Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical effects of chemical warfare
Biological warfare
Biological warfare
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethical effects of chemical warfare
Weapons Inspection Team
Knowing the history of chemical weapons and their devastating effects will help explain the reasoning for the development of weapons inspection team and why their success is vital to world peace. This paper will provide a small amount of history on chemical weapons, discuss the history of the weapons inspection teams and explain how the members are selected and trained. Incidents of the use of weapons of mass destruction will be mentioned which explain the reason for the development of the weapons inspection teams.
History of Chemical Weapons
Chemical warfare has been used in war for thousands of years as a means to lethally fight the battle. Just to give a few examples of the devastation, chlorine and phosgene gases were used during World War I and were dispensed from canisters causing around 90,000 deaths and over one million casualties during war (Mass, 2013). Apparatus for dispensing these weapons developed tremendously during the first half of the twentieth century, increasing these weapons’ alarming ability to kill. The United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War maintained massive stockpiles of chemical weapons enough to eliminate a large amount of the human race and animal life on Earth. In 1980, Iraq used chemical weapons on Iran during war and in 1988; Iraq used mustard gas and nerve agents on the Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. Pictures of the horrific attack on the Kurdish civilians were released and the world was stunned by the horrendous devastation.
These past events sped up negotiations in Geneva on the Chemical Weapons Convention which had already been in negotiation for 12 years. The world was terrified of the potential threat of chemical weapons being used by terrorists ...
... middle of paper ...
...t biological science and technology can be developed safely and securely – so that they bring benefits, not danger” (Secretary-General, 2011).
Secretary-General's remarks at the Seventh Review Conference of the BWC, 5 December 2011
Works Cited
Gregory, S. (2002). Who Are Those Inspectors?. Time, 160(25), 26
Mass, H. (2013). A Brief History of Chemical Warfare. Retrieved from http://theweek.com/article/index/249224/a-brief-history-of-chemical-warfare Wittlaan, J. (2014). Biological Weapons Convection. Retrieved from http://unoda-
web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/BWC_Fact_Sheet_Apr_2014.pdf
Wittlaan, J. (2014).Brief History of Chemical Weapons Use.Retrieved from http://www.opcw.org/about-chemical-weapons/history-of-cw-use/
Wittlaan, J.(2014).Fact Sheet.http://unoda-web.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-
content/uploads/2014/04/SGM_Fact_Sheet_March_2014.pdf
3Brophy, L. (1959). The Chemical Warfare Service (1st ed.). Washington: Office of the Chief of
In the late twentieth century, the field of biotechnology and genetic engineering has positioned itself to become one of the great technological revolutions of human history. Yet, things changed when Herber Boyer, a biochemist at the University of California, founded the company Genentech in 1976 to exploit the commercial potential of his research. Since then the field has exploded into a global amalgam of private research firms developing frivolous, profit-hungry products, such as square trees tailor-made for lumber, without any sort of government regulation.
As we move into the Twentieth Century the similarities are almost identical. The First World War has shaped not only modern warfare but even produced global attention to the brutal and inhumane death toll of the war. As stated in the Geneva Protocol, which prohibited the use of chemical weapons in warfare, which was signed in 1925? While this was a welcomed step, the Protocol had a number of significant short comings, including the fact that it did not prohibit the development, production or stockpiling of chemical weapons.
I have organized this paper into five distinct sections; mission, task organization, capabilities, limitations, and finally the conclusion. After the reading and comprehension of this paper, you should have gained a basic understanding of the Special Forces (SF) Chemical Reconnaissance Detachments (CRD). The following paper is mixed with Unclassified (UCI) and For Official Use Only (FOUO) information. FOUO is annotated at the beginning of all For Official Use Only information, the rest of the paper is UCI. If you wish to share this information paper with others, please at a minimum; confirm identity of the person prior to providing (FM 380-5, 2000). For further handling instructions please refer to FM 380-5, or contact me, I will gladly answer all questions.
