Biological weapons and chemical weapons are ineffective and that's why the
US doesn't employ them?  I'd have to disagree.  I'm sure that they can be
very effectively used.  Imagine a crop duster spreading the plaque or
anthrax or sarin gas.  You don't think a lot of people would be impacted?  I
suspect that a better reason that the US doesn't employ them is that you
cannot control who is targeted by them.  Massive civilian deaths would
result.
---------------------------------------------------------
Gary Paveza, Jr.
Senior Systems Administrator
(302) 252-4831 - phone
(302) 377-1516 - cell

        -----Original Message-----
        From:   Wirt Atmar [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
        Sent:   Tuesday, February 25, 2003 4:56 PM
        To:     [log in to unmask]
        Subject:        Re: [HP3000-L] OT: A powerful argument for war with
Iraq

        John writes:

        >  Wirt wrote:
        >  >he has no active WMD programs
        >
        >  Please, Wirt, hurry to the UN and share with them your
intelligence
        reports!
        >  Clearly the intelligence services of the western countries have
been lying
        >  to their employers!  It's up to you and your personal
intelligence agency
        to
        >  set them straight!

        Essentially the only weapon of mass destruction is a nuclear weapon.
The
        threat from chemical and biological weapons are being greatly
exaggerated in
        the news media -- and that alone is the fundamental reason that the
United
        States doesn't employ them. They're ineffective as battlefield
weapons and
        are generally more dangerous to the using organization than they are
to the
        intended target.

        The total accumulated world-wide deaths from the use of biological
weapons
        doesn't rise to the number of dead the US suffers in one day from
automobilie
        accidents, and the total chemical weapons world-wide death count
from 1911 to
        2003 only equals a few years worth of US auto accidents.

        But in stark contrast, there were dozens of days during World War II
when the
        death toll from conventional incendiary devices exceeded the current
US
        yearly automotive death toll, 30,000 or more burned to death in a
single
        night, with the Dresden and Toyko firebombings death counts
exceeding even
        the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear weapon tolls.

        WMD's aren't what you think they are if you listen to the news
nowadays.

        Wirt Atmar

        * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
        * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *