Countering Terrorism Essays - Biological Warfare, Nuclear Weapons

Countering Terrorism Essays - Biological Warfare, Nuclear Weapons Countering Terrorism Countering Terrorism There are currently more than 1500 terrorist organizations and groups being monitored in the United States. Terrorists by definition kill people and destroy property in order to advance a political agenda. We must make every effort to protect American citizens from these attacks. In the future that will require both state of the art measures to monitor terrorist activities and the movement of materials used for these activities, but also response scenarios in the event of an actual incident. The United States has consistently set a good example of no negotiations with terrorists and attempting to bring alleged terrorists to trial. We need to support humanitarian, political, and educational efforts to decrease the incidence of terrorism across the world. That includes measures to eliminate the production and deployment of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. We need to maintain a high level of vigilance to protect the security of the United States. The FBI is the lead agency in the the fight against terrorism. This FBI has been very effective in coordinating the efforts of other agencies. They have been successful in finding the perpetrators of terrorist activity and preventing many terrorist incidents. The problem is that no federal agency can be expected to find all of the terrorists, before they commit violent crimes. The bombing incidents at the World Trade Center and Oklahoma City are two examples. In both of these incidents, conventional explosives technology was used to kill people and destroy property. There are current efforts coordinated by the FBI to obtain intelligence on the groups that would use these methods and intercept them before the incidents occur. These incidents will continue to require concerted efforts by national and international law enforcement agencies. But there are possible incidents that could lead to greater loss of life. Those incidents would occur if terrorists used biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons. Bioterrorism Bioterrorism is using biological warfare agents to commit terrorist crimes. There are various estimates of the effects of terrorists releasing various biological weapons on an unsuspecting population. The Johns Hopkins University Center for Civilian Biodefense suggest that the three most likely biological agents that could be used include smallpox, anthrax, and plague. There are several other bacteria, viruses, and biological toxins that are also considered candidates for biological warfare or terrorism. On October 1, 1999 Dr. Kanatjan Alibekov, a former Soviet military officer who was second in command of their biological weapons division appeared on ABC News Prime Time Live. He had defected from the Soviet Union in 1992. He wrote a classified report at that time that this program had produced hundreds of tons of anthrax and several tons of small pox virus and plague bacteria. He said that the Russians were continuing to actively work on biological weapons. This allegation was subsequently denied by Russian officials. The most significant threat from biological weapons currently has to do with the security of the Russian supply of these materials. Because these weapons are inexpensive to produce and deploy there are concerns that they may be the agents of choice for some states that sponsor terrorist activity. The World Health Organization has estimated the lethality of these weapons. The lethality of smallpox, anthrax, and plague are given in the table below: Agent Case Fatality Rate Treatment and Prevention Smallpox 30% Vaccination Anthrax 80% Vaccination, Antibiotics Plague 50% Vaccination, Antibiotics The Working Group on Civilian Biodefense has concluded that of the total number of known biological agents only a few would be suitable as weapons of mass destruction. Various estimates about the lethality of these agents are available. A 1993 report by the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment estimates that an aircraft release of 50 pounds of anthrax spores over a large metropolitan area would result in 130,000 to 3 million deaths. This is the same magnitude of the expected casualties expected in a nuclear attack. The main problem in the case of a biological weapon attack is recognition of the illness and taking the appropriate treatment measures. Some of the symptom presentations are difficult to figure out, and any delay in diagnosis can lead to further poor outcomes and further spread of the illness. If the attack is not announced, the only early sign may be a large increase in serious respiratory disease in a community. Nuclear Terrorism Nuclear terrorism is a consequence of nuclear proliferation and advanced technology. As early as 1980, the Soviet Union and the United States produced working suitcase sized nuclear weapons that could be used for the purpose of terrorism. The United States subsequently disposed of these weapons. Dr. Alexie Yablokov gave testimony to the Research and Development Subcommittee in 1997 and asserted that these suitcase bombs exist and that many were unaccounted for. The Committee Chairman, Representative Curt Weldon said that in other contacts as many as 132 of these devices were built in Russia and that

Invariable Adjectives in Spanish

Invariable Adjectives in Spanish It is sometimes said that Spanish adjectives that are nouns, such as naranja and rosa, are invariable, and that you should say, e.g. coches naranja, pantalones rosa, or otherwise coches color naranja, pantalones color rosa, etc. However, some native native speakers find it quite acceptable to use phrases such as coches naranjas. As one correspondent wrote to this site: Are they wrong, or is it a regional thing, or has it now become acceptable? I teach Spanish, I love the Spanish language, and I find grammar fascinating - I want to make sure I am teaching my pupils correct usage. The Basics of Invariable Adjectives The short answer is that there is a variety of ways of saying orange cars, and that both coches naranjas and coches naranja are among them. In traditionally correct usage, naranja or rosa as an adjective of color should remain unchanged, even when modifying a plural noun. However, Spanish (like all living languages) is changing, and in some areas, especially in Latin America, a construction such as los coches rosas would be perfectly acceptable and even preferable. But the rule stated above is correct: Invariable adjectives (usually a noun being used as an adjective) dont change form regardless of whether theyre describing something that is singular or plural. There arent many such adjectives, the most common being macho (male) and hembra (female), so it is possible to talk about, for example, las jirafas macho, the male giraffes, and las jirafas hembra, the female giraffes. Generally, the invariable adjectives are that way because they are thought of as nouns (as are la hembra and el macho), and they include the colors that come from names of things; esmeralda (emerald), mostaza (mustard), naranja (orange), paja (straw), rosa (rose), and turquesa (turquoise) are among them. In fact, as in English, almost anything can become a color if it makes sense to do so. So cafà © (coffee) and chocolate can be colors, as can oro (gold) and cereza (cherry). In some areas, even the expression color de hormiga (ant-colored) can be used as a way to say something is ugly. There is a variety of ways these nouns can be used as colors. Probably the most common, as you said, is along the lines of la bicicleta color cereza for the cherry-colored bicycle. Thats short for la bicicleta de color de cereza. Saying la bicicleta cereza is a way of shortening it even more. So the logic of saying las bicicletas cereza for the cherry-colored bicycles is that were using a shortened form of las bicicletas de color de cereza. Or at least that might be an easier way to think about it than thinking about cereza as an invariable adjective. In other words, los coches naranja would be entirely proper, although some variation of los coches (de) color (de) naranja might be more common in actual usage, again depending on the area. What can happen over time, however, is that a noun used in this way can come to be thought of as an adjective, and once its thought of as an adjective it probably will change form for plurals (and possibly gender). In Latin America, especially, some of these words (particularly naranja, rosa and violeta) are treated as typical adjectives that change in number. So referring to los coches naranjas would also be correct. (It should be noted that in some areas the adjective anaranjado also is frequently used for orange). Proper Names Often Used as Invariable Adjectives As indicated above, macho and hembra are probably the common traditionally invariable adjectives (although you will often hear them made plural, perhaps more often than not). Others of more recent use include monstruo (monster) and modelo (model). Almost all of the other invariable adjectives youll come across are either proper names (such as Wright in los hermanos Wright, the Wright brothers, or Burger King in los restaurantes Burger King) or adjectives borrowed from foreign languages. Examples of the latter include web as in las pginas web for the web pages and sport as in los coches sport for the sports cars. Key Takeaways Invariable adjectives, of which there are few in Spanish, are adjectives that dont change form in feminine and plural forms.Traditionally, the names of many colors are the most common invariable adjectives, although in modern usage they are often treated as regular adjectives.Invariable adjectives added to the language in recent years include brand names and words imported from English.