3 ms·
It doesn't need to be a deliberate release of a bioweapon to be considered biological warfare. The simple act of knowingly obscuring the transmissibility and ex
by 2019-nCoV 7y ago
It doesn't need to be a deliberate release of a bioweapon to be considered biological warfare. The simple act of knowingly obscuring the transmissibility and extent of the virus, leading to rampant international spread, is biological warfare.
- nikofeyn 7y agoif that's your definition of biological warfare, then you need to consider to yourself that the u.s. government is then waging biological warfare against its own people. note that i don't agree with your definition.
- 2019-nCoV 7y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_warfare https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biological_warfare > Biological warfare [...] is the use of biological toxins or infectious agents such as bacteria, viruses, insects, and fungi with the intent to kill or incapacitate humans, animals or plants as an act of war. Knowingly allowing the spread of a highly contagious, lethal virus fits the definition. The only point of contention is whether the party's actions were due to incompetence or malice.
- nikofeyn 7y agothe quoted definition is not the definition you posted. and if you are so up in arms about this, what are you going to do about the u.s. waging biological warfare on its own people?