Monday, March 13, 2006

Biological conundrums

You may be one of those who believe that Saddam didn’t have any biological weapons when we invaded the country of Iraq a few years ago.  You may believe that he did and they are still at large because he got rid of them (Syria, whatever).  You may believe that he once did have them, but dismantled the program years ago.  You might think that bio-weapons are unthinkable and we should start an international commission to make really stern statements and try to coddle all the worlds government, dictator or not, to give them up for good.  Or you might think that there are some great legitimate reasons to have and use weapons that contain viruses and other organisms that do nasty things (I don’t).

But either way, I think that they are around to stay.  Not that I’m happy making that statement, but it seems that due to the sins of man there will always be men whose lust for power and fear of their fellow man will go to great lengths and insane means to protect themselves and destroy those who they hate and fear.

Glenn Reynolds had some thoughts recently that we shouldn’t relax on the issue just because we took Saddam out.  Old Soviet programs that manufactured bio-weapons probably weren’t disposed of properly, and we would be kidding ourselves if we conceded that Iraq was the only third world country with links to terrorists that maintained weapons that kill through chemical or biological means.

It should make sense that the more we grow to understand how the body works, and the more detail that scientists glean on what makes the body function, the more ways those with bad intentions will discover to destroy the body.

No comments: