Re: Al-Qaida may have nuclear weapons

["Frank Helk" <frank.helk@nis-hanau.de>]

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 04:46:42 -0800 (PST), Gerry Blackwood wrote:



Gerry,



>I will also make this point as well, not all WMD are equal. Not

>to underplay the seriousness of WMDs and many are very serious

>threats in the hands of terrorists, but we have to place these

>weapons in perspective. Nuclear weapons are of course

>significantly more threatening to life and order than either bio

>and or chemical weapons at this time. Biological weapons may some

>day destroy life on a massive extent, but they are still

>theoretical and turning this into and effective WMD weapon is

>extremely difficult. Of these threats proliferation of

>conventional weapons and unsecured fissile (nuclear) materials

>are the most serious.  



In that point I have an opposite opinion.



The damage done by a nuclear weapon is - even while one of the most horrible threats - at most limited. A very big boom, much damage, and contamination 

of a more or less area. Besides of the magnitude, not much different from a chemical weapon like i.e. nerve gas.



On the other side a biological weapon is incontrollable by its nature, because the deadly agent is self-replicating. The first time effect is defnitely much less 

compared to a nuclear blast. But even a single, small stroke with a bioweapon carries the risk of killing a significat part of mankind - without distinction 

between friend or foe.



THAT's what I'm really scared off.



Best regards



	Frank





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the

text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,

with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/