From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@spies.com)
Date: Sun Apr 13 2003 - 17:24:19 MDT
OK. I've done a little more homework on the Lewisite thing. I spoke a bit
muddily.
Pace both Ms. Smigorodsky and Mr. Lorrey, I should not have used the word
"primitive"--in this forum, it has a predictable dismissive flavor. That
was not my intent. If a bloodyminded person could use chipped obsidian as a
WMD, it would still be worth taking seriously. A ton of rocks or a ton of
chlorine are both troublesome if distributed in a troublesome way. If a
simpler substance can be manufactured in bulk more cheaply, any putative
"primitiveness" could be a _feature_, not a bug. Lethality per gram is a
concern on another axis (the Axis of Lethal, perhaps).
Lewisite was evidently actually developed fairly late in WWI, too late to
be fielded in that conflict.
Lewisite gains some of its effect from the fact that it contains arsenic.
So do some non-Green pesticides, which are still unhealthy for humans but
have less of a prompt pain and vesicant effect. A better-safe-than-sorry
field test kit might show a positive "lewisite" reading if it just looks
for the arsenic. In that sense, Lewisite could be considered "primitive",
though a better word is welcome. Elemental? Elementary? :)
By contrast, distinguishing high-level (1) Pu-239 (weapons-grade) samples
from (2) other (reactor core/dirty bomb) Pu samples from (3) other nuclides
seems non-primitive to me.
Sorry for my contribution to any misunderstanding.
-- I am not here to have an argument. I am here as part of a civilization. Sometimes I forget.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 13 2003 - 17:32:54 MDT