Terrorist Attacks: Weapons Of Mass Destruction

On august 6th 1945, the United States dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima, and 3 days later, they dropped another on the city of Nagasaki. The new weapons completely decimated the cities, and killed tens of thousands of people. Japan announced they would surrender to the allies a few days later on august 15. The United States justified their using of the bombs as a means to end the war without an invasion of Japan that would have resulted in thousands of more deaths on each side. While the Japanese did surrender shortly after the bombings, there is ample evidence to suggest that their surrender was imminent, and the use of the atomic bomb only accelerated peace. Through this essay, I will critically analyze justifications on the usage of the bombings, and potential results on this devastating new weapon.

The terrorist attacks on September 11 changed America forever. The attacks led to President Bush creating the Department of Homeland Security which tried to centralize the federal response to all terrorist threats. However, local police, firefighters, and emergency medical technicians will still be the first to arrive at the scene of an attack. These first responders face a unique and increasingly dangerous task when reacting to a terrorist attack on US soil.

International terrorism has greatly impacted the role of first responders throughout the U.S., not only in terms of large scale events like the attacks on 9/11, but the role of the first responder has needed to adapt to the widely varying methods of attacks that have been employed. First responders may face threats from biological, chemical, and radiological weapons of mass destruction. First responder heroes of 9/11 are still dealing with injuries, illness, and even still dying from the effects of that terrorist attack. (ODMP, 2017). First

Terrorist attacks are man-made attacks directed to harm or end the lives of civilians for the terrorist's specific reasons. In the past, these attacks were seen as uncommon and were shocking to the public whenever they did occur; however, after the Trade Center incident of September 11th, the public and the government finally realized that terrorist attacks were no longer simply a rare occurrence, but something to be anticipated and prepared for properly (Pilat, 2005). While shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing and foreign nuclear scares of the Clinton administration, the emphasis of WMD attacks rested on nuclear weapons, it became readily apparent that biological weapons were equally if not more dangerous to the public (Chittaranjan, 1998). Along this line of thought, the federal government enacted the CONPLAN, a plan that outlines the status and treatment of certain terrorist attacks and how these attacks are to be dealt with on a local, state, and national level. This paper will discuss the methods recommended for local responders at the scene of a WMD terrorist attack.

Earlier this morning, terrorist released lethal chemical agents in Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York City. This terrorist attack has killed hundreds and it also has injured thousands. As an intelligence analyst with the Department of Homeland Security, I will be developing a background paper discussing the National Response Plan (NRP) and the roles DHS agencies play in the response.

Chapter six of the textbook, Biosecurity and Bioterrorism Containing and Preventing Biological Threats, by Jeffrey R. Ryan, goes into extensive detail on the different ways to respond to a potential or active bioterrorist attract. To better explain, there are many different types of responders. For instance, there are the first responders, as well as community response organizations (Ryan, 2016, p. 136). In addition, there are many divergent levels of first responders that are called to a scene of an intentional or unintentional release of a chemical or biological hazardous substance. These levels are listed in the textbook as first responder awareness level, first

First responder safety is imperative while working on the scene of a terrorist event. It is the responsibility of their employers to ensure that they have the protection and equipment needed to get them through their shifts safely. Some of this can be accomplished by being prepared for a terrorist attack to occur. Several ways to be prepared in advance are to have proper Personal Protective Equipment, any special equipment deemed necessary by the responders and the training on the equipment.

