Do you think that the United States is prepared for a bioterrorist attack?

Question

I am doing a debate so i would appreciate that when you give me opinions bring good facts to go with them.

Answer 1

Our defense against a bioterrorist attack is currently being conducted in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Unlike our former President the current administration realizes that it is better to fight them over there than to fight them over here.

Answer 2

The simple answer is, "no". The long answer is, "Noooooooooooooooooo..."

People do not think about the most insidious bioterror threats that could harm us most- attacks on our agricultural system. Forget subway attacks with Anthrax for a moment, and think about the devastation a rapidly spreading wheat fungus could wreak in the Midwest. Or a poultry disease that wiped out several state's worth of birds? I can tell you some very sobering tales from my experiences with international livestock work- it would be extremely easy to get deadly spores into this country. APHIS and the USDA are severely understaffed and funded. Basic research is not funded. Biodiversity in our crops is a thing of the past. Monoculture means that you get a nice uniform piece of white bread, but if something happens to the wheat crop, an entire country goes without bread.

Answer 3

The United States is not prepared for any terrorist attack!

If you are intimating that some other group has massive amounts of biological weapons, I haven't heard of them! No country will attack us and they, if at all, will be single target attacks!

There is no way that we can stop going about our business on the basis of something that has never been threatened! Moreover, there is no way you can build a domed stadium around the US, neither letting people in or out.

If we get attacked, and our intelligence fails us, which it probably will since the FBI is more interested in private citizens E-mail than they are catching terrorist that MAY enter the country, then we know where the fault lies!

This country has warnings since 1996 about plane hijackings and nothing was done eccept by Clinton! Clinton in 1996 tried getting anti terrorism bills passed but they were watered down by Trent Lott and the Republicans! Bush did nothing!

Answer 4

Our country is hardly prepared for any attack right now...let alone a bioterrorist attack. Look at the anthrax mailings what were goign around. We never even caught the people(s) doing the dirty deed. To me, the only worse thing than this would actually be a nuclear bomb hitting us. This threat is extremely difficult to prevent and is one of the threats i fear the most.

Answer 5

You ask if America is prepared for a bioterrorist attack. I say no. But we are prepared to stop the people that are making bio weapons. Look at England. They're great at finding terrorists.

Answer 6

I dont think ANY country is prepared for a bioterroist attack or any significant scale.


Johns Hopkins University Hospital in Baltimore would have to spend at least $7 million to be ready for a bioterrorism attack. Boston spends $500,000 a year to train emergency medical workers to handle such disasters. North Carolina has a long-range state plan, but money is available for just 20 of its 100 counties.

Despite new concerns about bioterrorism and steps to address those concerns, local and state authorities lack a uniform system to assess their ability to detect or combat the intentional spread of a disease or any other attack, officials told a House panel Wednesday.

"We've got to have a similar message, devised by experts, coordinated across the land; to do less is not appropriate,"said Frank Young, former chief of the federal Office of Emergency Preparedness.

Since the Sept. 11 attacks, lawmakers have proposed adding $1.4 billion to the $350 million in the budget for bioterrorism.

Members of the House Energy and Commerce investigations subcommittee, concerned about the lack of a universal standard for checking readiness, had questions about how well bioterrorism funds are being spent.

"Everyone gives lip service to the idea that our local communities are, and will remain, the principal responders to terrorist events, yet most of the billions spent each year never find their way beyond Washington," said Rep. Jim Greenwood, R-Pa., the subcommittee chairman.

More money is needed to train health workers, shield them from infections and help them provide medicines to treat potential outbreaks, officials said.

While some experts raised the possibility of fights over jurisdiction when responding to an attack, other officials welcomed the autonomy from Washington.

"We cannot assume one single model will work. These things can happen anywhere: in large cities, in rural areas,"said Dennis O'Leary, president of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, which regulates hospitals, nursing homes and other health care facilities nationwide.

Answer 7

No, the US has a tendency to react to situations like that. It costs too much money and the country is just too big to prepare everyone for a bioterrorist attack.

Answer 8

I think the United States Military is prepared for an attack on an military installation but not on domestic soil. JUst lok at what happened during Hurrican Katrina. Pople are still suffering from that. The goverment agency who would handle such an attack was FEMA correct? Will if FEMA cant even get a handle on relif efforts for hurrican victims what in the hell would they do during a chemical attack. The govermtn can give gas masks to soliders who sign a contract but not to the American public who pay taxes?

Answer 9

Absolutely not.
It owuld be the easiest thing in the world either for someone to waltz in from Canada, or to prepare something within the USA, go over to some city where they will not be immediately affected, leave some biological time obmb and scram.
Some very anglo saxon looking idiots might be tempted with a million dollars.

Answer 10

NO. Katrina victims needed much of the same response that a bioterrorist attack would require. And they still do!
Nuff said.