|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
... The possibility that terrorists may use chemical or biological materials is only increasing over time, but there is still more of a risk from conventional weapons. ... Nonetheless, the CIA continues to believe that terrorists are less likely to use chemical and biological weapons than conventional explosives. ... In 1997, of the 74 criminal investigations related to weapons of mass destruction, 30 percent were related to the use of biological materials. In 1998, there were 181 criminal investigations related to weapons of mass destruction, and 112 were related to the use of biological materials. ...
Most people believe that it is when, not if, an attack will occur with chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. ... While an attack with a Weapon of Mass Destruction will cause loss of life, we have to ask ourselves if a small terrorist network can produce massive weapons. ... On the other hand, some statements suggest that there are considerable difficulties associated with successfully developing and delivering a Weapon of Mass Destruction. ... For example, the Deputy Commander of the Army’s Medical Research and Materiel Command testified in 1998 about the difficulties of using a Weapon of Mass Destruction, noting that
An effective, mass-casualty producing attack on our citizens would require either a fairly large, very technically competent, well-funded terrorist program or state sponsorship. ("Weapons of Mass Destruction. ... 2002)
In addition, the Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency testified that the agency had no conclusive information that any of the terrorist organizations it monitors were developing chemical, biological, or radiological weapons and that there was no conclusive information that any state sponsor had the intention to provide these weapons to terrorists.
Approximate Word count = 1114
Approximate Pages = 4.5
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|