Take away ALL weapons to the people who killed others who were inasent
They are on type. WMDs are also frequently referred to as NBC weapons:NuclearBiologicalChemical
FranceGermanyUnited StatesItalyUnited KingdomAustriaSingaporeChinaEgyptSpainNiger
no he acused it of having wmds and invaded it
the iraq war as no WMDs were found.
The world often condemns nuclear weapons for there desructive capabilities. Although if you consider, fear of total destruction actually has kept world war 3 from happening. Although the recent oil conflicts have threatened use of WMDs
No, because they were monsters back then and forced a bunch of scientists to make what they now call WMDs... And after being the only country in the world who has ever used a WMD, they feel the need to go and bomb other countries after imaginary WMDs... How does that look to you?
Bill O'Reilly
hey he used lots of weapons on his ships like wmds and other high tech stuff
Green Zone is set in the year 2003, when the United States first entered Iraq in search of WMDs.
I'm sorry to break it to you but humans are a threat to absolutely everything. This is largely due to the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs.) I don't mean to alarm you but a leading explanation for war explains that the nature of the international system is inherently anarchical and conducive to conflict. Because of this, someone will eventually pull the trigger on nuclear holocaust at some point. The risk of this heightens with unchecked nuclear proliferation, i.e. if WMDs find their way into the hands of failed, failing or rogue states (i.e. Pakistan, Iran, North Korea, Brooklyn...) If one of these areas gets their hands on a nuclear weapon, the worry is that they will use it instantly. Hope this helps.
At the time, Iran was a bigger threat to the US, and giving Iran another strong enemy to worry about would help US in it's machinations against Iran.
Weapons of mass destruction; are political tools for Internationale controlterrorism: 1. Political violence: violence or the threat of violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, carried out for political purposes. [English. v. err, To be mistaken, or make a mistake. n. Terror.]The above is technically incorrect - WMDs are not specifically designed for terror, though that is a major side effect of their nature, and it is trivial to employ such WMDs for political or terror purposes.At their base level, all WMDs are weapons, and thus, have an intended (military) function.Nuclear weapons are primarily blast and heat weapons, and thus, are intended for places where physical destruction is desired.Biological weapons affect solely living things, and are thus targeted at specific populations of plants or animals, with the intent of causing mass injury and/or death to that population. Biological weapons do not necessarily have to be targeted at human populations; certain animal and plant populations (particularly those useful for food purposes) can also be targets for biological WMDs. Of all the WMDs, biologicals come closest to the idea that they are purely for terror purposes.Chemical weapons are at their root, mass killing weapons with a secondary area-denial objective. Chemical weapons are generally intended to kill or drive off a defending force, and to contaminate the affected area. This effect is much the same a landmines - the contaminated area acts as a maneuver restriction on all forces in the area.Toxin weapons are primarily limited-area killing weapons. That is, compared to other WMDs, toxin weapons have a much, much smaller area of effect (though, significantly larger than comparable conventional weapons), and are generally useful for killing a defending force, where the contamination of chemicals is undesireable (that is, cleaning up an area attacked with toxins is radically simpler than one that has been attacked by chemicals).