In Freeman Dyson’s “Our Biotech Future”, he focuses on a range of topics including how biology has grown and become bigger than physics. Dyson argued that over the next 50 years, biotechnology will revolutionize our lives in much the same way as computers have done over the previous 50 years (Dyson, para. 2, 2007). Freeman compared the way how computers have grown to the genetic engineering of food crops. He explained that people did not trust that poisonous pesticides were put into their food, the same way how they did not like the fact that Von Neumann used his computer for secretly
There have been many wars and battles fought with different weapons, but chemical weapons used in these wars are the worst kind. These weapons cause mutations and horrible deceases to a state in which some deceases even exist many years after the incident. These chemical weapons were unfortunately used by Iraq during the 8-year war between Iran and Iraq: 1980–1988. Iraq started using these chemical weapons excessively after 1984, until the end of the war even though countries are not allowed to use chemical weapons in any cases. However, Iraq got confirmation from The United States.
The use of debilitating and deadly gases in World War I weighed heavily on the CWS in the years that followed. The lessons taken from the war forced CWS to the realization and likelihood of history repeating itself. Over the next 20 years, the CWS would fight its own battle for funding and existence due to the War Department’s issuance of General Order 26 of 1922. The order restricted research and development, as well as funding to CWS (Brophy & Fisher, 1959). During this time, the CWS evaluated its aging stockpiles. They knew that another war would require prompt production of chemicals in order to react to an attack on Americans. The CWS requested funding to perform research and initiate production, but the government felt it was unnecessary. In fact, officials questioned the existence of CWS. That would all change in the late 1930’s when the essence of a second world war would loom. The CWS received funding to initiate their plan of stockpiling chemicals weapons. In 1940, the CWS would receive a substantial increase in funding after Germany’s victory...
The purpose of this essay is to deal with the fact that chemical warfare should be brought back to modern warfare strategies. As Warren Rudman said, “And they will tell you unequivocally that if we have a chemical or biological attack or a nuclear attack anywhere in this country, they are unprepared to deal with it today, and that is of high urgency.” Rudman’s words are true in what they say and that we should do everything to counter-act his statement. Biological weapons are a key to outstanding success in war and therefore, I strongly suggest that chemical warfare is an effective and producible weapon tactic that can be used on today’s battlefield.
Clark, D. K. (1959). The Species of the World. Effectiveness of chemical weapons in WWI. Bethesda, Md. -. Operations Research Office, Johns Hopkins University.
Poison gas was perhaps the most feared weapon out of all. Created to overcome the long stalemate style of trench warfare, its purpose was to draw out soldiers hiding in the trenches. One side would throw the poison gas into the enemy trenches and they would either wait for their enemy to come out into open fire or perish in the trenches. The first poison gas used in battle was chlorine at the start of the Second Battle of Ypres on April 22, 1915 by the Germans. Shortly after, followed the phosgene. The effects of these gases were ghastly. Chlorine was the most deadly as "within seconds of inhaling its vapor, it destroys the victim's respiratory organs, bringing on choking attacks" (Duffy). Phosgene had similar effects, except the fact that the effects started kicking in after 48 hours of inhalation. In September 1917, the Germans introduced the mustard gas or Yperite which was contained in artillery shells against the Russians at Riga. Those exposed t...
Donahue believes that censoring science is putting the United States at the same risk as not censoring. The author states “the effort to suppress scientific information reflects a dangerously outdated attitude.” Donahue supports this claim by explaining several cases in science where sharing information on microbiological studies have helped science move forward. The author mentions an article that was published describing how susceptible the United States milk supply is to the botulinum toxin. This article was suspended by the National Academy of Science because they believed it to be a “road map for terrorists” (p. 1). The author believes however, that instead of censoring such an article this information should be shared, this way other scientists will be able to discover ways to defend against terrorist attacks.
“International Agreements.” The Concise Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, Third Edition. 1994: Columbia University Press. Lanouette, William. A. “Why We Dropped the Bomb.”
Coker, Jeffrey Scott. "Genetic Engineering Is Natural and Should Be Pursued." Genetic Engineering, edited by Noël Merino, Greenhaven Press, 2013. Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints in Context,
Nine years after synthetic biology was first practiced, the IASB finalized the Code of Conduct for Best Practices in Gene Synthesis. They said that “this event is a breakthrough in self-regulation in synthetic biology” (“Code of Conduct for Best Practices in Gene Synthesis). IASB’s code gives engineers and scientists the freedom to research organisms and genes that may hold environmental or health risks, but in a safe and secure manner. IASB addresses the possibility that synbio materials could be used inappropriately, for instance, in terrorist activities. Engineers and scientists are expected to follow previous “standards of good practice” set forth in the general engineering code of ethics and perform risk assessments of DNA sequences for genes. “Records of suspicious inquiries” and “statistics on biosecurity and bios...