|
|
 |
COULD IT HAPPEN HERE? Is the U.S. prepared for a chemical or biological weapons attack? February 11, 1998 |
|---|
Questions asked
in this forum:Is disarmament better than expensive defenses? Would bombing weapons sites in Iraq release dangerous agents into the atmosphere ? How much information is being disseminated via the Internet? What are the first symptoms of contact with a biological agent? How will this threat affect the design of cities and homes?
NewsHour Backgrounders
April 22, 1997
President Clinton wants the Senate to ratify the Chemicals Weapons Treaty, a document that that would ban some of the world's most dreaded killing agents.
November 11, 1996
Were U.S. soldiers exposed to chemical weapons during the Gulf War?
Browse the NewsHour's coverage of military.
Chemical Weapons Two types of chemical agents are of primary concern. Both are odorless gases that can kill millions of people in a single incident.
Sarin was designed by the Nazis as a final defense weapon--it was never used. Saddam Hussein has used sarin against unprotected Kurds in Iraq.
VX, reportedly developed by the British War Office is 100 to 1000 times more powerful. Both gases cause suffocation by attacking the nervous system. There is an antidote, but it's expensive and in short supply.
Biological Weapons Biological weapons are made out of germs--spores that can travel by air and that can take several days to sicken victims. The only sign might be thousands of people storming hospital emergency rooms. The incubation period for anthrax, for example, is 72 hours.
The closest the U.S. has come to a germ attack was in 1984 when the Rajneeshee cult in Oregon sprinkled salmonella bacteria in salad bars to sicken the population in an attempt to fix a local election.
The germs are out there, but using them is difficult. Two years ago the FBI nabbed a white supremacist who had ordered and received a sample of the bacteria that caused the bubonic plague form a mail-order house in Rockville, MD. However, he would have needed specialized knowledge to deliver the germ effectively. E
mergency rescue crews in cities across the U.S. are accustomed to handling hurricanes, hazardous spills and fires. But what about clouds of poisonous gases or air-borne spores of deadly germs? What once seemed like an exotic threat is now a terrible reality in some parts of the world. In 1995, the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo attacked the Tokyo subway system with sarin gas, killing 12 people and injuring about 5,500. The TV pictures of the incident begged a grim question: Could such an attack happen in the U.S.?
To many defense analysts, the question is not "if," but "when." Microbiologists can make deadly biological agents in a basement, and the list of countries
with chemical weapon capabilities grows every year. During a recent television appearance, Defense Secretary William Cohen used a 5-pound bag to illustrate the amount of biological agent that could wipe out half the people in Washington, D.C. Chemical and biological weapons are fast replacing nuclear weapons in nightmare scenarios of terrorism and international warfare.
Some analysts say the threat has been overplayed, however, and that the situation is not as dire as has been portrayed. Defense analyst Larry Johnson points out that the Japanese cult was well-financed, had access to the latest science, and failed four times before the 1995 attack. It also takes specialized knowledge to make the agents, and even more specialized military tactics to disperse them.
In a proactive move, the U.S. government has taken several steps to prepare for an attack. The Defense Department has shifted $500 million of the Pentagon's five-year budget to biological and chemical attacks. The Marines have created special response forces which would be called to the scene. The Army's Chemical and Biological Defense Command is working with local fire fighters and police to create a response mechanism.
States, too, could be taking action, but thus far, have been slow to adopt rigorous plans. Detectors could be installed in likely attack sites, like subways. But the price tag would be nearly $100 million, and detectors would only identify some agents.
So how concerned should we be? Should we be spending millions of tax dollars on a chemical weapons defense? What can the federal government do to make U.S. citizens feel safe from attack?
Our guests are Dr. Kathleen C. Bailey, a biological weapons specialist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a research institution for the Department of Defense. Dr. Bailey says the government could do much more to address the dangers of a biological or chemical attack.
Larry Johnson is the president of the Janus Group, a security consulting group. He believes the threats are exaggerated to ensure funding for military research institutions that are currently missionless.
Is disarmament better than expensive defenses? Would bombing weapons sites in Iraq release dangerous agents into the atmosphere ? How much information is being disseminated via the Internet? What are the first symptoms of contact with a biological agent? How will this threat affect the design of cities and homes?
Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. PBS Online Privacy Policy
Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved.
