Chemical Weapons - Weapons of Mass Destruction
Chemical weapons and their use is one of the most important issues facing the world today. Not only is the use of such weapons highly controversial, but also the very idea of such weapons of mass destruction being in the hands of dangerous leaders. Next to nuclear weapons they are the most feared, and the prospect of these weapons not only concerns people, but also frightens them. As a result of these fears, America has entered a new war that could bring devastating effects upon our world. It is a very sensitive topic among many countries, and is out of hand primarily because of the introduction of chemical weapons to the world in the First World War. Many people have the same feelings about chemical weapons. Chemical weapons are wrong and those that exist in the world should be destroyed, but it is not that simple. Chemical weapons are very dangerous and even after their destruction, they are still very hazardous. Innocent people are being killed accidentally with chemical weapons, whether it is poor storage or bad transportation. The fact is that chemical weapons need to be destroyed, through very careful means. The production and use of chemical weapons is ethically wrong based on the devastating effects they have on the entire world. The weapons are something that is very difficult to get rid of, and we need to develop better ways to protect ourselves against their use and disposal.
Chemical weapons have been used throughout the world dating back to 430 BC, when they were used against the Spartans in the Peloponnesian War. Although they were not nearly as harmful as they are now, they still had devastating effects. Very little good has ever come from the use of chemical ...
... middle of paper ...
...l Information Network 6 (March 2003): 1-4
"Business: Who will Build our Biodefences?; Vaccines Against Bioterrorism". The Economist 1 (Feb. 2003): 60-64
Leavitt, Ron. "Bioterrorism; All-Purpose Drugs Tested for Germ, Radiation, Chemical Agents". TB & Outbreaks Weekly 4 (Dec. 2001): 14-16
Cook, Tim. "A Short History of Chemical Weapons". The Spectator 4 (Sept. 2001): 18-23
Bibliography
"Science and Technology: Hide and Seek; Biological Weapons". The Economist 30 (Nov. 2002): 84-87
"Anthrax; Vical Receives U.S. Government Grant to Research Anthrax Vaccine". Vaccine Weekly 21 (Aug. 2002): 7-8
Cook, Tim. "Creating the Faith: The Canadian Gas Services in the First World War". The Journal of Military History 12 (Oct. 1998): 755-786
Burgess, Glenn F. "Counter-Chemical Warfare ConOps now…Survive and Operate". Marine Corps Gazette 4 (Dec. 2002): 47-51
The Demon in the Freezer by Richard Preston is an intriguing book that discusses the anthrax terrorist attacks after 9/11 and how smallpox might become a future bioterrorist threat to the world. The book provides a brief history of the smallpox disease including details of an outbreak in Germany in 1970. The disease was eradicated in 1979 due to the World Health Organization’s aggressive vaccine program. After the virus was no longer a treat the World Health Organization discontinued recommending the smallpox vaccination. In conjunction, inventory of the vaccine was decreased to save money. The virus was locked up in two labs, one in the United States and one in Russia. However, some feel the smallpox virus exists elsewhere. Dr. Peter Jahrling and a team of scientists at the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Maryland became concerned terrorists had access to the smallpox virus and planed to alter the strain to become more resistant. These doctors conducted smallpox experiments to discover more effective vaccines in case the virus were released. Preparedness for a major epidemic is discussed as well as the ease with which smallpox can be bioengineered.
Stacey, C. P. Six Years of War: The Army in Canada, Britain and the Pacific.
Guillemin, J. (2005). Biological weapons: From the invention of state-sponsored programs to contemporary bioterrorism Columbia University Press.
From the creation of the Army’s Technical Escort Unit, there has always been one mission that has never changed; the removal, transportation and disposal of chemical weapons. “The U.S. Army Technical Escort Unit was formed in 1944 and is the longest, continuously active, military chemical unit in existence... The unit was formed as a group of specialist to escort chemical weapons”(Cashman, 2000, p. 104). Although this mission type has not faded, the overall mission of these units has expanded to a larger arena.
Shane, S. (2010, February 19). FBI Concludes Investigation in Fatal Anthrax Mailings. The New York Times. Retrieved December 12, 2013, from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/20/us/20anthrax.html?pagewanted=all
Clark, D. K. (1959). Effectiveness of chemical weapons in WWI. Bethesda, Md.: Operations Research Office, Johns Hopkins University.
The free speech clause in the Bill of Rights states: “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech” (US Const., amend I). This clause, albeit consists of a mere ten words, holds much power and affluence in the American unique way of life. It guarantees Americans the right to speak freely without censorship by preventing the government from restricting the rights of the people to express their opinions. Consequently, this freedom can encourage citizens’ participation in politics; promote an adaptable and tolerant community; facilitate the discovery of truth; and ultimately create a stable nation. However, how much freedom should be granted to an individual? Where should the line be drawn for the coverage free speech protection? (1) What happens when the exercise of free speech puts other constitutional values in jeopardy? What values should prevail? (2) In an attempt to address these questions, many opposing interpretations have been presented. While some construe this clause in an absolute, categorical approach, others take on a more lenient, balancing stance. (1)
Web. The Web. The Web. 05 Feb. 2010. http://www.firstworldwar.com/weaponry/gas.htm>.
The Amendment I of the Bill of Rights is often called “the freedom of speech.” It provides a multitude of freedoms: of religion, of speech, of the press, to peacefully assemble, to petition the government. Religious freedom is vitally important to this day because it eliminates the problem of religious conflicts. Historically, many people died for their beliefs because their government only allowed and permitted one religion. T...
Herbeck, Tedford (2007). Boston College: Freedom of Speech in the United States (fifth edition) Cohen vs. California 403 U.S. 15 Retrieved on March 2, 2008 from http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/comm/free_speech/cohen.html
According to “Freedom of Speech” by Gerald Leinwand, Abraham Lincoln once asked, “Must a government, of necessity, be too strong for the liberties of its people, or too weak to maintain its own existence (7)?” This question is particularly appropriate when considering what is perhaps the most sacred of all our Constitutionally guaranteed rights, freedom of expression. Lincoln knew well the potential dangers of expression, having steered the Union through the bitterly divisive Civil War, but he held the Constitution dear enough to protect its promises whenever possible (8).
Staver, Mathew D. "Allowing Religious Expression in School Protects Students' Rights." Students' Rights. Ed. Jamuna Carroll. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2005. Opposing Viewpoints. Rpt. from "New Federal Guidelines a Real Blessing for Public Schools." Liberator Mar. 2003: 1-4. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 19 Nov. 2013.
Kersch, Ken Ira. Freedom of Speech Rights and Liberties under the Law. Santa Barbara, CA:
Hentoff, Nat. Free Speech for Me – But Not for Thee. New York: HarperCollins, 1992. Print
McDowell, Gary L. “The Explosion and Erosion of Rights.” In Bodenhamer, David J. and Ely, James W. The Bill of Rights in Modern America. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2008. Print.