Biological Weapons And Its Uses

World War I was known as the chemist war because a lot of the modern day chemical weapons were developed, improved and employed during this time. Blood agents got their start a few centuries early, but did not see tactical use until the first Great War. In this paper I will discuss the origin and types of blood agents. Hydrogen cyanide is the most effective of the blood agents and is the most prominently used therefor we will discuss it in more detail. Blood agents make up a small portion of the chemical weapons known throughout the world but are in great abundance in the manufacture world, so it is

Weapons of mass destruction are ‘weapons that can devastate large areas and kill huge numbers of people’. There are 3 types of WMD’s; Nuclear Weapons, Biological Weapons and Chemical Weapons. In the world there are only 8 counties that own nuclear weapons and these include USA, Russia, UK, China, France, India and Pakistan and unofficially Israel. In this essay I will be looking at whether or not Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD’s) can be justified, we can link this to the just war theory. I will also be looking at the 1945 Atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima and whether or not it can be justified.

Frist of all, in the Second Battle of Ypres, the Germans introduced the first use of poisonous gas. When poison gas first introduced it was a popular weapon choice and would be the weapon to change the outcome of the war. The Germans surprisingly attack the Allies, where the used lethal chloride gas against them. The gas was deadly and killed over one thousand soldiers. (1) It also allowed a significant advanced for the Germans in the war. The gas usage continued to grow throughout the war. In the end, many Allied countries started chemical weapons research. Gas warfare became common but effective actions were used to protect the troops. After World War 1, poison was use for a while but in today’s war it is no longer allowed. Instead of poisonous gas, chemical warfare is used. Chemical weapons come in a variety of forms and are used for several different techniques.

“Based on published translations of the de’ Mussi manuscript, other 14th-century accounts of the Black Death, and secondary scholarly literature, I conclude that the claim that biological warfare was used at Caffa is plausible and provides the best explanation of the entry of plague into the city. This theory is

A scream echoed throughout the harsh winter air, where it passed a frail man tied to a post whose eyes drooped and arms rotted. The noise flew past a few soldiers loading a biological weapon into a plane. The scream landed upon the ears of a scientist who stood inches away from that horrible cry, and continued his work, uncaring of a heart beating at his fingertips. He was the sole spectator and sole perpetrator of this person’s death through live dissection. This was what happened in Japan’s biological warfare experimental camp from 1935 to 1945. The camp was made possible by the Manchurian Incident which is when the Japanese bombed their own property and claimed it was an attack by the Chinese, prompting the Japanese conquest of Manchuria. However, Japan yearned to conquer more nations. Sensing a war with Manchuria’s north

“Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Soviet Union and the United Kingdom were among many countries that investigated how to wage biological war.” (pg. 38) Some of these countries have biological weapons programs and even some biological weapons have been used in the past. A Russian program “known to the Soviets as “the Concern Bioreparat”, supposedly a series of laboratories and plants that manufactured vaccines and other medicinal products, was in fact a vast network of secret cities, production plants of Moscow’s germ effort. Bioreparat studied and perfected germs as weapons. President Richard Nixon’s administration became the “world’s leading advocate for a treaty banning germ warfare. Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention- prohibited the possession of deadly biological agents except for research…for vaccines, detection and protective gear. It was the world’s first treaty to ban an entire class of weapons.” (pg. 63) April 1979, an explosion at a secret military base near Soviet city of Sverdlovsk, sent a cloud of Bacillus anthracis fanning over a nearby village, leaving thousands dead. Although the Soviets, had signed the treaty, they denied allegations that this was “nothing more nefarious than tainted meat.” (pg. 77) During the Gulf War, for example, biological weapons developed by Iraq posed a threat and they might, if fact still pose a threat. While US went in search of nuclear

In order to ascertain the effect that technological advances had on the nature of warfare within this 146 year period, it is necessary to break down the definition of the “nature” of warfare. Within this essay it is understood to mean the ways in which wars were fought. Furthermore, one must also consider the non technological factors that affected the nature of warfare, and the ways in which wars were fought as a result of their impact. For example, factors such as economic power and resources have been known to significantly affect the nature of warfare. In evaluating the importance of these factors in comparison to

Set-up - Warfare is constantly changing, for the tools of war are always evolving, as do the societies that wage war. Between 1400 and 1918, western warfare went through four periods that saw such profound change that it can fairly be said that a "military revolution" occurred. According to historians MacGregor Knox and Williamson Murray, military revolutions "fundamentally change the framework of war" and "recast society and the state as well as military organizations." While all of the military revolutions studied in H100 were important in the evolution of warfare, one clearly stimulated greater change than the others.

We will be exploring the gunpowder weapons and how the use of these weapons changed the balance of power in warfare, transforming global history by leading to a period of dominance by Western European powers. I will be comparing European, Russian, Islamic, Chinese, and Japanese uses of gunpowder weapons and explore how these powers fit guns into their political, military, and cultural systems.

Welcome to week 4! This week we are discussing what consequences face the Nation if our chosen threat isn’t adequately addressed and whether we believe that it is being addressed adequately now. Of the six security challenges that are mentioned in the 2014 Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, I have chosen to discuss biological threats. Biological terrorism is a scary prospect that should be a growing concern for the country. The reason for this is the ease at which a bio attack can be put into action. Depending on the level of intricacy of the attack, the effects could be isolated to one area or become a pandemic that spreads across the United States. Bioterrorism comes in many forms but as a general explanation biological

One of the many advancements made during the duration of World War I was that of poisonous gasses. These gasses were considered “uncivilized” before the beginning of the first World War. However, they were deemed necessary to overcome the standoff between the Allied forces and the Central Powers. The French army was the first to use such a weapon in 1914, but the Germans were the first to use poisonous gasses on a large scale. The German’s first recorded use of

Progress and development is a characterizing feature of all facets of the world, with military technology and warfare being no different. Throughout the history of humanity, warfare has evolved in pace with the available technology, proceeding through the stone age into the age of iron, then steel, and into the modern era of warfare characterized largely by the presence of gunpowder. Contemporary warfare however has evolved into something entirely different. Herein, it will be demonstrated that the tactics and technology employed during World War I are fundamentally different than warfare as it is currently practice.

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.

Is the use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons in war ethical? Is there an appropriate time to use them? A dilemma will later be presented for consideration. Different ethical theories can either support or oppose the use of CBW depending on the circumstances. However, chemical, biological and nuclear agents are dangerous, uncontrollable and undifferentiating weapons of mass destructions. Actions must be taken to see that there are no future instances of use during war. However, before one discusses the legal and ethical issues involved with CBW, one must understand what chemical, biological and nuclear weapons are and how they function.

     Laqueur sheds enlightenment into a new arena for terrorism: Arms of Mass Destruction. The chemical and biological weapons of yesterday are available and relatively cheap on today’s open market. Mr. Laqueur goes into depth on previous usages by terrorist organizations using these types of weapons as well as the