U.S. vows to eliminate all its chem weapons

U.S. vows to eliminate all its chem weapons

The U.S. has destroyed almost 90 percent of the chemical weapons stockpile it amassed by the end of the Cold War, and it won’t stop until every last pint is gone, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton vowed on Monday.

For all the many problems and challenges America faces today, Clinton’s statement was a reminder that the threats of the bad old days were far worse: Nuclear, biological and chemical weapons attacks that could have meant death and destruction on a strategic scale. Her announcement also was telling in other ways: For all the uniformed and congressional advocates of the standard nuclear triad, where are the voices supporting (for lack of a better term) the weapons-of-mass-destruction triad?

Although everyone with a piece of the nuclear pie wants to keep or expand it, you don’t hear people standing up and saying, “We need a new generation of weaponized super-germs in case we have to launch a bio-war against China;” or “When is this administration going to get serious about new chemicals we can use to poison Moscow’s water supply?” Submarines, missiles or bombers that deliver world-ending weapons are terrific if they’re in your district, but bio and chemical weapons don’t have that same constituency, for whatever reason.


Anyway, here was Clinton’s statement. She did not commit to a date by which the U.S. chemical stockpiles would be gone, other than to say she wants it done yesterday:

At the end of the Cold War, the United States joined together with other nations in the Chemical Weapons Convention to state in unequivocal terms that we will end our chemical weapons programs and destroy existing stockpiles, precursor chemicals, production facilities and weapons delivery systems. The United States is committed to the complete elimination of chemical weapons stockpiles in the United States and around the world. To date, we have already destroyed 89 percent of our original chemical weapons stockpile. We reaffirm our commitment to finish the job as quickly as possible in accordance with national and treaty requirements that ensure the safety of people and the protection of the environment.

As of today, 188 countries have joined the international community and renounced chemical weapons. Under international verification, stockpiles and production facilities are steadily being eliminated. The United States will continue to cooperate closely with the other member states of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and work toward complete elimination in the United States and around the world. The international community must continue to speak with one voice and remain vigilant, so these weapons pose no threat to people here or anywhere.

H/t: AFMag.

Join the Conversation

IMHO of course, there are some weapons that are just simply too hateful and inhuman to have lying around, and the chem/bio weapons fit very nicely into that category. Nuclear weapons can obviously cause just as many casualties, or even more, but anyone who looks below that “first level” at the intended effects and the even more frightening, unintended effects of large scale chem/bio war has got to be just a little bit replused.

Get the damned things incenerated and let us be done with them; and let us all offer a multi-lateral “second sunrise” to anyone, anywhere in the world, that thinks otherwise.

I think the key difference is that nukes kill relatively cleanly; all you need to see is the Pine Ridge videos of sheep convulsing so hard their spines break to understand the inherent repulsiveness of chemical agents.

and if you’re not in the immediate vicinity of the blast, you inhale its radioactive debris and die a slow, painful death.

Nuclear, biological, chemical…all of these weapons are an absolute abomination.

SO when does the SECSTATE tells the military what weapons to be destroyed?

She best keep her digits off the ZOMBIE gas and TX virus, I’m all stocked up and ready for it to be released. Have my off road trailer all loaded up and ready to go in the garage and already mapped out where all the hot gals work to pick up and save on my way to hang out on the roof of Victorias secret, shootin zombies and grilling out till its all over with. But other than that hillary is just talkin outta her six with no authority over anything, Michelle already took it from her and put her in her place (dont you people read the enquirer?).

Well, I believe that the Bio weapons were ordered destroyed back in 1969 or 1970. US chemical weapons stores have been being systematically incinerated since 1979 or so. The Bio Weapon stockpile is toast and the chemical weapon stockpile is down to a small fraction (I’ve heard 30% or less) of its peak.

While she is generally not one of my favorite political figures, SECSTATE was just reaffirming the international treaties that the US has signed in the past and the policies of the last . . .30 years or so. :-)

It made it seem like that she was running the destuction of these of these as it was under her order.

I don’t believe we have a “stockpile” of biological weapons. However, we still remain a robust biological warfare R&D capability…NOT for the reason of designing new biological agents, but to study potential agents and devise antidotes and countermeasures. As long as there are other countries doing research into biological weapons, we must maintain this capability.

As far as nuclear arsenal, that is never going to zero…nor should it. The genie was out of the bottle in 1945. As long as there are other countries who either possess, or have the capability to design, build or acquire nuclear weapons…we need our nukes as a deterrent. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not leaving in the real world. Yes, a world without nuclear weapons would be ideal…but unfortunately, idealizations are just that, and usually never translate into reality.

In fact, I may be a bit of a hardliner when it comes to our nuclear deterrents. I think we should move forward with the RRW (Reliable Replacement Warhead) project, and I would even consider underground testing of the new warhead, as proof of design. Underground testing is still “technically” legal, under international rules, because we (the USA) never ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty…although we did sign it. The Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was signed and ratified in 1963, and prohibits atmospheric testing. Properly designed underground testing is perfectly safe, and releases no radioactive products into the atmosphere/environment.

I do realize, however, that resumption of any underground nuclear testing would be a political football, and would give Russia and China an excuse to resume their own nuclear testing program. However, without a real, full-up test, a new weapon design (e.g. RRW) can never be 100% certified, even despite our intensive computational modeling as well as non-nuclear modeling (e.g. sub-critical tests, hydrodynamic and radiation transport simulations/tests using National Ignition Facility, etc.)

For some reason, my first paragraph didn’t post. I discussed USA biological weapons program. It is my understanding that we no longer have any stockpile of biological weapons (if we ever did). However, we do possess a robust biological warfare research program. This program’s purpose is not to design new biological weapons, but rather it is strictly research for the purpose of countering any biological warfare agents that an Enemy might use against us. In short, it is to devise antidotes, countermeasures and protocols to defeat or neutralize potential biological pathogens used as WMDs.

Pine Ridge? They are gassing sheep in Napa Valley? You sure they’re not goats at Pine Bluff? They really broke their own backs huh? Sure, you know what you’re talking about.

I have no problem with getting rid of our chem weapons as long as we very publicly and repeatedly state the use of chem weapons will result in a nuclear response (and mean it). The meaning it is key!

Nuclear, biological, chemical…all of these weapons are an absolute abomination as indicated above. We have been burning this stuff for many yeras and we are only 90% complete. Each of the furnaces were built for $1B+ USD to safely incinerate the gases and powders. How much of this stuff did we really stockpile? It has to be a lot more than was originally released to the general public. Wow!

If we put as much money and effort into making jobs as we do to make weapons, everybody would have a job and the government wouldn’t be as broke as it is now.

I’d like to know more about the chemicals they dropped on myself and shipmates in the mid 60’s called Project Shad. The DOD started to release information concerning the tests conducted at sea about two years ago. I rceived a letter from the DOD to go to the nearest VA for a checkup, but when I got there they didn’t know what to look for, so gave me a routine physical (it wasn’t performed by a doctor). It’s too bad I had to wait 40 + years to find out we were used as guinea pigs, and have no idea if any of my illnesses over the years may have been caused by these chemicals?????

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement