.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Light hearted post... do you think Thai girls can tell if you can't be fooled anymore?
-
Recently Browsing 0 members
- No registered users viewing this page.
Announcements
-
Topics
-
-
Latest posts...
-
1
Kamala Harris Accelerates Campaign Momentum in Final Weeks Before Election
sounds like monopoly. do not talk to the press. do not collect 200 while passing go. -
13
-
13
Trump Just Pulled Out Of The Debate 🐥🐣🐓🐔🐤
No, she have just officially said yes to be the candidate, and from now will take interviews and debates. Some people do mot understand protocol, and how things works in what order. Can't wait to see the upcoming debate with Trump. -
13
-
13
-
13
Trump Just Pulled Out Of The Debate 🐥🐣🐓🐔🐤
Whatever. It’s politics. That’s how they do. -
13
Trump Just Pulled Out Of The Debate 🐥🐣🐓🐔🐤
She had said she would agree to only the ABC debate first and then decide if she is willing to do more. She didn’t specifically turn down the others, but has only agreed to do the one first. Even if she would be willing to do others, I doubt Fox would make the short list. -
13
-
13
Trump Just Pulled Out Of The Debate 🐥🐣🐓🐔🐤
Different democratic candidate, different game plan. According to the rumblings in the Trump team they want the microphone off because they are worried that Trump can’t handle 90 minutes of Harris having the option to speak the entire time. They should be concerned. Trump isn’t sharp or skilled enough to handle it and he will get squeezed into a corner. Then he will get triggered and lash out. Will be a disaster for him.- 1
-
-
23
Can you do same day in and out when doing plane flight border runs?
Are you really sure that I give false information? A friend of mine just showed 10k to the immigration officer from his Thai bank application on mobile phone and it was fine! -
1
Kamala Harris Accelerates Campaign Momentum in Final Weeks Before Election
Kamala Harris is gearing up for a 71-day sprint toward the November 5th election, with a strategy designed to outpace Donald Trump, dominate news coverage, and make inroads in key battleground states. Her campaign is structured around a few critical objectives: to outwork her opponent, maintain a strong media presence, and focus her efforts on states that could expand her paths to victory. Harris' determination is evident as she intensifies her campaign efforts this week. Her schedule is packed, starting with a bus tour through southern Georgia—a state that has recently shown potential for Democratic gains. This tour marks the beginning of a relentless push to engage voters and increase her visibility across the nation. In addition to the bus tour, Harris is set to participate in her first interview as a presidential candidate, a significant milestone that underscores her growing presence in the race. Moreover, her team is ramping up preparations for the highly anticipated September 10th debate against Donald Trump, which is expected to be a pivotal moment in the campaign. Harris’ campaign is riding a wave of positive momentum following the Democratic convention, with polls showing encouraging signs. Her team is keen to maintain this momentum by keeping the pressure on Trump and promoting Harris’ message of optimism, which contrasts sharply with Trump's divisive rhetoric. The vice president's strategy is not just about winning votes; it's about offering a clear alternative to Trump’s vision, one that resonates with a broad spectrum of Americans who are looking for leadership that embodies strength, decency, the rule of law, and individual freedom. Although Harris has introduced several policy proposals aimed at supporting first-time homeowners, the working class, and other key demographics, her senior advisers are cautious about unveiling fully developed policy plans before Election Day. The rationale behind this decision is rooted in the reality of Harris' late entry into the race, which has forced her team to prioritize certain aspects of the campaign. With limited time before the election, Harris and her advisers believe that focusing on broad, aspirational themes will be more effective in countering Trump than getting bogged down in the specifics of policy debates. A key element of Harris’ strategy is to maximize media coverage without relying solely on paid advertisements. This approach is evident in her busy schedule, which is designed to generate news coverage that keeps her in the public eye. Nonetheless, her team has allocated a significant budget—$370 million—for TV and digital ads that will be deployed between Labor Day and Election Day, ensuring that her message reaches as many voters as possible. One of the most anticipated events in Harris' campaign is the upcoming debate against Donald Trump, which will be hosted by ABC News. This debate is seen as a critical moment that could potentially alter the course of the election. Harris' team is well aware of the stakes and has been working tirelessly to prepare her for the onslaught of falsehoods they expect from Trump. The vice president has already participated in a mock debate at Howard University prior to the Democratic convention and plans to engage in several more practice sessions before the real showdown. A small, dedicated group of aides, including policy advisers Brian Nelson and Rohini Kosoglu, along with Harris' White House and campaign chiefs of staff Sheila Nix and Lorraine Voles, are assisting her in these preparations. The debate is not just an opportunity for Harris to showcase her skills; it's a chance to solidify her position as a viable contender in the eyes of the electorate. Both campaigns recognize the importance of this event—Trump’s team hopes for a misstep from Harris that could go viral, while Harris' team knows that a strong, steady performance is crucial to reinforcing the belief that she can win in November. Acknowledging the criticism that she has been in office for 3½ years, Harris' team understands the need to effectively