PDA

View Full Version : most Nasty weapon of WW2 or Pre WW2



general_kalle
11-20-2007, 06:21 AM
seams like we a gonna have a most/Best/worst/least
preiod again.
if you guys remember last time

what do you think was the most nasty weapon used during ww2.

perhaps we should count the Nuclear bombs out

V2 rockets?
Napalm?
Fragmentations grenade
Flamthrower

i think probably Napalm.

general_kalle
11-20-2007, 06:21 AM
seams like we a gonna have a most/Best/worst/least
preiod again.
if you guys remember last time

what do you think was the most nasty weapon used during ww2.

perhaps we should count the Nuclear bombs out

V2 rockets?
Napalm?
Fragmentations grenade
Flamthrower

i think probably Napalm.

stathem
11-20-2007, 06:28 AM
Mustard Gas

- you did say pre-WW2 also.

waffen-79
11-20-2007, 06:33 AM
+1 Mustard Gas

and also any bomb heavier than 500kg

ploughman
11-20-2007, 06:36 AM
OUtside of strategic systems, tactical battlefield weapons. Flame throwers. Anything flamey, napalm. Flame.

JG52Uther
11-20-2007, 06:41 AM
Gas,flamethrowers,napalm.Booby traps of any description.
Mind you if you were unfortunate enough to be on the receiving end of ANY weapon you would have considered it nasty.

Rood-Zwart
11-20-2007, 06:59 AM
Fear (as a weapon an sich)

bolox00
11-20-2007, 07:04 AM
probably boobytraps- some were a true testament to man's ingenuity in killing/maiming. the .303 'landmine' being particularly nasty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

if you are interested in this stuff
http://www.swoopbooks.com/BookItem.aspx?item=9781853676130

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2007, 07:34 AM
Well, tossing the decaying bodies of your enemies into their wells was a rather nasty little item from the middle ages

jarink
11-20-2007, 07:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
Mustard Gas

- you did say pre-WW2 also. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mustard gas was not intended as a killing agent, but more of a heavy-duty disabling agent (to be used much like tear gas). It could kill if a person got a large enough dose, though blindness and lung problems were more common for severe cases.

Phosgene killed more people then Mustard.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> From Wikipedia:
Although it was never as notorious in public consciousness as mustard gas, it killed far more people, about 85% of the 100,000 deaths caused by chemical weapons during World War I. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As for conventional "nasty" weapons, the flamethrower gets my vote. Unlike shown in the movies, it often killed it's victims by asphyxiation (by burning up all the available oxygen), especially when they were in confined spaces like tunnels or bunkers.

x6BL_Brando
11-20-2007, 07:45 AM
While it might be a peculiarly British loathing, I have always considered the caltrop to be a most evil appliance of war. A four-pointed piece of wrought iron made so that it always fell point-upwards, it was designed to pierce the hooves of horses and was prevalent in WW1. Any horse maimed in this way was shot since there is no feasible way that a horse could recover from such a wound in battlefield conditions. We're a loathsome species when we get down to it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

B

War, glorious war. (http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-weapons/00-weapons-cat-index.htm) , not for the squeamish.

LEBillfish
11-20-2007, 08:01 AM
Sticking to WWII in no particular order of "gruesome".....

Anthrax & other biologicals tested and improved upon in China and German held territories......
Zyklon B, and other NUMEROUS chemical weapons though claimed to not be used.
Phosphorous/Napalm/incidiary (be it yous start burning or the house does around you, ugly).
and naturally the big daddy radiological.

Lets also not forget various successfully tested (though not used in combat) Sonic, radiological wave and partical weapons.

Yet in the end, the real super nasties...The ones that took out more then any other.....A tiny chunk of lead or iron designed to bounce around in you like a pinball machine after the shock/blast did its work.....Plain ol'bullets and bombs.

T_O_A_D
11-20-2007, 08:05 AM
Well it wasn't a weapon per say, but a deterent to being captured.

Axis POW camps and the way you were treated once in one.

From what I've read so far the Allied POW camps were fairly pleasant. But that may be the winners writing the history too.

TgD Thunderbolt56
11-20-2007, 08:09 AM
Fat Man & Little Boy

Ratsack
11-20-2007, 08:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But that may be the winners writing the history too. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not entirely 'winner's history'. Three out of 5 million Soviet PoWs can't be wrong.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Ratsack

flyingloon
11-20-2007, 08:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB462cid:
Well, tossing the decaying bodies of your enemies into their wells was a rather nasty little item from the middle ages </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

...or tossing corpses/dead livestock using trebuchets into besieged cities/fortresses to spread disease, continuing the medival theme.
more recent ones are the mines (bouncing bettys?) that were specifically intended to cause stomach wounds, or other non-fatal wounding. and i'd also go for the napalm/white phosporous in terms of the horrific results.

whiteladder
11-20-2007, 08:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">caltrop to be a most evil appliance of war </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Romans used something similar at Alesia called the goad, a wooden shaft with a barbed spike driven into it. These were buried in pits in front of the Roman encirclement, the spike capable if piercing the barefeet of the gauls and pinning them in place, now that is nasty.

