by 
PokerPaul
ANSWERS: 5
-
Biological weapons are "alive"...chemical ones are inert. http://www.milnet.com/chembio.htm
-
Biological Weapons are actual living organisms, like a virus, in some sort of delivery system. Anthrax can be a biological weapon if delivered in some manner that allows it to be dispersed and inhaled, like in a SCUD Missle. Chemical Weapons, on the other hand involve chemicals that have a deadly reaction with living tissue. It also needs some sort of delivery system to disperse the chemical. Mustard Gas would be one example of a chemical weapon. It could also be delivered and dispersed by a SCUD missle.
-
Just to add to shea52403's answer. Biological weapons, being, in many cases, infectious diseases, have the potential to spread far beyond that area where they are initially released. Many victims would become infected, but still try to escape the area. This would spread the disease to other areas. With modern transportation, there is the potential for such and agent to be spread globally before the authorities could put sufficiently stringent quarantine procedure in effect to contain it. Chemical weapons, on the other hand, represent a fixed quantity of poison that will become less effective as it spreads because the concentrations drop as the poison is diluted within the carrying medium (air or water). Therefore, the effects are usually limited to the area in which they are used. BTW, this is one reason why security officials don't really consider the prospect of terrorists poisoning a municipal water supply to be very likely. It would take just too much poison to do something like that.
-
why are chemical and biological weapons feared?
-
physically active chemicals are not physically only if you use it in the term if they have a reaction with something.
Glenn Blaylock RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC