a new threat. One of the earliest reported uses was in the sixth century B.C., when the Assyrians poisoned their enemys wells with a fungus disease called rye ergot. The commander of British forces in America, Jeffrey Amherst, used biological warfare on the Ottawa Indians. He sent two wagons of blankets from the smallpox hospital to the tribe as a peace-offering. And in the 15th century, Pizarro reportedly presented the South American natives with variola-contaminated clothing (Solomon, 1999).The use of biological warfare started to spread, however, in the first World War. Both sides of the war used these agents for tactical purposes. On the battlefield itself, however, there is an inherent danger in using these weapons that of infecting ones own troops. Also, there is the extreme risk that the disease may get out of control, spread by an unanticipated shift in wind like a wildfire. For this reason, the application of choice for this weapon is long range and terrorist attack. During the cold war, many nations began experimenting and stockpiling biological and chemical weapons. The low cost and ease of manufacturing is the primary reason an aggressor might focus on this form of weapon. Perhaps more so because of their shear effectiveness (Horowitz, 1997).There is a debate today as to whether we are at risk of an attack by biological weapons. We know that rogue nations, such as Iraq and Iran, have tried to stockpile these weapons, in spite of the United Nations efforts to cease that activity. Officials in the Clinton administration have stated that there is no question eventually, we will be hurt by these agents. One of our saving graces is that, sometimes, the agents do not act as planned. A Japanese cult launched at least nine germ attacks in Tokyo in the early 1990s, attempting to kill millions. The strikes, however, produced no known injuries or deaths (Solomon, 1999).The largest threat comes, not from aggressive nat...