BBB_Hyperion
11-20-2007, 08:22 AM
Sarin Gas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin
shortly followed by
Japan's Biological Weapon Arsenal
(aerosolized anthrax)
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/japan/bw/index.html
and Atomic Bombs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bomb

Why is the atomic bomb (ww2 category) not on top of the list ?
Because the effect is not that great compared to chemical or biological variants and the infrastructure remains intact.

flyingloon
11-20-2007, 08:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bolox00:
probably boobytraps- some were a true testament to man's ingenuity in killing/maiming. the .303 'landmine' being particularly nasty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

if you are interested in this stuff
http://www.swoopbooks.com/BookItem.aspx?item=9781853676130 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what's teh .303 landmine boloxOO? sounds ingenious...
kinda disturbing realising this, but that's something i find myself thinking when looking at some of these things - that it's a terrible thing to happen to someone, and then that it's also bloody clever HOW it has happened.

LW_lcarp
11-20-2007, 08:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:

Why is the atomic bomb (ww2 category) not on top of the list ?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by general_kalle

perhaps we should count the Nuclear bombs out

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hope that answers your question

WN_Barbarossa
11-20-2007, 08:38 AM
Sorry, but how can a weapon be termed "nasty"?
Weapons are desingned to kill/injure people and however that's not a delightful thing, this is what wars are all about.

You will never say "Oh my god, that poison gas is tearing my lungs apart, I wish could die in a more chivalric way."

Bewolf
11-20-2007, 08:44 AM
Actually, I'd rather have a bullet pierce my organs and bleed to death then suffering from gas or fire.

whiteladder
11-20-2007, 08:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Sorry, but how can a weapon be termed "nasty"? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


I agree that in priciple all weapons ultimately are design to kill, but there is a concept in international law that conventional weapons should not be "excessively injurious or that have indiscriminate effects", the treaty for which was signed in the 1980`s and which 89 countries have sign up for.

carguy_
11-20-2007, 08:53 AM
I say Big Berta.


I saw also a TV doc where veterans said there were special units that dug under enemy stations and mined everythig.When their army was about to attack, the enemy stations suddenly exploded.Tons and tons of dirt blown up in the air.Must`ve been nast also.

whiteladder
11-20-2007, 09:01 AM
Little surprised this has been mentioned yet, fire seems to be a primeval fear in humans and for me the use of White phosphorus has to be near the top of what is classed as a nasty weapon.

flyingloon
11-20-2007, 09:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
I say Big Berta.


I saw also a TV doc where veterans said there were special units that dug under enemy stations and mined everythig.When their army was about to attack, the enemy stations suddenly exploded.Tons and tons of dirt blown up in the air.Must`ve been nast also. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah first world war, messin ridge possibly? used coalminers to dig under the german positions and place huge quantiies of explosives, to be detonated at the time of the attack. think there was one or two of these where they didn't go off, not sure what happened but i believe they were marked as "do not go here". germans also used these mining teams, and a whole seperate little battle was fought between them, where they would try to locate and sabotage each others tunnels, causing deliberate roof collapses and the like, if not straight out hand to hand fighting when the tunnels met. stuff of nightmares really.

bolox00
11-20-2007, 09:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by flyingloon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bolox00:
probably boobytraps- some were a true testament to man's ingenuity in killing/maiming. the .303 'landmine' being particularly nasty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

if you are interested in this stuff
http://www.swoopbooks.com/BookItem.aspx?item=9781853676130 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what's teh .303 landmine boloxOO? sounds ingenious...
kinda disturbing realising this, but that's something i find myself thinking when looking at some of these things - that it's a terrible thing to happen to someone, and then that it's also bloody clever HOW it has happened. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the .303 landmine was a standard british bullet
fitted into a tube with a release mechanism (based on a shirt collar stud) for the firing pin.
treading on the upturned, buried, device would fire it straight up thru the foot, leg and usually the collection of 'dangly bits' between the legs of the victim.
very simple,horribly effective-particularly on morale.

