Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Warfare Nuclear, Biological and Chemical (NBC) warfare is one of the most dreaded forms of attack on the battlefield. In the last century, we learned a great deal about how life works, how it is organized. We have used that technology to save many lives by curing diseases and vaccinating against viruses. But it seems that whenever we have a breakthrough in science, there is an ever-present danger of a form of weapon resulting from the discovery. Biological Warfare is defined as bacteria, viruses, fungi or rickettsia, which are used in wartime to cause disease or death in people (Hay, 1984). It seems like a contradiction. Doctors work hard to find cures and vaccinations for the various diseases and viruses that plague our population. On the other side of the coin, however, there are people that would use disease as a weapon. They not only use the sort of disease that nature provides, but try to create more effective and horrific manmade diseases. Biological weapons, as opposed to chemical weapons, are effective with a relatively small quantity of agent. However, most of these agents have a limited shelf life, as their activity is continually declining (Hay, 1984). Most biological agents are dispersed in aerosol form. They can be sprayed from a small cylinder with compressed air, spread by guided missiles, dispersed as a powder from aircraft, or used in a cluster of bombs. The danger is the potential for these biological agents, if successful in infecting a population, can be spread quickly. The U.S. Navy tested the effectiveness of Biological weapons on a metropolis in November of 1950. They released harmless bacteria off the California coast, sufficient to contaminate 117 squar... ... middle of paper ... ...chnology? This depends on the goodwill of those who possess the destructive technology. As stated previously, it takes just one sociopath with the right technology to wipe out an entire continent. Hopefully, the persons who poses the power to destroy the world, will realize that everyone is a loser in an NBC war -- and that long term peace will mean the pursuit of technology to better mankind. Bibliography: Abelson, Philip. "Biological Warfare." Science. Vol. 286 p. 1677. 26 Nov 1999. Hay, A.; Murphy, S.; Rose, S. No Fire No Thunder. New York, 1984. Monthly Review Press. Horowitz, Leonard. Emerging Viruses: Aids and Ebola. Rockport, 1997. Tetrahedron, Inc. Osterholm, Michael. "The Silent Killers." Newsweek. Vol. 130 p. 32. 17 Nov. 1997. Solomon, Brian. Chemical and Biological Warfare. New York, 1999. The H.W. Wilson Company.
Guillemin, J. (2005). Biological weapons: From the invention of state-sponsored programs to contemporary bioterrorism Columbia University Press.
History has proven the use of chemical weapons ranging back for decades. From the Greeks in ancient Europe using Greek fire to South American tribes using a form of tear gas made of grounded up hot chili peppers to scare away enemy tribes. As well as dipping the tips of spear heads with a poisonous toxin. Poisonous toxins used from live reptiles like frogs and venom from the snakes found from whichever region had enough potency venom to exterminate. The past has proven, that in order for Armies to survive and win, it relied on out smarting the enemy. New technologies and the evolution of weaponry were left to the brightest minds from those eras to develop.
Though biological weapons have been available for under a century, there is a long history of their use between 1914 and 1972. Chemical warfare was first introduced in 1914 at the beginning of World War I. Because of the new style of warfare with automatic weapons, trenches were dug out from the ground to defend against a slaughter. The introduction of this issue caused us to invent weapons such as the grenade, flame thrower, and finally, biological weapons. Biological weapons were distributed by hoses, grenades, and aerial attacks. By doing this, we eliminated many enemy trenches and saved a large amount of Ally lives. (Menace)
New York: Harper & Row, 1987. 942-946. Print. 4. Shalett, S.. N.p.. Web.
Clark, D. K. (1959). The Species of the World. Effectiveness of chemical weapons in WWI. Bethesda, Md. -. Operations Research Office, Johns Hopkins University.
Weapons and Artillery of World War II The result of World War II was affected by many different factors. One major factor which affected the war was the weapons and artillery used during the war. Since the beginnings of time, weapons have always been around. From swords and knives to nuclear weapons and missiles, weapons have evolved greatly over the years.
Chemical warfare is the use of chemical agents to injure, incapacitate, or kill enemy combatants. First seen during World War I (WWI), the devastating effects of widespread chemical warfare were eventually deemed inhumane by an international consensus and chemical agents were subsequently banned from use. Still, despite the tendency of the modern warrior to overlook antiquated tactics, the threat of chemical agents in the theater of war cannot be entirely discounted by today's Soldier. By analyzing the application, evolution, and overall legacy of chemical weapons in the Great War we can work to minimize the danger they pose in current conflicts and those of the near future. For it is only by understanding the past that we can understand the present and shape tomorrow.
Medical College of Wisconsin. “Facts About Anthrax and Smallpox as Bioterrorism Weapons.” Healthlink. 12 Nov. 2001. Medical College of Wisconsin. 24 July 2008 .
With vaccines more abundant we can eradicate harmful disease like HPV, influenza, and Hepatitis. All treatable and yet still common among many communities in the United States. The only chance is providing people the necessary information and requiring mandated immunizations with no exempts in every state. Then maybe we can eradicate those diseases and permanently wipe them off worldwide like small-pox. Vaccines are safe and if we continue providing them we could eventually face disease like HIV and even some cancer that have not ever been able to treat in the future.
Lussier, Frances M. "Chemical-biological-radiological warfare (CBR)." World Book Advanced. World Book, 2014. Web. 24 Apr. 2014.
Danticat, Edward. “A Wall of Fire Rising”(2009). The Norton Introduction to Literature, Portable 10th ed. Alison Booth and Kelly J.Mays. New York: Norton, 2010. Pg.232-244
The Wheel of Fire. London: Methuen and Company, 1949. 298-325. Long, Michael. A.
Thesis Statement: A Weapons of Mass Destruction is a significant and viable threat to the United States of America and the government needs to create a strong and adaptive Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive (CBRNE) detection and response framework in order to be able to prevent such an attack from occurring or having the ability to respond quickly and proficiently. 1. What is the goal in this paper? The goal of my paper is to raise an awareness for how viable a Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) threat is on our homeland and to reiterate the need of an enhanced Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive (CBRNE) detection and response framework for the United States, or to assess whether or not the current detection and response framework is sufficient. The paper will also provide a suggestion of how the government could improve each of the frameworks if they are not sufficient enough.
New York: Scribner Law. 1989. p. 472,473. The "Fire and Ice" American Literature. New York: Scribner Law. 1989. p 466.. Freeman, Margaret.
In conclusion, it is clear that a biological weapon is wrong. When Saddam Hussein threatened to turn the Persian Gulf War into “the mother of all wars” the world shook with the possible implications. The United States managed to divert the course of the war such as this did not happen. In other situation these results have not been as successful, unfortunately, and many people have suffered and died. I hope that civilization is moving towards total illumination of biological weaponry.