The logical end of the ‘Solution to bad speech is better speech’ has arrived in the age of state-sponsored social media propaganda bots versus AI-driven bots arguing back

  • orrk@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    9/11 only had its effect because they hit the twin towers, chemical weapons can kill entire areas

    • thenightisdark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t understand the point you’re making. If airplanes hitting a building can do the same damages chemical weapons…

      Chemical weapons can kill entire areas just like planes hitting buildings. I’m a licensed pilot.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        what killed people was the damage to the buildings not the planes themselves, if the twin towers had been a chemical plant (especially one making something like phosgene, mustard gas or chlorine gas) in the middle of NY, the death toll would have made 9/11 look like a wet fart

        • thenightisdark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The chemical plant cannot be a WMD.

          Places cannot be WMD. This is inherent in the word weapon a weapon is not a place. The w in WMD makes it not a place

          • orrk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            hey, I was arguing with the logic of planes are a WMD because 9/11, pointing out that if plans would be a WMD because the WTC towers collapsing killing a lot of people, a chemical plant would be way worse.

            but in effect a plane is not much different from the larger cruise missiles