A pessimist might think we agreed to the treaties because we weren't
giving up anything that would work. We haven't given up nuclear weapons.
As an optimist, I think we also have treaties about land mines.
-----
Get a free science project every week! "http://scitoys.com/newsletter.html"On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Nathan McCorkle <nmz787@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 11:44 PM, Daniel C. <dcrookston@gmail.com> wrote:I thought we don't have bioweapons because we agreed to some
> The US military did a lot of research into chemical and biological
> weapons. Their conclusion was that biological weapons are too
> unreliable and/or ineffective to actually use. Granted, part of the
> military's requirements probably include the ability to control the
> affected population (a goal that a terrorist might not share) but I
> still think it's a good sign. If the US military can't make it work,
> the chance that a bioterrorist will have success seems pretty slim.
>
international treaty(ies)
--
Nathan McCorkle
Rochester Institute of Technology
College of Science, Biotechnology/Bioinformatics
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DIYbio" group.
To post to this group, send email to diybio@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to diybio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/diybio?hl=en.
0 comments:
Post a Comment