Science Talk

Lorentz · Guest

I was thinking about how to wage warfare in such a way as to NOT
follow the predictions in the book of religious texts. It seems to me
that any large war would by nature have to follow the outline of
either the Book of Daniel or the Koran, and thus support the beliefs
of the religious fanatics. So very often, religious scripture comes
true as a self-fulfilling prophesy. In the end, the prophesy is just a
real estate grab. So all of a sudden, it occurred to me.
What if instead of loading lethal WMDs at each other, like nukes
or anthrax, we used chemical weapons that induced sterility? Nonlethal
contraceptives, or mild diseases that reduced fertility. No religious
texts predict this type of warfare. Yet, many of issues that drive
nations into frenzy are related to their population growth. The
nastiest nations seem to be those with a high birth rate.
Right now, countries with large-birth rates are aggressive
because their leaders feel they can loose citizens. In fact, their
leaders love war because it reduces a dangerous element from their own
ranks. But in a prolonged war, even if only one side lobes
contraceptives, the population becomes very dear.
I realize that some nations would respond with the bloodier type
of warfare. However, their bloody response will destroy the land they
want to take over. Their weapons would kill as many of them as they
would of the nation that launched the contraceptives. One the
contraceptives start to take effect, the bloody-war nations will be
afraid to continue.
Some of the results of this type of war would be bad. The baby
boomer problem would become very bad. it would mean an aging
population, an end to retirement, and forget about hiring cheap
foreign labor. However, overall lives would be spared. People would
have to car for each other, and sectarian violence in the losing
countries would end.
The risks of actually eliminating mankind would probably be less
than the full warfare since the environment is not going to be
damaged. Even a small amount of fertility is sufficient to maintain
mankind. It wouldn't take much. Look at social insects and naked mole
rats. You only need a few individuals to propagate to maintain a
species. People will value children more if there were fewer of them.
And the war would resolve the same issues that the bloody wars of
today solve.
This would violate many a religious precept, especially those
that involve turf. It would make it very difficult to practice the the
commandment "Be fruitful and multiply." It would be difficult to take
over holy areas if there aren't enough people to occupy them.There
would be no armeggeden. No Gog and Magog, no righteous walking on the
edge of a sword into Paradise. But overall, earth would be a better
place.