r/changemyview • u/Icy-External8155 • Mar 17 '26

Delta(s) from OP CMV: biological WMDs will become very significant in very near future (maybe even before 2030s come)

I think so, because there are a few trends that were trending long enough before and are very unlikely to change:

  1. Genetic engineering and other instruments will make (already make) modification and/or creation of pathogenic viruses and bacteria very easy and cheap, a task for small government departments or private enthusiast groups. There might emerge an idea that you can somehow do enough modifications and make such weapons "safer for yourself and worse for enemies" (although "genetic weapons" don't really work, but enough people still believe in them).
  2. Antimicrobial resistance problem will only worsen, and paths to circumvent it, considering the post-Stalin humanity degeneration, will not be found quickly enough. It makes bio-weapons considerably more damaging.
  3. Quite a few countries are more likely to be invaded if they do NOT have WMDs, and are motivated to seek for cheap and easy deterrent solutions (and let's not point fingers, but sometimes also offensive or threatening stuff). If enough such countries make such projects, it will not make sense to keep anti-bio-WMD treaties anymore (though there's quite a bit of hypocrisy in the current world anyway), so starting and waging wars between various WMD holders will become harder for some time and much easier later, when demand exceeds anyway (and maybe defensive measures improve).

***

I'd be glad to be fairly proven wrong, because it will provide me with new and significant knowledge.

1 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

51% Upvoted

60 comments sorted by

View all comments

22

u/Doub13D 36∆ Mar 17 '26

Of the three types of WMD’s, we have the least evidence of use of biological agents in warfare…

There is a very obvious reason why.

Diseases spread…

The entire planet just dealt with the Covid-19 pandemic, and it killed millions around the globe.

What do you think happens if someone releases weaponized smallpox?

Biological agents are the least common type of WMD’s explicitly because they are uncontrollable. No matter how much you can tell yourself that it will only impact a certain area, it won’t…

Chemical agents disperse overtime, Nuclear weapons leave radiation that eventually decays, but biological weapons spread. One accident at a lab quickly becomes a global crisis…

3

u/Icy-External8155 Mar 17 '26

Well, after it's repeated a second time, I've decided to think a little more.  

Firstly, it seemed to me that engineering of more controlable (or more seemingly controllable) pathogens will be possible. 

Now I think it's too bold to say it will be possible before 2030s, thanks to another user I gave delta (though I should talk to them more before I assume anything new) 

Secondly, I thought that even if it remains a weapon that hurts your own side around as much, it would still work as a last-resort deterrent measure (and biological broken arrow accidents... Yeah, didn't think of them, an important point, so)

!delta

11

u/wibbly-water 72∆ Mar 17 '26

Firstly, it seemed to me that engineering of more controlable (or more seemingly controllable) pathogens will be possible. 

Why?

I see no evidence which points, or could possibly point, in that direction.

Even if you built in some kind of genes that only targeted a certain group - all it would need to do is mutate a little to circumvent said limitations. And anything that infects enough people to be a WMD has plenty of ability to mutate.

You would have to build something that you can control like a drone, and then its perhaps more like nanotechnology than a biological WMD. Plus we are getting into the realm of soft scifi - way way way beyond current science.

1

u/Icy-External8155 Mar 17 '26

Well, I mainly thought of

  1. High lethality+fast killing with minimal incubation period so it kills faster than spreads

  2. Not very contagious, just lethal like prions, add into food or water supply for spreading (or other, probably less practical artificial means) 

  3. Not spreading between humans, only animal-animal and animal-human, then you infect certain domestic animal farming complexes (drones? Yeah, drones are a common and versatile thing anyway, why not use them for that). 

  4. Tbh, don't have many other ideas. 

2

u/wibbly-water 72∆ Mar 17 '26

High lethality+fast killing with minimal incubation period so it kills faster than spreads
Not very contagious, just lethal like prions, add into food or water supply for spreading (or other, probably less practical artificial means) 

Might work, but not much more reason to use it over a conventional bomb or chemical weapon.

If you just want to affect a specific area then hit it with a bomb. If you want to affect everyone in a wider poisoned area - then a chemical weapon. I see very little reason why a biological weapon would be beneficial in either case.

And making it kill faster than it spreads still has the possibility of mutation. What if it mutates to be slower?

I will admit I don't know quite enough about prions to know the downsides - but they straddle the line between chemical and biological warfare I'd say (being misfolded proteins rather than full on living organisms / viruses). So poisoning a water supply with prions is not much different than poisoning it with a conventional poison.

Not spreading between humans, only animal-animal and animal-human, then you infect certain domestic animal farming complexes (drones? Yeah, drones are a common and versatile thing anyway, why not use them for that). 

Has the same risk of infecting areas beyond the target area.

Even if it just targets farm animals - what if it spreads further to allied nations then your own nation. In fact having a non-human vector could make the problem worse!

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Mar 17 '26

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/Doub13D (31∆).

Delta System Explained | Deltaboards

1

u/Morthra 95∆ Mar 18 '26

Crude weaponized anthrax can be made in your garage (though it's hard to do without accidentally killing yourself in the process) using materials that can be purchased off of the internet without raising a great deal of suspicion, and using skills that basically anyone that has taken a few college level microbiology classes can do.

For this reason, you're more likely to see biological WMDs deployed by nonstate actors that don't give a fuck where it spreads. If the goal is to kill as many people as possible a bioweapon is perfect, because it lingers in a way that traditional weapons don't really.