Terrorist attacks have increased over the past few decades and will continue to do so as new technology is made available to terrorist cells. Adversaries can conduct physical, chemical, biological, and cyber-attacks (Department of Homeland Security, 2012). Ensuring that first responders are properly trained will reduce the risk brought to them. Training and exercises will keep first responders prepared for whatever happens next. Although not

In the article “Know the Smells and Warning Bells of WMD”, the author, John Linstrom’s principal point is that the fire departments should better prepare to respond to incidents involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Historically, explosive or WMD incidents were handled by law enforcement, while fire assumed a support role, but with increased terroristic occurrences, firefighters have been finding themselves in situations where they have been first on scene. Mr. Linstrom stresses that firefighters need to be mindful of the threat of explosives and WMD’s when responding to incidents (Linstrom, 2004). Firefighters need to familiarize themselves with terrorist tactics and beware of potential high-risk

What is Bioterrorism? What are the types of Bioterrorism? What issues or concerns should we be aware of when talking about Bioterrorism? How is Bioterrorism different from the United States and that of Guam? These are some of the things people would think of and wonder when they hear the word Bioterrorism. It’s important to know the different steps or precautions that a person can look into in order to prevent themselves from being a victim of Bioterrorism. First things first, Bioterrorism is defined as the intentional release of toxic biological agents to harm and terrorize civilians, in the name of a political or other cause. The history of Bioterrorism goes way back. According to the Terrorism Issues and Homeland Security, there have always been efforts to use germs and disease as weapons. The reported risk has led the U.S. government to expend immense resources for bio-defense in the early part of the 21st century. According to Right Diagnosis from health grades, there was a list of the different types of Bioterrorism and they are: Anthrax, Salmonella, Glanders, Melioidosis, and Smallpox.

It is always a scary prospect of someone or a group using something like a weapon of mass destruction on our home soil. It should be a high priority to be prepared in case of the unimaginable and our country needs to face the reality of our modern times with those who are out there that want to cause us harm and take proper steps to prevent or stop this. Some of these ways are creating government acts in order to help different agencies allocate resources or stockpile in case of emergencies or educating agencies on the realization of the possibility of an attack and help with training their employees.

The 9/11 terrorist attacks irrevocably and dramatically transformed the landscape of national security and risk, marking the beginning of the nebulous and never-ending War on Terror. Western governments frequently cite terrorism to rationalize legislation that restricts the privacy and democratic freedoms of its citizenry as anti-terror, increasing unaccountable government power. This rhetoric includes that governments must eliminate all risk of terror, it being such an existential threat that we, as citizens, can and must do everything to fight “them”, including throwing out privacy and the freedom of the press. Our lives are both augmented and restrained by the advent of ‘big data’ that, when paired the ongoing mass, indiscriminate surveillance, strips individuals of their right to privacy. Governments have capitalized on the corporate practice of collecting massive amounts of data on individuals, which has increased in both scale and scope as surveillance technology has become more sophisticated and more difficult to evade. The result is that we live under a global Panopticon in the knowledge that at any point, our online lives and communications can be exposed and subject to scrutiny. Other democratic freedoms jettisoned in the fight include the transparency and accountability in public administration and, relatedly, a free, independent and pluralistic media. The same anti-terror rhetoric and legislation is used to spy on, prosecute, and imprison journalists and

section of track and bridged the gap with wire to disable the electronic warning system.

Biological weapons cannot, without explosive components, destroy structures. Nuclear weapons can level entire parts of a city. Nuclear weapons however cannot target specific groups of people within the impact zone whereas biological agents can be deployed in an enclosed space, reducing the number of deaths but targeting only a specific group. This may be important when considering the terrorists constituents. Do they want targeted attacks against only government or military personnel? Would they rather see a high death toll? Terrorist organizations are not typically simply causing death, they are advancing a political or religious ideal that may have limitations that shy away from indiscriminant

The solution does not lie in procurement of things: safety equipment, clothing or gadgets for fire services or police. If preparation for chemical terrorism is HAZMAT equipment, treatment in the streets and a cordoned-off crime scene; preparation for biological terrorism is education, a robust public health system and broad interagency collaboration. The integrated system must include intelligence and forensics, the means and the will to retaliate, medical and physical countermeasures and a strong public health infrastructure, all bound by vigorous interagency collaboration and effective educational programs. We face a very complex problem; one of low-probability, but potentially high-impact. Calling for a “Manhattan Project” may actually be under-response. What must we do?