Why Do North Korea Use Chemical Weapons?

Poison Gas/Chemical Warfare usage, while not harming physical structures preventing the collateral damage of homes and buildings, causes a high casualty rate in all living things. It is indescriminate and robs life equally be they related or not to a target of military or strategic importance. Gas usage has been widely considered uncivilized, but the French resorted to its usage in August, 1914 during the first World War in an attempt to rout the Germans. Unfortunately, the Germans were the first to give gas warfare serious development and it became used extensively before the war was over. On the battlefield it prooved effective in eliminating hostile threats in an inhumane way, but this does not make it morally acceptable. In more recent times ISIS has been reported to using Poison Gas in Syria against both military and civilians in an indescriminate manner. This sort of attack ignores international laws as well as inhumanely cause widespread harm. In this day and age, this sort of attack is unnecessary and is why it was outlawed in the first place even back during the first World War.

Chemical warfare, while horrible, proved to be unwieldy and unpredictable, and relatively easy to counter. After some limited successes against unprepared opponents, the use of chemical gas had very little tactical benefit; the recognition of this limited utility is that after widespread use in 1915 - except for the short-lived effects of the introduction of mustard gas in 1917 - gas was abandoned by both sides as an effective tactic.

The first World War has been reported to be one of the most brutal wars in the history of time for many reasons. One of those reasons was strategic usage of chemical warfare. Chemical gas was used on both sides of the line, which turned out to be fatal for many. World War I was mostly fought in the trenches, where soldiers lived in deep, v-shaped holes or underground bunkers. Both sides would occupy these trenches in order to escape from the constant stream of bullets. These battles often ended in a standoff, or tie, which helped the introduction of a different, brand new style of fighting that included the use of chemicals. These chemicals had a range of

Did you know that it is estimated that North Korea has less than 10 nuclear weapons and the United States has around 7,200. Even though we have a lot, just one can do a lot of damage if launched. North Korea has been threatening the U.S. ever since the war we had against them. In their country they are taught we are not good people and we are one of two main enemies. I think North Korea is a threat the the U.S. because they have nuclear weapons, have a large army and are backed up by china, and they think we are bad and are ready to attack whenever.

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.

In 1925 Geneva Protocool became huge becuase those in the part war wanted to avoided such a deadly war again. 38 Countires signed this agreemnet “that prohibited the use of ‘asphyxiating, poisonous or or other gas’ in warfare” (“Chemical Warfare: Does the use of Chemical Weapons warrant immediate US intervention?” 2). People belive that with out this being set in place that World War 2 wouldve been much more deadly then it already was. This shows the effect of signing the Geneva Protocool and the world leaders had learned from the bad and moved forward from then on out so they became “reluctant to use chemical weapons during World War II than they did during World War I” (“Chemical Warfare: Does the use of Chemical Weapons warrant immediate US intervention?” 3). Despite the effort of the Geneva Protocool it wore off “During the Vietnam War, the US military sprayed herbicide and other chemicals, including agent orange, over the Vietname countryside” (“Chemical Warfare: Does the use of Chemical Weapons warrant immediate US intervention?” 3). Overtime the protocool wore out but it did have some great effects and helped for a few years after it was

According to a recent article entitled “North Korea tests most powerful nuclear bomb yet” written by Angela Dewan on the CNN website, North Korea has successfully tested a ICMB-ready hydrogen bomb. In her article, Angela Dewan explains how relations between North Korea and the US have become worse to the point that military options are being considered to deal with the recent successful underground hydrogen bomb test by North Korea. According to the article, the nuclear device was “more than eight times more powerful than the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945,” The article also explains how relations have become worse since the death of Kim Jong Il the father of the current dictator Kim Jong Un. Both South Korea and the United States

The Germans had the far most advanced chemical weapons during each war from WWI to WWII, the Germans were the first to use chemical weapons on the battlefield during World War I Phosgene, and Sulfur Mustard Gas on the allies. Furthermore, during WWII the Germans not only used these chemical poisonous weapons on the battlefield but used hydrogen cyanide on Jews who were under captivity killing millions during the war. Furthermore, Tabu was discovered by the Schrader at IG Farben who connected Phosphorous to cyanide gas and was way more effective than the chemical weapons from WWI, and could kill a victim within 20 minutes of inhaling it.

The first World war chemical weapons were used then outlawed for combat. “Unlike when the U.S. was the only nuclear power and first used the technology against Japan without fear of reciprocation” ( The Ch.1 The Dangers). As a country we didn’t know the effects of a bomb on a living city, but now we know the consequences. Now what

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.

War, according to the Oxford Dictionary, is “A state of armed conflict between different nations or states or different groups within a nation or state” (citation). War truly does bring out the worst of in the people involved, because in war the objective is to kill or capture enough of the opposing sides’ soldiers to show that your side is superior. Both sides will take any measures necessary to win, a few examples of this being Mustard gas, Ricin, Agent Orange, and Sarin . When guns and other weapons will not cut it, that’s when in the mind of the governments that chemical warfare became necessary . Since these four chemicals and many more have been used throughout history, the Chemical Warfare Convention banned all forms of chemical weapons, due to the lasting effects of the chemicals on both nations and individuals of those nations. The way the CWC defines a chemical weapon is a toxic chemical or its precursor that can cause death, injury, temporary incapacitation or sensory irritation through its chemical action.

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.

Chemical weapons are toxic gases, which use in the wars such as World War 1. Chemical weapons used in First World War and they killed a lot of people even children. In addition, chemical weapons are unless color, so people can’t see them. Also, most of people who died through the First World War were civilians. Therefore, who were responsible about them? In addition, people who survived had dangerous and permanent diseases such as cancer, asthma … etc. Even people’s genes effected by these toxic gases and they cause a lot of genetic problems that appeared in a second generation. Even soldiers who were pushed to this war. Then, they died or effected who were responsible about their families. In addition chemical weapons burned a lot of trees and they changed plant characteristics. Also, these gases can react with others to change air and weather characteristics. Therefore, chemical weapons effect on our

Chemical weapons originated in early World War I. They were simple grenades or mortars filled with common chemicals. These specialized grenades were popularized by the Germans and then were seen used by even the Allied Forces. They were popularized by their area of effect and useful in the trench warfare.

Before the establishment of the norms the weapons could us in any circumstances. So the international law limited the reasons of using the weapons against other states. And other organization would like to avoid this kind of issue among the states. Today however such killing are increasing in the battle and the reasons is the weapons maximize the number of the victims and the dead people. The court noticed that for the privilege to apply to the present condition of the law of the Charter on the utilization of power and the law material in equipped clash, specifically compassionate law, must consider the one of a kind qualities of atomic weapons, and specifically their dangerous limit, their ability to bring about unbelievable human enduring, and their capacity to harm to the coming