Biological Warfare Pros and Cons

0
13317
Biological Warfare Pros and Cons

Biological warfare for offensive purposes has been outlawed since 1972 and the treaty that outlawed the practices has been ratified by 170 countries. The Geneva Protocol of 1925 also prohibits the use of biological weapons. We often think of biological warfare as a modern trend, but the first known practice of it dates back to the 6th century. The Assyrians put a fungus in the water supply of their enemies to make them a less effective fighting force.

Are there pros and cons to consider with biological warfare? Or is it a practice that should be eliminated from the world today?

The Pros of Biological Warfare

It can end a war very quickly.
Many biological warfare components are highly concentrated. Just a few drops of certain agents, toxins, or bacteria can literally kill millions of people once they hit the air or water supply within a community. This eliminates the enemy population quickly and effectively without the destructive forces that a nuclear weapon would employ if detonated over a community.

They are cheap and easy to make.
Biological weapons are effectively deadly partially because of how cheaply and easily they can be made. Literally anyone can create their own crude biological weapons if they have the flu and leave samples of the virus in container that they can manage to keep the virus alive over time.

They are weapons that are extremely easy to disperse.
If a government receive intelligence about where a terrorist cell was located, they could introduce a biological weapon over the location. This would effectively eliminate the terrorist threat immediately because the disease would spread from person to person and eventually remove the cell from existence, providing protection to the rest of society.

The Cons of Biological Warfare

It is never 100% effective.
Despite their deadly nature, research has consistently found that between 1-10% of the general population is naturally immune to the biological compounds that have been formed into a weapon. This means that to effectively remove an enemy population, a nation would be forced to expose their own soldiers to these compounds so that survivors could be eliminated.

There are massive amounts of collateral damage.
In any given population, there are going to be civilians who are not active combatants in whatever conflict is going on. Biological warfare eliminates the entire population center, not just the military forces. This means that a toxin released in a city of millions could potentially murder over a million people in the name of war.

These weapons are unpredictable.
In the few instances where biological weapons were dispersed, there was just as much of a chance that a nation could infect their own troops with compounds that were meant for the enemy. Some biological components can live for an extended period in ground soil or the water supply, which means that a site can be “hot” for upwards of five decades sometimes and be mostly unusable.

There’s a reason why most nations have banned biological weapons for offensive purposes. Too many innocents get hurt when these weapons are released. By weighing these pros and cons, everyone can decide if these weapons should be a viable component of modern warfare.