flyingloon
11-20-2007, 09:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bolox00:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by flyingloon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by bolox00:
probably boobytraps- some were a true testament to man's ingenuity in killing/maiming. the .303 'landmine' being particularly nasty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

if you are interested in this stuff
http://www.swoopbooks.com/BookItem.aspx?item=9781853676130 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

what's teh .303 landmine boloxOO? sounds ingenious...
kinda disturbing realising this, but that's something i find myself thinking when looking at some of these things - that it's a terrible thing to happen to someone, and then that it's also bloody clever HOW it has happened. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the .303 landmine was a standard british bullet
fitted into a tube with a release mechanism (based on a shirt collar stud) for the firing pin.
treading on the upturned, buried, device would fire it straight up thru the foot, leg and usually the collection of 'dangly bits' between the legs of the victim.
very simple,horribly effective-particularly on morale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
thought it must be something like that. simple, easy to manufacture in the field and horribly effective for a minimal input of resources. and probably non-fatal as well, so it takes another two men out of action whilst they carry the wounded man.
this is what i mean, the terrible ingenuity involved in looking at a shirt pop stud, a bullet and (possibly) a cigar tube and then thinking "ah-ha, i have a cunning plan..."

BBB_Hyperion
11-20-2007, 09:21 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LW_lcarp:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:

Why is the atomic bomb (ww2 category) not on top of the list ?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by general_kalle

perhaps we should count the Nuclear bombs out

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hope that answers your question </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hope that answers your interpretation of "perhaps"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Perhaps

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Sergio_101
11-20-2007, 11:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:

Why is the atomic bomb (ww2 category) not on top of the list ?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, it could not be nastier.

Defining "nasty"....

If I were a German in a trench in the Ardiennes in Dec 1944 I would think of a VT (RADAR) fused atillery shell as nasty.

If I were in a trench in Flanders in 1917 I certainly would chose (mustard) gas.

If I were in Nagasaki in August of 1945 I would not be posting this.

As far as non nuclear nasties, I chose Napalm.
Not alaways fatal, life changing injuries.
No recovery as you are horribly maimed.

All Weapons included I don't see a contender
with the atomic bomb.

Sergio

TgD Thunderbolt56
11-20-2007, 12:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Why is the atomic bomb (ww2 category) not on top of the list ?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. I mentioned it 5 posts above your first. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

DuxCorvan
11-20-2007, 04:53 PM
I think it's mines. They go on killing and maiming *anyone* long after wars are over.

Taylortony
11-20-2007, 06:16 PM
S mines were nasty,

To the poster about mustard gas, well it's not designed to kill, killing someone is endex for him, it is better to take someone out of the war alive, all be it horribly mutilated or injured, that way you tie up 4 or 5 people on your side to look after him.......... dead is dead and a man and a shovel sorts that problem out......

My worst fears in the military, bar mess food http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Were modern Blood Agents

or Blister Agents an update to mustard gas
............

Do not know what these are, well Google them, But I for one are not going to open your eyes on here to 2 of the most vile weapons ever produce, nerve agents I could live with as a pin head droplet on the skin would mean game over, but the other two............... they still make my skin crawl and shiver

LW_lcarp
11-20-2007, 06:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LW_lcarp:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:

Why is the atomic bomb (ww2 category) not on top of the list ?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by general_kalle

perhaps we should count the Nuclear bombs out

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hope that answers your question </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hope that answers your interpretation of "perhaps"
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Perhaps

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

per·haps

–adverb

maybe; possibly: Perhaps the package will arrive today.

So maybe or possibly we should count the Nuclear bombs out. So it would be better to word the topic, most nasty conventional weapon of ww2 or pre ww2



Nasty means painful, gruesome and causes great fear and lowers the morale of soldiers in my book.

So the nuke is a bright white flash and then your gone.

Any and all booby traps (including mines) which go off when someone trips something would have to be the nastiest. Click- boom and you have a person with no leg or arm. The victim of the device has to live with missing parts for life.

Airmail109
11-20-2007, 06:55 PM
Humans are the nastiest weapon thats ever existed.

AKA_TAGERT
11-20-2007, 07:04 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:

Why is the atomic bomb (ww2 category) not on top of the list ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Because it was far from a nasty way to die..

It was actually one of the most painless of weapons..

For those killed in the blast..

Split second and it was over..

Probably didn't even know what hit em..

At best, the last thing their brain stem registered was the hair standing up on the back of their neck as their vision went white.

Long story short..

If I had to choose between..

Getting blow into a zillion pieces in a micro-second..

vs..

Coughing up blood and snot and than choking on it for 5min before I died..

I would NOT pick the later.

There is a reason they out lawed gas weapons after WWI and not nukes after WWII..

Pain vs. No pain

Skoshi Tiger
11-20-2007, 07:14 PM
If your talking nasty, Mk7 .303 round is fairly nasty.

For a bit of back ground, at the end of the 19th century small arms were going through a bit of a revolution.

People were finding that smaller pointed could do more damage than big fat rounded bullets IF they were going fast enough. At the right speeds you started getting most of the damage from hydrostatic shock.

Now the .303 started off with a 200 odd grain bullet. It had great penetration. So good that people even used it to shoot elephants. The problem was that when used on people it frequently over penetration, that is leaving the target without transferring all the bullets energy.

