Over the
past few days, chemical weapons are being destroyed in Libya. Some of the weapons that
were destroyed include artillery shells, bombs filled with mustard gas, and
tubes filled with mustard gas. Libya's foreign ministry calls this "an
important milestone". Libya has now become totally free of usable chemical
weapons that might present a potential threat to the security to the local
communities, the environment, and the neighboring areas around. Also, Andrew C.
Weber, a US assistant for nuclear weapons says 517 artillery shells filled with
mustard gas, eight 250-kilogram bombs filled with mustard gas and 45 tubes
filled with mustard gas were destroyed. I think if countries destroy their
chemical weapon stockpiles, then there will be less wars and fighting’s going
on.
Popular Posts
-
According to Logan's Article, Animal Poaching is a big problem in South Africa. That is why they are creating drones to protect the a...
-
Salva Dut was a young boy in South Sudan who lived a life of running and hiding for 19 Years. When Salva grew up he was...
-
Malawi school kids need chairs & desks! In our schools, we have chairs that we sit in and tables/desks we use to write on, but the kids ...
-
Lately I have been reading a novel called Boys without names . It is about an 11 year old boy named Gopal who used to lived in India, Gopal...
-
I am currently reading Facing The Lion , a book about a kid named Lamasolai goes to school because of a law in Kenya that forces a family t...
Okay, this sounds great and chemical weapons are bad, but when was the last time a country lied about weapons, and besides compared to weapons that the super powers like the US, China, and Russia mustard gas is no big deal, so why do we need to destroy their mustard gas storage?
ReplyDeleteI'm glad that Libya got rid of the weapons. If terrorists got a hold of the weapons, that would NOT be very pleasant. However, the sad thing is, there will always be war. Whether it's with Nuclear devices, guns, chemical weapons, or just fists, there will always be conflict. I'm glad that this is one less threat, but even then, why do we get involved with other's conflicts when we have our own to deal with?
ReplyDelete