Because then, you are involving the lives of innocent, and humans that have nothing to do with your belligerent cause. I request that a protocol is created along this bill as derogation for belligerent use of Chemical Weapons against military targets only. The effectiveness of chemical weapons against military targets is not subjective, but objective. Impact and explosive weapons, such as an Air Strike or Artillery Barrage, are highly destructive and are practically ineffective compared to Chemical Weapons, that destroy less, means less massive destruction, but have a high effectiveness, in range and proportion. Lets imagine you have a battalion of enemy infantry to attack your country and you are at war with that enemy. A conventional weapons would basically estimate the area of damage and attack it, in order to stop the enemy from attacking your country, but more than few might not be stopped, and your attack can even miss, causing unnecessary destruction, while Chemical Weapons, always allied to smart weapons, is more effective in stopping the enemy, and will cause minor destruction, and no damage to infra-structures. From this I defend that Chemical weapons are much more effective, also very dangerous if in the wrong hands, that's why we need to define the target, as military targets only.
Without this protocol, the effectiveness of an army is in question, and probably there will be more resources wasted for the same end, when, if Chemical Weapons are allowed, those will do the job fine.
Don't you agree?
Poll