/k/ - Weapons

>>543681

>What is the most dangerous thing mankind has created?

The weaponised disease is the most dangerous thing to exist.

Reliance on technology.

>>543681

female suffrage

this is some facebook tier thread

>>543755

All newfags need to go back to 4chan.

The most dangerous thing discovered or invented.

The most dangerous discovery would probably be fire. Humans have burned so many billions of square kilometers of woodlands, burned animals, enemies and anything else they came across. Problem with fire is, that it is not only deadly, but also spreads on itself. Once it gets out of control a fire can change the ecosystem of an entire region for the next fifty years to come.

Invention is much harder to properly assess, however if we were to take "dangerous" as "killing potential" I would have to say the atomic bomb in combination with ICBMs and the industrial capability to mass produce both.

We could probably kill everything on earth with those if we truly wanted to.

>>543791

Nukes have a pretty limited killing potential actually, the vast vast majority of any nations arsenal is destined for military targets, infact even if you tried to cause maximum havoc you would waste many bombs on single cities or spread them out to create radiation hazards. The problem with this is that there are inventions which not only can be produced more easily than Nuclear weaponry, but are more efficient at depopulating living centers, produce larger theoretical hazard zones, and are longer lasting.

It would be far cheaper and faster to kill the planet with hazardous chemicals than nukes.

>>543802

>if you tried to cause maximum havoc

Wouldn't maximum havoc, chaos, and devastation be achieved much more economically and easily with biological weapons? You even get to reduce the damage to civilian infrastructure, thus limiting rebuilding costs when you occupy the territory in question.

>>543803

true, i agree with you. My point however was more aimed at the nature of total global erradication, and the maximum total destructiveness of a given weapon or combinations there of. you would need a complex concoction of pathogens to completely eradicate all human life in a given nation, yet more for the world and more still for all life. VX nerve agent however is a single compound which could be spread over the entire world, and would cause most vertebrate life to be non-viable for several hundred years due to the decomposition rate of the liquid (it's also extraordinarily hard to manually clean up).

What organic weapons would you use to destroy a specific nation though? i can't think of anything biological on its own that i would use, unless you went the whole way to artificially create a strain of something, like a genetic weapon.

>>543810

Ideology is the deadlest weapon today. Before that it was nationalisim, and then religion.

>>543681

>all the ones falling on their ass into a sitting position

>none of them taking that as a cue to tactically use that sitting position and a shooting position

>>543681

>That half hearted and annoyed "sorry" for pointing a loaded gun at someone.

What a piece of work.

>>543803

Infesting the target's food supply and production with specialized virii is a pretty good way of achieving it. You'd have to design at least two though, one for plants and other for animals.

>>543844

>virii

Reminder that Latin virus had no plural, that it would be viri if it did have one, and it's better not to use it anyway since the word viri already means "men" or man's". Use "viruses".

Half the nonstandard pluralizations like that aren't correct. Some like "octopus" aren't even Latin in origin; "octopodes" would be closer. Most of the time English standard is the way to go. Cactuses, viruses, octopuses. The only times I use the Latinic forms anymore is either out sheer force of habit from going so long using them in ignorance, or cases where it would actually cause confusion to use the English (e.g. supernova, pl. supernovae, where the abbreviation SN is always pluralized as SNe and almost never SNs.)

>>543681

Sam Hyde.

Radiactive isotope dust.

>>543827

All the people trying to be cute with the answer are annoying.

>technology dependence is da wepon!

>islam is de wepen!

>women r badd.mkay go mgtow

>youtubers lul im so smrt

hurrrr LOVE is the most dangerous weapon

>>543890

>second pic

Drew your hand too early, jude.

>>543925

Even in Greek it sounds kinda awkward even though the singular sounds pretty natural. It's like giving the octopus-species some special significance (see: antipodes). The gender-neutral octopoda (chtapodia in modern) like the very equivalent "arthropod" sounds a bit more appropriate.

>>543936

CUCK CUCK CUCK oops for some reason I am compelled to say that whenever someone suggests that it's "moral" and "right" to settle for used up rotting roasties.

but really, nothing has done more damage to society than feminist pro marriage shaming language.

>>543948

>nothing has done more damage to society than feminist pro marriage shaming language

Again, you're making your philosemitic motives too obvious. Next you'll say something along the lines of "feminists are worse than jews".

>>543681

This is why I don't fear combat with soy commies.