly. Probably would have solved our global overpopulation problem by this point, and with that, a host of other problems as well. Maybe not the way you'd want to solve a problem, but, if you want to make an omelet...
 
On the other hand, they have persistent effects and area effects even greater than nukes in the long run. Seem more user friendly. Probably would have solved our global overpopulation problem by this point, and with that, a host of other problems as well. Maybe not the way you'd want to solve a problem, but, if you want to make an omelet...
Um...?
 
The first use would kill many, many more people than nuclear weapons, that's for sure. Operation Vegetarian anyone? Then the weapon would blow back in your face and kill your guys.

Seem more user friendly. Probably would have solved our global overpopulation problem by this point, and with that, a host of other problems as well. Maybe not the way you'd want to solve a problem, but, if you want to make an omelet...

Not only overpopulation, it also solves every problem on Earth by making sure civilisation gets sent back to the Dark Ages so everyone has bigger things to worry about. Why eradicate smallpox when you can use it as a weapon? There would be no First World, Second World, Third World, the child in Ethiopia and the child in America alike will be wondering when their next meal is, which is probably never since bioweapons killed all the crops and animals and their parents too. Environmentalists love it because it solves global warming and pollution, capitalists love it because gets rid of communism, communists love it because it gets rid of capitalism, Nazis love it because it gets rid of untermenschen, etc.

One thing's for sure, a world ravaged by nuclear warfare is a lot more preferable to one ravaged by biological warfare.
 

Onlooker

Banned
Its a much scarrier world for sure. Of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, the later definitively have a potential for far greater devastation than either of the two. They are uncontrollable. They spread constantly. The ways to counter it are slow, ineffective, and worst of all the weapon once unleashed can evolve, gain immunity, develop new vectors of spreading and worse. Its not as dramatic as nukes, but it'll get the job done and then some.
 
Top