snow: Calling all trucks Types of chemical and biological weapons

Such application of these weapons is not practical in a large scale conflict between two nations.
These weapons are often slow to kill and cause unnecessary pain to the target.
There is a degree of uncertainty as to whether or not the weapon will eliminate the target (requires supervision) Have the potential to put an end to an armed conflict by quickly incapacitating enemy forces
Can be justified by a utilitarian approach if the lives lost and damage done by the weapon to end the war are less than that caused by a continuation of the war Unintended civilian casualties (comparable to a nuclear weapon)
Potential to backfire I do not agree with the use of chemical or biological weapons in any scenario because it is illogical to use such weapons when conventional weapons (guns, explosives, etc.) are just as effective if not more effective at dispatching enemies.

“How Biological and Chemical Warfare Works.” 2009.

Unlike biological weapons, chemical weapons had actually been used inmodern warfare.

“A History of Biological Warfare from 300 B.C.E.

On November 25, 1969, the President declared thatthe United States unilaterally renounced first use of lethal or incapacitating chemical agents andweapons and unconditionally renounced all methods of biological warfare.

Common Biological and Chemical Weapons Agents - WebMD

While the United States did not consider prohibition of one of these classes of weapons lessurgent or important than the other, it held that biological weapons presented less intractableproblems, and an agreement on banning them should not be delayed until agreement on a reliableprohibition of chemical weapons could be reached.

“The Ethics of Chemical and Biological Weaponry.” Santa Clara University.


On February 14, 1970, the White Houseannounced extension of the ban to cover toxins (substances falling between biologicals andchemicals in that they act like chemicals but are ordinarily produced by biological or microbicprocesses).

Download Chemical and Biological Weapons and …

Many states maintained chemical weapons in their arsenals to deter the use ofthis type of weapon against them, and to provide a retaliatory capability if deterrence failed.

Chemical, Biological and Radiological Weapons - Public health

A number of nations, including the SovietUnion and its allies, continued to favor a comprehensive agreement covering both chemical andbiological weapons.

Is it ethical to research, develop, or use chemical and biological weapons?

Gaddafi has chemical weapons and he's ready to use …

The Biological Weapons Convention, which came into force in 1975, has one great and apparently lasting achievement to its credit: it was the first treaty to ban an entire category of weapons of mass destruction. Yet there are worries that the eighth review conference, which begins in Geneva today, will fail to achieve much more than windy generalities. The problem is that although the treaty has established a powerful norm, backed by 175 countries, against the acquisition or use of biological weapons, it is weak in two important areas. The first is that unlike, say, the analogous Chemical Weapons Convention, it has no formal method of monitoring or verifying compliance. The second is that it is ineffective when it comes to keeping up with the latest scientific advances, such as low-cost gene-editing methods that have the potential for dual use. Progress on either front would be a step in the right direction.

What about research involving possible chemical and biological agents?

Common Biological and Chemical Weapons Agents - …

Here are brief descriptions of several types of chemical and biological agents: • Nerve agents: A Japanese cult used sarin gas in 1985 to kill a dozen people and injure 5,500 in a Tokyo subway.

A draft convention proposed in theGeneral Assembly by the Soviet Union and its allies on September 19 dealt with both chemicaland biological weapons.

A Short History of Bio-Chemical Weapons - CounterPunch

Many of these nations, the United States pointed out, would be reluctant to give up thiscapability without reliable assurance that other nations were not developing, producing, andstockpiling chemical weapons.