WMD Weapons of Mass Destruction

WMD

Weapons of Mass Destruction

Much publicity has been given the issue of weapons of mass destruction in recent years, especially following the terrorist acts of 9/11. There is some doubt however, in the minds of the public as to whether terrorists have the ability to use or intent to use such weapons in a large-scale attack against the U.S. Or any other foreign nation. This paper argues most terrorists are not likely to use weapons of mass destruction. WMD, so emphasized during the last few years, have been a subject of much debate. The war with Iraq is clouded with the finding that few if any WMDs existed among the terrorist camps located and seized by government agents. Just how likely are terrorists to use such weapons, and how effective are they?

Analysis of Research

Much of the information presented by the media suggests terrorists like Bin Laden are likely to try to use weapons of mass destruction. McCloud & Osbourne (2001) note testimony by Jamal Ahmad al-Fadl suggested Bin Laden often attempted to acquire raw materials for use as weapons of mass destruction. As the researchers note, it is important for the public to ascertain from evidence given from testimony like this weather the use of WMD by terrorists is a "practical" or real threat. Testimony by Al-Fadl suggests Bin Laden did have an interest in nuclear weapons. There are questions however as to whether the testimony offered by this witness is credible, in part because the witness admitted he broke with Al-Qa'ida some time ago, and may have been attempting to anger them or illicit some financial gain by testifying.

There are many parties in fact with alleged testimony implicating Al Qa'ida and other terrorists groups in plots to engage in nuclear warfare. For example, the U.S. declared in 1998 its actions against the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant were justified because government secret service agents suspected the plan was manufacturing chemical or other types of weapons of mass destruction.

Ackerman & Bale (2002) note following the attacks on the World Trade Towers, allegations that terrorist planned to use WMD became commonplace. The media reported numerous events where plants and camps oversees were bombed because world and U.S. officials suspected the camps may be harboring terrorists attempting to develop chemical, biological or nuclear agents.

What one must realize however is many of these reports of camps and efforts to deliver or create weapons of mass destruction come from incredible resources. For example, some reports come from Arab intelligence agencies, anonymous "anti-terrorist" experts and even witnesses in trials against known terrorists. Many are now arguing however, if the threat of terrorists using WMD is so real, why have they not used them by now? Many suggest the evidence confirming the existence of a threat is nothing more than "hearsay." While it is true it is likely most terrorists would like to use such weapons, there is not a lot of evidence suggesting they have the wherewithal to do so, or the interest. They may instead rely on other flamboyant gestures, such as the acts of 9/11 to get their message out.

The acts occurring on 9/11 engaged the entire world. Terrorists were recognized as a global threat capable of mass destruction. Yet in this instance, weapons of mass destruction were not used to cause the disaster and destruction of the world trade towers. A few suicidal members of the jihad and airplanes were used to wreak havoc that day.

Many believe the term "weapons of mass destruction" is a catchall phrase used by government agents who believe it is in the best interests of the American people and people across the globe to consider terrorists a massive threat. Further, they believe the best way to pursue this goal is to proclaim all terrorists are working to develop WMDs.

What the government needs to produce to affirm whether WMDs are a real threat is proof of their use and terrorist activities directly related to the creation of such weapons. There is ample evidence according to some, including CIA Director George Tenet who stated in 2000 Al-Qa'ida was attempting to gain chemicals to use in terrorist activities. There is no question that terrorists seem to have an interest in such weapons. However, while they may make a concerted effort to get these weapons, they may still lack the technology and financial abundance to deploy such weapons on a massive scale. It is not impossible, and it is certainly prudent to be on guard for any plots involving weapons of mass destruction.

The best possible argument one can make based on evidenced gathered by intelligence agencies is that many terrorist groups do have interest in weapons of mass destruction. Many attempt to acquire the raw materials for these weapons. However, there is not proof yet, solid proofs, that terrorist have the ability to use these weapons or deploy them on a massive scale that would result in havoc throughout the world. Nonetheless, government agents have a duty to be on high alert to keep abreast of terrorists activities. They should in doing so however, keep the media at bay. The more the media promotes such language, the more validity and credence they give to terrorists entities that thrive on publicity to fulfill their purpose... instilling terror and fear in the hearts of the public at large.

Conclusions

There is much media coverage surrounding terrorists. Much of the media suggests the government supports the belief terrorist plan to use weapons of mass destruction against all people. These weapons include chemical agents, nuclear agents and other powerful tools that can when deployed properly, result in widespread damage. Despite the publicity given to the treat of terrorism, and terrorist use of such weapons, proof of this threat remains elusive.