3 ms·

Ignoring the James Bond qualifier makes this scenario completely plausable. It is not clear that the US would not weaponize bioagents as one of the leading biow

Ignoring the James Bond qualifier makes this scenario completely plausable. It is not clear that the US would not weaponize bioagents as one of the leading bioweapon manufacturers in human history.

stale2002 5y ago
> Ignoring the James Bond qualifier makes this scenario completely plausable No its not. It is not plausible at all. Just think about this for a second. People in eastern europe are genetically similar to russians. Why would they make a super weapon, to kill off people with slavic DNA, when such a super weapon would target much of its own population as well? The conspiracy doesn't make any sense even if you assume supervillian levels of evilness.
- ashwagary 5y ago
  >Why would they make a super weapon, to kill off people with slavic DNA You seem to have followed one unecessary qualifier with another one immediately. I suspect this is somewhat intentional because it's absolutely not required where the vast majority of bioweapons are concerned.
  - stale2002 5y ago
    > You seem to have followed one unecessary qualifier Its not an unnecessary qualify because the "targeting russian DNA" is a common part of many of the conspiracies and what I was referring to. A common conspiracy going around is that there were bio-weapons meant to target Russian DNA, which doesn't make any sense. Edit: for Example, here is one english speaking, moderately sized influencer, repeating this conspiracy about the targeting of Russian DNA. https://clips.twitch.tv/SpicyClearFriesItsBoshyTime-9Ap6YN1HxD0Goxdt https://clips.twitch.tv/SpicyClearFriesItsBoshyTime-9Ap6YN1H... I don't keep track of every place that is spreading each specific conspiracy theory. But the point of this example, is to just give a one-off example describing this conspiracy in general.
    - ashwagary 5y ago
      You included a conspiracy theory that no one in this thread brought up for what purpose? I can only see it as an attempt to deflect, undermine, distract from the core points of this exchange, which makes it a bad faith approach on your part, in my opinion.
      - stale2002 5y ago
        The thread is about conspiracies being peddled by the russian government, state media, and other bad actors. And yes there absolutely are conspiracies, related to this idea of bio-superweapons that are being peddled by bad actors. Instead, it is other people attempting to deflect from the very real issue of conspiracies being peddled by these bad actors. So yes, the original point about all of this, is about fake propaganda being spread. And yes that is an issue, as demonstrated by the example that I gave. You and others just have to admit that yes fake propaganda, being spread by bad actors, is a real issue, which is the core point. The idea that these bad actors are speading a bunch of mis-info, and half truths, to justify an invasion should be pretty obvious, IMO.

Ignoring the James Bond qualifier makes this scenario completely plausable. It is not clear that the US would not weaponize bioagents as one of the leading bioweapon manufacturers in human history.

stale2002 5y ago

> Ignoring the James Bond qualifier makes this scenario completely plausable No its not. It is not plausible at all. Just think about this for a second. People in eastern europe are genetically similar to russians. Why would they make a super weapon, to kill off people with slavic DNA, when such a super weapon would target much of its own population as well? The conspiracy doesn't make any sense even if you assume supervillian levels of evilness.

ashwagary 5y ago
>Why would they make a super weapon, to kill off people with slavic DNA You seem to have followed one unecessary qualifier with another one immediately. I suspect this is somewhat intentional because it's absolutely not required where the vast majority of bioweapons are concerned.
- stale2002 5y ago
  > You seem to have followed one unecessary qualifier Its not an unnecessary qualify because the "targeting russian DNA" is a common part of many of the conspiracies and what I was referring to. A common conspiracy going around is that there were bio-weapons meant to target Russian DNA, which doesn't make any sense. Edit: for Example, here is one english speaking, moderately sized influencer, repeating this conspiracy about the targeting of Russian DNA. https://clips.twitch.tv/SpicyClearFriesItsBoshyTime-9Ap6YN1HxD0Goxdt https://clips.twitch.tv/SpicyClearFriesItsBoshyTime-9Ap6YN1H... I don't keep track of every place that is spreading each specific conspiracy theory. But the point of this example, is to just give a one-off example describing this conspiracy in general.
  - ashwagary 5y ago
    You included a conspiracy theory that no one in this thread brought up for what purpose? I can only see it as an attempt to deflect, undermine, distract from the core points of this exchange, which makes it a bad faith approach on your part, in my opinion.
    - stale2002 5y ago
      The thread is about conspiracies being peddled by the russian government, state media, and other bad actors. And yes there absolutely are conspiracies, related to this idea of bio-superweapons that are being peddled by bad actors. Instead, it is other people attempting to deflect from the very real issue of conspiracies being peddled by these bad actors. So yes, the original point about all of this, is about fake propaganda being spread. And yes that is an issue, as demonstrated by the example that I gave. You and others just have to admit that yes fake propaganda, being spread by bad actors, is a real issue, which is the core point. The idea that these bad actors are speading a bunch of mis-info, and half truths, to justify an invasion should be pretty obvious, IMO.