address this line of attack, which Republicans have used to link her to the perceived shortcomings of the Biden administration. In parallel with preparing for the debate, Harris’ campaign is also focused on expanding its reach in swing states. Dan Kanninen, the Harris campaign's battleground states director, emphasized the importance of building momentum following the Democratic convention. "It's important to have a place to put that energy," Kanninen noted, highlighting the ongoing efforts to bolster the campaign’s team and voter outreach in key states that could tip the balance in the election. Harris' campaign has been proactive in responding to Trump's false statements, but the strategy for the debate may involve a more measured approach. "I would let Trump be Trump," said Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro when asked what advice he would give Harris for her debate against the former president. Shapiro believes that Harris has the opportunity to remind voters of Trump’s past actions and the risks he poses for the future. "She is a skilled debater. She will do that effectively," he added, expressing confidence in Harris' ability to handle the high-pressure situation. As the election draws nearer, Harris’ campaign is clearly in full throttle, with a well-defined strategy aimed at securing victory. Whether through relentless campaigning, strategic media engagement, or meticulous debate preparation, Kamala Harris is making her case to the American people, positioning herself as the leader who can guide the nation forward in a time of division and uncertainty. The next 71 days will be crucial, and Harris is leaving nothing to chance in her bid to win the presidency. Credit: AXIOS 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
After Solingen Stabbings Scholz Pledges Swift Deportations and Stricter Laws
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has vowed to take decisive action following a tragic stabbing incident in Solingen that left three people dead. The attack, allegedly perpetrated by a Syrian asylum seeker, has reignited the country's ongoing debate over migration and the policies surrounding it. Scholz made his intentions clear during a visit to the western town of Solingen, where the attack occurred, stating that irregular migration into Germany "must go down." He underscored the gravity of the situation by labeling the incident as an act of terrorism, saying, "This was terrorism, terrorism against us all." Scholz's remarks reflect the growing political pressure in Germany to address issues related to migration and public safety. He emphasized the need for his government to do "everything we can to ensure that those who cannot and should not stay here in Germany are repatriated and deported." He also promised that deportations would be expedited if necessary to prevent such tragedies in the future. In addition to accelerating deportations, Scholz pledged to tighten laws on weapons ownership "very quickly," signaling a comprehensive approach to enhancing security. The political ramifications of the Solingen stabbings were immediate and far-reaching. The suspect, identified as 26-year-old Issa Al H., a Syrian refugee, has been linked to the terror organization Islamic State. This connection has fueled an already heated debate on migration in Germany. Conservative opposition leader Friedrich Merz quickly called for an end to accepting refugees from Syria and Afghanistan, arguing that stricter border controls were necessary. His position, while controversial, reflects a growing sentiment among certain political factions in Germany that the country needs to reevaluate its immigration policies. Alice Weidel, the leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), took an even more extreme stance, advocating for a complete halt to all migration. The AfD has long been critical of Germany's immigration policies, and Weidel's call for a total stop to migration represents the party's most extreme position yet. However, experts caution that such measures are neither feasible nor compatible with German and European Union law, which requires member states to honor their legal and humanitarian commitments to those fleeing persecution. Despite the intense political pressure, Scholz's governing center-left SPD party has reiterated Germany's commitment to helping those in need. The party maintains that Germany must uphold its obligations to asylum seekers while also ensuring that those who pose a threat to public safety are deported. The government has pledged to deport migrants who have committed serious crimes or whose asylum applications have been rejected. The Solingen suspect's case has raised questions about the effectiveness of Germany's deportation system. Issa Al H. arrived in Germany in 2022 as a Syrian refugee, a group that typically has a strong chance of being granted asylum. However, his application was rejected, and he was ordered to be deported to Bulgaria, the country where he had initially registered for asylum. Despite this order, authorities were unable to locate him for deportation, allowing him to remain in Germany. The failure to deport him has sparked a heated debate over who was responsible for the oversight. Germany's deportation policies are complicated by international law and humanitarian concerns. The country generally does not deport people to unsafe countries or war zones, such as Syria or Afghanistan. Doing so would require negotiations with regimes like the Taliban in Afghanistan, a prospect that is both politically and practically challenging. Nevertheless, there are increasing calls within Germany to revisit these policies in light of recent events. The ongoing debate over migration has been a contentious issue in Germany for years. Local councils frequently report that their budgets are strained by the influx of refugees, and there are ongoing discussions about how to improve the asylum process. Some advocates argue that allowing refugees to