Is a tank, fighter jet, or warship a weapon?If not, does it contain weapons?If so, does it contain weapons? What about an aircraft carrier with no organic armament, only its aircraft? If completely empty of aircraft and munitions for them, is it a weapon?
By oxford's definitionYes, all are weapons
>>65511360A weapon's essense is its warhead. The rest are vehicles, when armed are weapons too. The grey area stretch through the ability, intention, precedence and involvement timeline of handling the warhead and would excercise many levels of caution thoughout the process of checking the status of the warhead.Any definition of any word is only meaningful and worth the time if the user of the word is trustworthy and intent to keep his promise, which usually means sharing some kind of common boundary.
>>65511360weapon is tool of powerwoman my enemyI dick womannow woman my friendmy dick a weapon
>>65511360I'd argue even in the case it's unarmed a tank is always a weapon as it can be used as a battering ram against man and building. Jets and ships are trickier since saying they're weapons would infer their civilian versions, often times which are very similar in construction are also weapons. Is an oil tanker a weapon?
>attack and overcomeImplies only the blood of the defeated defender can consecrate a tool into a weapon
Is a gun a weapon or is the bullet a weapon?
>>65511399Is AN/PYQ-10 a weapon?
Why do asians in really old art look even uglier than actual ugly asian people
>>65511360What is the riddle of steel?
>>65511638Anon, Confucius actually looks like that.Sidenotes, on Confucius>He is not a friendly, meek scholar, he is a mountain of a man>His travels with his students, largely unmolested by warlords and bandits because its like a small army, with fucking war chariots
>>65511465>Is an oil tanker a weapon?Yes, if it's not going through Hormuz anymore.
>>65511360when i saw the thumbnail i saw armenian cory
>>65511360>Is a tank, fighter jet, or warship a weapon?They were built for that purpose, so yeah. Once a weapon, always a weapon. Even if disarmed or doing other stuff.>What about an aircraft carrier with no organic armament, only its aircraft? If completely empty of aircraft and munitions for them, is it a weapon?It was built for the purpose of carrying and deploying aircraft, so yes, warfare was its intended purpose and therefore it is a weapon by nature. A gun that has never been loaded with bullets once in its entire existence is still itself a weapon. It was purpose built to get bullets into the enemy. A carrier was purpose built to get warplanes to the enemy.Not to say they can't have alternative uses, but that is the idea behind their design and the expectation of their use. Even if they never wind up fulfilling that purpose they were still intended for it. Then there are objects with neutral or benign associations (eating utensils, building tools, objects of nature, etc.) that become weapons via the way they were used. A big sharp rock is not a weapon by nature, it's just random. But if I pick it up and hit you with it, it has become a weapon. And that definition will stick to it as long as anyone knows it was once used that way.Once a weapon, always a weapon. (this board is of course for the discussion of purpose-built weapons rather than weapons of convenience)
>Confucius says if grenade has pin, then pin has already been pulled
>If so, does it contain weapons? No one answered this. Is an infantryman with a rifle and a magazine of ammunition for it one weapon, two weapons, or thirty-two weapons?
>>65513595One man armed with one weapon system.
>>65511360Having seen first hand what a tank with a dozer blade does to entrenched infantry, I would say yes, tanks are weapons. Planes are weapons because you can fly them into things if you're brave enough. Battleships have gotten at least two confirmed kills of other vessels, a German submarine and a Japanese destroyer, by running them over, so they also count as weapons.
