William Robb wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Treena" > Subject: Re: OT: Obnoxious Sonofabitch Copyeditor > > > If we're going to use the phrase "mass destruction," and I suppose we are > > since it seems to be officially sanctioned by the UN, how much does it > > have to destroy to qualify as being of "mass destruction?" Aren't ordinary > > bombs meant to destroy lots of things at once?
[...] > What is the time span needed for something to be called a weapon of mass > destruction (if we are going to put the term into the language)? > A bomb dropped on a city can kill thousands at once, and would qualify. > An army using nuclear waste material (inexplicably called depleted uranium) > in tank destroying weapons can poison an entire population over a few > generations with the fallout from vaporized uranium. I suppose you can support that hazy assumption? keith whaley > Does this count? > Or does it have to happen all at once? > Just wondering. > > William Robb
