Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: rcorless@uwovax.uwo.ca (Rob Corless) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Biological weapons Message-ID: <1991Jan19.033623.765@cbnews.att.com> Date: 19 Jan 91 03:36:23 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 24 Approved: military@att.att.com From: Rob Corless Only two of all the news reports I have read or heard mentioned Iraq's biological weapons capability. One report just mentioned the words, while the other was a brief, sketchy account of some U.S. medical people being very skeptical that vaccines could be prepared in time for Jan 15. The diseases mentioned in the article included anthrax. (1st was CBC television interview, 2nd was a Denver Post article). I am naive, perhaps, but I am *much* more worried about biological weapons than nuclear ones -- according to the well-known principle of biology, "Under the most carefully controlled conditions, the organisms will do what they damn well please". Can anyone in this newsgroup provide an overview of the effectiveness of such weapons, with particular regard to Iraq's arsenal? That is a rather vague question, but I'm afraid I am too ignorant to phrase it more precisely. I am aware of the difference between biological weapons and biologically-produced chemical weapons, but although I see reports that Iraq has chemical weapons I don't know how they were produced, or if that is significant. It is the purely biological ones I am concerned with.