Weapons of Minimum Destruction
'Believe it or not, what we refer to as "weapons of mass destruction" are actually not very destructive.' David C Rapoport, professor of political science at University College Los Angeles and editor of the Journal of Terrorism and Political Violence , has examined what he calls 'easily available evidence' relating to the historic use of chemical and biological weapons. The term 'weapons of mass destruction' refers to three types of weapons: nuclear, chemical and biological. A chemical weapon is any weapon that uses a manufactured chemical, such as sarin, mustard gas or hydrogen cyanide, to kill or injure. A biological weapon uses bacteria or viruses, such as smallpox, ricin or anthrax, to cause destruction - inducing sickness and disease as a means of undermining enemy forces or inflicting civilian casualties. We find such weapons repulsive, because of the horrible way in which the victims convulse and die - but they appear to be less 'destructive' than conventional weapons. [more 
]
]