This wasn't a problem in Europe when the targets were 'Civilised' and stayed shot! but in other parts of the Empire targets weren't as obliging, so in the field the British soldiers modified their rounds to make them more effective. This resulted in things like the Dum-dum rounds (Which were basically soft pointed rounds)

Unfortunately these modifications frequently contravened the conventions that civilised countries used to determine what was appropriate to shoot at each other.

So along came the Mk7. It was a fairly long light bullet (174grns) constructed with a leadbase and an aluminium tip (in one instance replaced with paper pulp! though it was concidered unhigenic and abandoned) covered in thick copper lining.

This made the round very unstable when it hit something which caused it to tumble end over end spinning through the body transferring most of it's energy and still complying to-the-letter with the conventions in place at the time.

Isn't being civilised a wonderful thing?

BBB_Hyperion
11-21-2007, 12:16 AM
Check real post not the quoted part only Tagert etc i already completely agreed . Even if i don't have track(tm) and even if i had i wouldn't post it.

Pirschjaeger
11-21-2007, 12:22 AM
Propaganda.

Remove the propaganda and there's a good chance there'd be much less war. My less war means far less weapons development, testing and usage.

Fritz

La7_brook
11-21-2007, 12:42 AM
I like this Nebelwerfer :cool http://youtube.com/watch?v=BDaTAwXhREo

Pirschjaeger
11-21-2007, 01:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by La7_brook:
I like this Nebelwerfer :cool http://youtube.com/watch?v=BDaTAwXhREo </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

cool + 1

FPSOLKOR
11-21-2007, 04:26 AM
WWI
Tanks
WWII
Rocket artillery

carguy_
11-21-2007, 06:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Humans are the nastiest weapon thats ever existed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL no ofence but that is the most idiotic thing I read on here boards since loooong time ago http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Wepps
11-21-2007, 06:16 AM
I think in the spirit of Vlad, the Voivode of Wallachia, the sharpened stick is probably the worst thing I can think of.

By the time you get to the Japanese in WWII though, you end up with the tremendous technological innovation of this device of adding poo to it.

Nasty. Just nasty.

Of course, Vlad's version had poo added by default, but not by design.

DKoor
11-21-2007, 06:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">most Nasty weapon of WW2 or Pre WW2 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Nylon socks fer wimmin.

MOH_MADMAN
11-21-2007, 02:05 PM
smallpox

Jediteo
11-21-2007, 02:16 PM
Humans, 'nuff said.

Or Chuck norris.

But honestly the machine gun was probably the most devastating development before The Bomb.

Airmail109
11-21-2007, 02:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Humans are the nastiest weapon thats ever existed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL no ofence but that is the most idiotic thing I read on here boards since loooong time ago http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Be sure in a 1000 years we'll be blowing up alien rougue planets with a death star

joeap
11-21-2007, 04:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Humans are the nastiest weapon thats ever existed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL no ofence but that is the most idiotic thing I read on here boards since loooong time ago http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Be sure in a 1000 years we'll be blowing up alien rougue planets with a death star </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Commence primary ignition"

slipBall
11-21-2007, 04:33 PM
Tugboat Annie was our secret weapon

http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f394/SlipBall/Tugboat20Annie-thumb.jpg

SeaFireLIV
11-21-2007, 05:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Humans are the nastiest weapon thats ever existed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL. I think earth and all its animals would agree.

As for weapons, imho, Fire. Especially the kind that`s design to stick. I could take almost anything, but sitting in a foxhole, mg nest or pillbox and getting doused in flame is a sure fire way to die nastily. It`s not clean, it`s not quick and it sure looks painful.

leitmotiv
11-21-2007, 09:25 PM
Easy, Britain's Great Pre-WWII Joke


http://cla.calpoly.edu/~lcall/chamberlain2.jpg


(thanks to Monty Python for this)

flyingloon
11-22-2007, 07:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carguy_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Aimail101:
Humans are the nastiest weapon thats ever existed. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL no ofence but that is the most idiotic thing I read on here boards since loooong time ago http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

agree with aimail, our devious little minds came up with all these inventive ways of breaking bodies into smaller parts

flyingloon
11-22-2007, 07:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wepps:
I think in the spirit of Vlad, the Voivode of Wallachia, the sharpened stick is probably the worst thing I can think of.

By the time you get to the Japanese in WWII though, you end up with the tremendous technological innovation of this device of adding poo to it.

Nasty. Just nasty.

Of course, Vlad's version had poo added by default, but not by design. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

gross dude

Krizz1972
11-22-2007, 08:22 AM
white phosphorus + nuclear weapons

DuxCorvan
11-22-2007, 09:48 AM
Michael Jackson's 'uh-uhs', 'hahs' and 'aaahs' can drive normal men to insanity.