An escaped bioweapon would have a higher mortality rate and take less than 2-weeks to kill you.
(Seeing as your post was obvious sarcasm I’m sure you know that)
If there were, as posters here were saying yesterday, 90,000 dead in Wuhan the PRC would not be able to cover that up. There is no place to store that many bodies. I don’t the Germans in WW2 could have cremated that many victims so fast and they had custom built facilities to do so.
If you were trying to develop tactics for using bioweapons, you would want to release something less deadly, but deadly enough to expose the defenses of your opponents.
The less-deadly exposure would also serve to reduce the panic that might occur in future bioweapons attacks, rendering them more effective due to lowered defenses.
“An escaped bioweapon would have a higher mortality rate and take less than 2-weeks to kill you.”
Not true.
Do you think they aren’t trying to design a 1 2 punch of flu allowing you to walk around and spread a disease and then something else later kicks in.
Whether or not they have been successful we don’t know.
But you can bet they are trying
We don’t really know what the mortality rate is right now. We’re relying on Chicom data.
An well designed bioweapon would have an EXTREMELY long latency period (like this virus),
be airborne (like this virus),
survive on surfaces for many days (like this virus, up to 5 days)
be shed prior to becoming symptomatic (like this virus),
seem to have a preference for males (like this virus),
and have a certain number of asymptomatic spreaders (like this virus).
A significant percentage of those infected would require extreme medical intervention (like this virus)
that would then crash the health care system of the infected country (like this one...)
You don’t have to kill all the enemy with an ebola like bleeding out horror show 2 days after they’re infected. Just destroy their ‘fighting ability’ (because all the men are in the ICU)