Random thoughts just popped in my head and I just remembered that all the water in a given city is all centralized. Just add poison and boom, eradicated an entire city who are full of dissidents/opposition as punishment for voting the “wrong” way, or for a protest, or if the population is filled with “filthy undesirable [Insert Racial Group Here]”, or something like that.
Kinda unsettling to see that we are all just attached to “the grid” 😖
I don’t really understand the thought behind the question. In the sense of legality? Obviously. In the sense of someone saying something? Obviously. In the sense that people have free will? No. The people that work at water facilities are typically technically government employees. If all of them suddenly went rogue would you count that as “the government doing it”? Because they wouldn’t be acting in line with the government, but they’re still “the government.”
So, no, but actually yes, but actually no.
It’s like saying “what’s actually preventing a secret service member from shooting the president?” Nothing? Everything? How do you answer?
is that a hypothetical?
when there’s lead in US drinking water the government just ignores it if it’s in a poor neighborhood
Or floride
jk
Developed world, we should follow medical advice for water quality
US, no fluoride in water, only lead.
The only evidence that fluoride makes you stupid, is that you probably grew up drinking fluoridated water, and say stupid shit like that.
Did you take me seriously? I said jk, did it need to be /s?
most people did
A very fundamental part of that is the amount of moving parts. Every person in the chain that is required for the thing to happen, has to either support the thing or otherwise follow through.
This very concept is what has saved us from nuclear apocalypse so far. Very literally so.
How many people go days without drinking tap water?
A function economy 😂. Jk
But being realistic to your answer, it’s possible to be done, but everyone involved would have to be in on it, assuming you wanna get away with it. The US has extremely strict and aware water safety protocols. It would take just 1 whistleblower to takedown this operation.
The US has extremely strict and aware water safety protocols. It would take just 1 whistleblower to [take down] this operation.
Had. HAD. The US has fired many/most of its inspectors.
75% of American drinking water requires treatment for one thing or another. One of those treatments is supplied by a single vendor out of a single plant in a flood-prone area. Apparently only recently did it receive federal staffing to improve security. This is only one of the many weak links in a supply chain with now absolutely zero oversight.
I wish I was kidding.
Trump gonna Trump 🙃
The next president is absolutely f*****
Orr just someone having one those water treatment facilities running Windows XP and increasing the chlorine content. Has happened before.
Nope.
No.
But…
The adage that “the dose makes the poison” is working in your favor here. A large city supply delivers millions of liters of water per day; by the time you dilute your poison into millions of liters of water you’ll either be adding absurd amounts of poison (someone is going to notice massive line of tanker trucks queued up outside the treatment plant), or you are dealing with large - but not unweildly - volumes of something so horrendously toxic that it’s still deadly when diluted that much. There are very few substances that toxic, and someone is going to notice if you start procuring hundreds of liters of botulism toxin or Vx because at that point you are dealing with outlawed chemical warfare agents
Lots of people drink bottled water, soda, beer, or other drinks not immediately connected to the water supply. Furthermore, poisons are unlikely to remain undetected long enough to kill the entire population. While a strong dose of a deadly poison like cyanide can kill in minutes it’s likely to be detected quickly due to how rapidly its effects begin to show up.
A slower-acting, accumulating poison like dimethylmercury could potentially kill more people because its effects don’t show up immediately. On the other hand, the delayed effects of the poison would provide the victims a chance to retaliate against the poisoners.
Either way, it’s a very crude and unfocused attack against a population which is unlikely to achieve any political aim besides wanton destruction and outrage.
If you live in an open and transparent society: there will be an investigation and there is a high chance they will find out. You’ll be expected to take care of the mess with disaster relief for the survivors. Also about 40% of the people did vote for you. Also even the ones who did not vote for you still pays tax.
If you live in a dictatorship: police brutality is cheaper and is a bit more selective in it’s targeting.
The international backlash would be pretty severe.
Its called the Geneva Suggestions
The chance of them pulling it off with nobody noticing or saying anything is very low, it’s not a one person operation. Then depending on the speed of the poison it would become obvious that there’s something in the water very quickly and people would stop drinking it.
Genocide is unlikely as people can stop drinking after finding out it is poisonous, especially if the poison is fast acting. There has been many cases of industrial mining companies poisoning rivers.
River ecocide will probably alert the authorities first. https://www.waternz.org.nz/Story?Action=View&Story_id=2427
It has to be a slow acting poison and not easily detectable or something so new that no one knows about… yet. Example…PFAS - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SC2eSujzrUY
Seems like there has been break-ins though to water supply - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/elisabethbraw_is-russia-trying-to-poison-finlands-water-activity-7251250484294873088-d2YP
