ADVANTAGES OF USING VIRAL WEAPONS

Introduction Advantages of Using ... Current Threats   Small Pox Threat   Other Viruses...   Terrorist Threat

You're probably wondering why anybody would bother using missiles loaded with viruses instead of explosives. Truth is, in many cases it's much easier to kill a person by just hitting him with a bomb. The problem with this is that if you bomb the person you also bomb the house, factory, or military installation. It leaves an enemy's country in ruins. We've seen how such devastation can actually hinder an invading force. In World War I, for example, Russians would intentionally burned down their buildings, farms, food, etc. catching the invading army without shelter and food for the upcoming winter months. A viral weapon on the other hand, will kill the person and leave the houses, factories, and military bases alone. With no people left, an invader could then use the houses, factories, and all for their own purposes.

Against modern Western nations, viral weapons are particularly effective. Infected people usually won't show symptoms for at least a few days after infection. Since people in Western nations travel a lot, the virus could potentially spread its devastation over a huge area.

Viral weapons are also considerably less expensive. While it would take hundreds of scientists many years and millions of dollars to develop working nuclear technology, a dozen biologists with a few hundred thousand dollars could develop a viral weapon in a matter of weeks. In addition, the weapon could be developed and created using pharmaceutical equipment that is readily available all over the world.

CURRENT THREATS

The threat of Iraq's germ warfare program has already caused a lot of trouble for the UN. They are believed to possess enough viral, chemical, and biological weapons to kill several hundred million people.

However, Iraq's stock of viral weapons is closely watched, while those of other countries are not. Russia is having what is effectively a yard sale on all sorts of weapons, from conventional weapon systems to rare metals. While they are not known to have sold biological or nuclear weapons, the possibility is definitely there. Their economy has not been stable in the recent years as given example by the ruble crash in August of 1998. If given a choice between selling weapons or starving, most people would forgo their morality for a chance to eat. Scientists in Russia earn a mere $100 per month, yet are relatively well off, suggesting possible corruption.