work sooner would help them integrate more effectively into German society, thereby reducing the strain on public resources. Despite these challenges, Germany has generally managed to cope well with the large numbers of refugees it takes in each year. In 2023 alone, over 350,000 people applied for asylum in Germany. Additionally, since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, around 1.2 million Ukrainians have sought refuge in Germany. These numbers highlight the country's significant role in providing sanctuary to those fleeing conflict and persecution. Despite this large influx, terror attacks linked to asylum seekers in Germany are relatively rare. The last major incident occurred in 2016 when an Islamist extremist drove a lorry into a Christmas market in Berlin, killing 12 people. However, the recent attack in Solingen is likely to have a substantial political impact. With key regional elections approaching in Saxony and Thuringia, the AfD is already using the attack as a rallying point for its campaign. The party, which has gained traction in parts of eastern Germany, is hoping to capitalize on public fear and dissatisfaction with current immigration policies. Within hours of the stabbing, the AfD posted a video on social media featuring the party's regional leader in Thuringia, Björn Höcke, with the caption "Höcke or Solingen," a stark and provocative message intended to resonate with voters. The political landscape in Germany is likely to shift as the country grapples with the implications of the Solingen attack. While Scholz's government is committed to upholding Germany's humanitarian obligations, it also faces mounting pressure to enhance security and control over migration. The balance between these competing priorities will shape Germany's policies in the coming months and could have lasting effects on the nation's approach to immigration and public safety. Credit: BBC 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
The Flying Bats FC Womens Football Team with 5 Transgenders Wins Grand Final
In a season marked by controversy and debate, the Flying Bats FC, a Sydney-based women’s soccer team, clinched the Women's Premier League grand final, capping off an undefeated season that has sparked discussions around the world. The team, which includes five transgender players, has become a focal point in the ongoing debate over transgender athletes’ participation in women’s sports. The Flying Bats’ dominance throughout the season was evident as they won all 16 of their regular-season matches, scoring 65 goals while conceding just four. Their path to the grand final was punctuated by multiple forfeits from opposing teams, including both semi-final fixtures, due to objections over the presence of transgender players on the team. Despite these challenges, the Flying Bats emerged victorious, winning the grand final with a tight 5-4 scoreline against West Pennant Hills Cherrybrook Football Club. The grand final, held at Christie Park under tight security, reflected the intense scrutiny the team has faced. Security guards were present to discourage professional photography and monitor the crowd, highlighting the sensitivity surrounding the match. The scores were level at 3-3 by halftime, but the Flying Bats managed to pull ahead in the second half, thanks to strategic substitutions and a determined effort from their players. One of the transgender players was issued a yellow card during the match, and another was named best on the ground after the final whistle. The controversy surrounding the Flying Bats has attracted significant attention, with critics arguing that the inclusion of transgender players in women’s sports is unfair to cisgender female athletes. High-profile figures like JK Rowling and sports commentator Lucy Zelic have been vocal in their opposition, with Zelic describing the Flying Bats’ victory as a “crime against women” and calling for a deeper examination of the policies that allow transgender women to compete in female sports leagues. Zelic, who has been a consistent critic of the team, expressed her disappointment after the grand final, emphasizing the need to protect women’s sports from what she views as an erosion of fairness. “Somehow, this is supposed to represent progress. Somewhere, the custodians of our game don’t care,” Zelic posted online, echoing concerns from various quarters about the implications of the Flying Bats’ success. The West Pennant Hills Cherrybrook Football Club, who narrowly lost the grand final, described the defeat as “heartbreaking” but praised their players for their resilience and determination. “Our Premier League Women’s team have left everything on Christie Park this afternoon... We could not be prouder of you girls,” the club posted on social media, capturing the emotional toll of the match on their players and supporters. Throughout the season, six of the Flying Bats’ victories were the result of forfeits by opposing teams, reflecting the broader controversy surrounding their participation in the league. Reports suggest that sports governing bodies warned clubs against forfeiting their matches against the Flying Bats, highlighting the complex dynamics at play. The issue of transgender athletes in women’s sports is not just a local concern but a global one. The Flying Bats FC, which describes itself as the largest LGBTQIA+ women’s and non-binary football club in the world, has become a symbol of the broader debate over inclusion, fairness, and the future of women’s sports. Club president Jennifer Peden has been a staunch defender of the team’s inclusion policies, emphasizing the importance of providing a safe and supportive environment for all players, regardless of gender identity. “As a club, the Flying Bats FC stand strongly for inclusion, and pride ourselves on safe, respectful and fair play,” Peden stated in April. She pointed to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s guidelines, which prohibit discrimination against