 |
 |
 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
Imagine, a September 11 with weapons of
mass destruction. It's not 3,000. It's tens of thousands of innocent men,
women and children."
There is already a mountain of evidence that Saddam Hussein
is gathering weapons for the purpose of using them. And adding additional
information is like adding a foot to Mount Everest.
The problem here is that there will always be some
uncertainty about how quickly he (Saddam) can acquire nuclear weapons. But
we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.
We have no such weapons at all, no chemical weapons, no
biological weapons. |
|||
Weapons of Mass Deception
When Bush wanted to invade Iraq, he tossed out several reasons, one at a time. Growing concerned that none of his explanations were swaying public sentiment to enable him to invade a country that posed no threat to our country, nor had attacked us, he resorted to a lie that finally stuck. We have to invade to remove Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The lies were thick and vast. The news media was excited to spread the tales of what Iraq could do with its vast arsenal of WMDs. It could launch missiles containing NBC’s (nuclear, biological or chemical weapons) on our populace. When this failed credibility, it became 'rain down his short range missiles on our regional allies.' Lies, damned lies, and told often finally gave the President the poll numbers to attack a non-belligerent nation. Let me tell you about WMDs. I know something about WMDs. I spent more time studying WMDs that GW spent in the Air Guard. Maybe a lot more time. I know chemistry. I know microbiology. I know molecular biology. I have worked extensively with anthrax, plague and the most dangerous viruses Arizona has to offer. I was a founder, and head of Arizona’s Bioterrorism Detection laboratory at the State Public Health laboratory for several years. Definitions: Weapons of Mass Destruction: Weapons capable of causing large numbers of casualties for relatively small size, or single use. [misnomer discussed below] I will be looking at a terrorist or small nations as potential aggressors with these weapons, as larger governments use of these weapons would be strategic rather than tactical, and require different deterrents. Four categories: Nuclear, Biological, Chemical and Conventional
Nuclear: atomic bomb, thermonuclear bomb (hydrogen bomb), radiation bomb Atomic bomb: fission bomb, creates large blast, radioactive residuals, large energy release kills thousands to tens of thousands in a city. Permanently blinding UV flash. Thermonuclear (a.k.a., Hydrogen bomb) bomb: fusion bomb. Uses atomic bomb as the detonator to generate fusion reaction. Immensely powerful. Enormous blast radius. Permanently blinding UV flash. City killer. Radioactive residuals. Kills tens of thousands to millions in city. Radiation bomb: conventional bomb encasing radioactive (or toxic) material that is disseminated as a cloud of drifting debris in a conventional blast. Radiation is silent, so after what appears to be a conventional explosion, further harm can result if radiation is not sought immediately upon investigating the blast. As above, radiation treatment of survivors, cancer registries and monitoring for decades to life, and expensive cleanup and disposal of radioactive debris. Advantages: Has not been done, so great deal of notoriety for obtaining and using any of the above weapons. Radiation a big fear word. Very reliable weapon, both blast and very certain of detonation due to well known technology. Not overly dependent upon weather or time of day. Nuclear devices are very safe for terrorists, somewhat unsafe in construction process by small nation-states. Disadvantages: Very hard to obtain nuclear weapons. Keep radiation from killing yourself, or making someone sick with obvious and unexplainable radiation poisoning during construction, especially radiation bombs. Anyone using such a weapon would have no where to hide. Weapon detectable with radiation monitors, and heavy. Biological: Any weapon using infectious organisms, or biological toxins. Includes genetically modified organisms or toxins. Dissemination through inhalation or ingestion. Contact generally will not cause infection. Advantages: Easy to obtain and cultivate organisms in large quantities without detection. Seemingly easy to disperse biological weapon. A biological attack would be new and therefore terrifying weapon, even if attempts at disseminating are very ineffective. Silent killer, release not detectable and long incubation period of days which allows one to disseminate and be well away before anyone knows what you have done. Puts a real crush on health care and decontamination infrastructure. Little bit goes a long way. Grams of material can be effective at terror, as witnessed by the anthrax letter mailings which is estimated at less than 10 grams (size about 10 sugar cubes) of material. Disadvantages: Hard to maintain pathogenicity of organism grown up in large quantities. May be vaccine available. May be treatment available. May infect yourself, and will not be able to disguise infection. Very hard to produce product in easily disseminated, yet effective form. Very sensitive to dissemination in daylight, wind speed, or too high or low humidity. Variable infectious responses in variable humans, and can only be used once in same area as survivors develop immunity. Usually organisms not infectious beyond exposed persons (i.e., unlike Hollywood movies, most organisms suitable for weaponization will not be transmitted from human to human, so sick people pose no risk - a few exceptions), and disseminated weapon usually not infectious for more than a few hours post-dissemination. Requires elaborate equipment and experience to prepare. Viruses more difficult to cultivate than bacteria. Short storage half life (typically hours to days) once weapon created. Due to Legionnaire’s disease and other air concerns, even high rise buildings now present problems for terrorists considering indoor release.
