From: utzoo!decvax!genrad!linus!allegra!eagle!mhuxt!mhuxj!mhuxa!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxo!jnc
Newsgroups: net.politics
Title: Re: Are nuclear weapons *special*?
Article-I.D.: ihuxo.232
Posted: Wed May 11 16:01:37 1983
Received: Sat May 14 00:49:45 1983

Relay-Version:version B 2.10 gamma 4/3/83; site mhuxt.UUCP
Posting-Version:version B 2.10 gamma 4/7/83; site ihuxo.UUCP
Message-ID:<232@ihuxo.UUCP>
Date:Wed, 11-May-83 16:01:37 EDT
Organization:BTL Naperville, Il.

This note is in response to Neil Katin's comments on the issue of
the unique-ness of nuclear arms, and specifically to his statements on
biological/chemical warfare.

Neil states, "The US has renounced all use of biological weapons and
first use of chemical weapons. . ."

This statement might lead us to believe that the U.S. has not recently
used chemical weapons, when the U.S. has in fact used chemical warfare
as recently as the Vietnam War.  I'm referring to our use of Agent Orange,
a defoliant sprayed, by the millions of gallons, on the Vietnamese
countryside (and on the Vietnamese people, and inadvertently on U.S.
soldiers).

Agent Orange contained, among other ingredients, a chemical called dioxin,
one of the most toxic substances known. Times Beach, Mo., was accidently
contaminated with trace amounts of dioxin, and the EPA evacuated the town
earlier this year.

Certainly the use of Agent Orange qualifies as chemical warfare against
the Vietnamese, who have complained of neurological and other organ damage,
and enormous increases in the rate of birth defects, among peo;ple exposed
to the defoliant.  Vietnam veterans accidently sprayed with Agent Orange
have documented similar effects.

Just trying to set the record straight,
		Jeff Coleman