mike1963
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-04 08:51 PM
Original message |
We need to keep in mind (and tell others) that chem/bio agents are NOT |
|
Weapons of 'mass destruction.' Only nukes are actually WMDs. Yes, it's possible under ideal conditions to kill a fair number of people with stuff like Sarin, Anthrax, Ricin, smallpox, etc. but it's a damn hard thing to do efficiently.
|
Fescue4u
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-04 08:55 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Its also damn difficult to get fissonable material and get the geometry right for critical mass.
In fact, Id say that if a terorist was starting from scratch, he would have an easier time kill a mass number with Anthrax or ricin.
Hell, a terrorist with supply of ricin and a weekend visit grocery stores could kill thousands and terrorize millions...and Ricin is not that difficult to make.
Besides, dead is dead, doesnt matter what we can the weapon.
|
Toots
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-05-04 09:01 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I agree with you on the chemical stuff but biological can be |
|
devastating. We don't know what new strains of disease may develop. Small pox during the 1700s killed millions of people around the world. It wiped out complete peoples. Granted it didn't destroy a single building so I guess the mass destruction part isn't apt but the death toll by far exceeded any nuclear event to date.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 10:24 PM
Response to Original message |