Both Hollywood and the government would like you to believe that Joe Six Pack can whip up biological or chemical weapons in their garage. This is bunk. In one case it is literary license, in the other it is misleading for reasons of inexcusable ignorance, or political and prosecutorial opportunism. It takes a great deal of skill to surreptitiously and definitely acquire the raw materials, maintain its pathogenicity, and create and appropriately dispense these agents in a manner that will sicken or kill people. Frankly, it takes training, and a lot of test runs. Chemical: Chemicals, usually highly reactive, that will kill and injure (or depending upon who classifies them, can temporarily disable) people when disseminated and come into contact either through ingestion, contact or inspiration. Advantages: The few chemicals needed are readily available, in bulk, anywhere in the world. The technology is well known. A chemical attack would be new enough in this country to cause widespread terror, even with only a handful of deaths. Immediate heavy burden on health care and decontamination infrastructure. Most are contact poisons, and cleanup and disposal costs are high, as well as contamination risk for responders, transport vehicles and treatment facilities. Disadvantages: It takes a lot of volume of chemicals to produce casualties, relative to biological weapons. Effective dissemination dependent upon moderate wind speeds, and humidity levels. Potential for injuring yourself. May be antidote and treatment available. Highly reactive: corrosive. Produces tell tale smells. May be readily detectable and identifiable after government set up programs. Bulk chemicals both monitorable and traceable.
Conventional explosive: Not necessarily considered a WMD, but tell that to the people in Oklahoma City. Advantages: Well known, reliable and predictable blast. Readily obtainable materials worldwide. Safe. Expertise worldwide readily obtainable. Disadvantages: Takes a lot of explosives to make a very large blast. Required foreplanning to maximize destruction and casualties. Expertise required. Monitorable and traceable. As you can see weapons of mass destruction are not without problems. Otherwise, everyone would be doing them. Yet they cause inordinate fright for what they are capable of doing. For the most part, biological and chemical weapons when deployed kill few, and sicken dozens to a few hundred. But they frighten. And that is why the White House used them, to get your support behind their plans for conquest of the Middle East . . . hey, they are your kids. Maybe you raised them to become cannon fodder for the Empire. As we have seen, an airplane can be a weapon of mass destruction. Potentially so could tanker trucks and non-passenger trains. Enormous amounts of your tax dollars are being spent of detecting and treating these weapons. But the amount is ludicrously disproportional to the threat.
My solutions would be: 1) Continue our policy to nation states of hit us with an NBC, prepare to get a nuke in response. Nukes are a valuable deterrence because they are effective, if we make it clear they are targeted at the aggressing nation’s leadership. 2) Get rid of the Select Agent act, passed by a cowardly Congress, at the behest of law enforcement who have not the foggiest notion of how to detect or respond to a WMD. More counter-WMD research has been killed off by the requirements and penalties on otherwise perfectly harmless and quite valuable researchers than any other act of CONgress. 3) Let the free market work. If the market exists for detecting WMDs, and countering WMDs, the market place will provide the solutions. The only solutions government provides are fear and inconvenience as they squash our rights. In addition, cash bounties on information leading to arrest and prosecution of terrorists works better. It is hard to keep a conspiracy secret. And there are plenty of suppiers of bulk chemicals who would love to make a phone call for a reward. But will government pick up the phone and listen . . . they have not before.
Teacher Arrested
At Phoenix Sky Harbor airport today, an
individual later discovered to
|
||||
|
|
||||