transgender players in sport under the federal Sex Discrimination Act of 1984. These guidelines emphasize that sporting organizations cannot discriminate against transgender individuals, either directly or indirectly. For example, refusing a transgender woman’s application for membership or requiring a birth certificate to verify gender would be considered discriminatory under these rules. The guidelines have informed the gender inclusion policies of Football Australia, Football NSW, and the North West Sydney Football Association, which governs the league in which the Flying Bats compete. Despite the backlash, supporters of the Flying Bats argue that the inclusion of transgender players is a matter of human rights and equality. The LGBTI Rights Australia Facebook group congratulated the team on their victory, criticizing the opposition as an exploitation of sports for political purposes. “Transgender women have been proudly part of the Bats for 20 YEARS... yet it took terf N@zi$ up until this week to take notice,” the group posted, celebrating the team’s success and calling out the critics. As the Flying Bats FC basks in their hard-earned victory, the debate over their place in women’s sports is far from settled. The team’s success has intensified discussions about the intersection of gender identity, fairness, and inclusion in sport, raising questions that resonate well beyond the soccer field. While the Flying Bats have proven their prowess on the pitch, their season has also highlighted the need for a broader societal conversation about the future of women’s sports in an increasingly diverse world. Credit: Daily Mail 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
The Silent Battle Against Iran’s Terror Financing: A Global Tug of War
As the war in Gaza dominates global headlines, another conflict—less visible but equally significant—continues to unfold behind closed doors. This is the quiet war waged over cutting off Hezbollah, the powerful Shiite militia, from the lifeblood that sustains its operations: Iranian petrodollars. While the world’s gaze is fixed on Gaza and the escalating skirmishes between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah, diplomats are increasingly alarmed that this tension could spark a wider conflict. Simultaneously, a battle over Iranian terror financing has been simmering in the shadows, poised to reach a critical juncture in the coming weeks. This conflict, involving several Arab nations, Europe, and the U.S., centers on whether Lebanon will be penalized for its role in facilitating Hezbollah’s financial operations. This pivotal decision lies in the hands of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the global body dedicated to combating money laundering. Founded by the G7 in 1989, FATF has grown to include numerous member countries worldwide. While FATF lacks formal enforcement power, its evaluations carry significant weight in international finance, potentially crippling a nation’s ability to operate within the global financial system. As FATF prepares to place Lebanon on its “gray list” of jurisdictions with weak anti-money laundering measures, the world is watching closely. Lebanon could face severe consequences if it fails to implement necessary reforms, potentially moving from the gray list to the dreaded “blacklist,” a designation that would further isolate the country financially. The recent Hamas attacks on Israel on October 7 served as a harsh reminder of the dangers posed by unchecked financial flows to terrorist organizations. Israel, the U.S., and other Western governments have previously tolerated the millions of dollars flowing to groups like Hamas from Qatar and Iran, believing that such funds would help stabilize Gaza. However, this strategy has backfired, prompting Western security officials to push for a more stringent approach to combating money laundering and terror financing in Lebanon, particularly those involving Hezbollah-affiliated entities. Sources familiar with FATF’s investigation suggest that the case against Lebanon is straightforward, given the overwhelming evidence of money laundering and terror financing within the country. However, the situation is complicated by Hezbollah’s deep-rooted influence over Lebanon’s institutions, which hampers the government’s ability to enforce international financial norms. Adding to the complexity, several regional players, including Bahrain and Libya, have aligned themselves with Lebanon, resisting international efforts to crack down on Hezbollah’s illicit financial activities. FATF’s current deliberations are not focused on whether Lebanon should be placed on the gray list but rather on the conditions Lebanon must meet to be removed from the list after a two-year review period. Central to this discussion is the role of Hezbollah in Lebanon’s banking system, which poses significant challenges to reform efforts. Hezbollah’s financial operations are heavily supported by Iran, a relationship that dates back to the 1980s. Iran’s financial backing has enabled Hezbollah to establish a powerful “state within a state” in Lebanon, positioning the group as a formidable adversary to Israel. Despite Hezbollah’s dominance in Lebanon’s political and economic landscape, the organization remains heavily reliant on Iranian funding. A significant portion of this funding is funneled through a Hezbollah-controlled financial entity known as the al-Qard al-Hasan Association (AQAH). AQAH functions like a bank, despite lacking a banking license and operating outside of regulatory oversight. It is a vital instrument for Hezbollah, enabling the group to pay its fighters and officials and provide financial services to local communities. Amid the political and economic turmoil that has plagued Lebanon in recent years, AQAH has expanded its operations, becoming one of the country’s largest financial institutions, with deposits reportedly reaching billions of dollars. What sets AQAH apart from other Lebanese banks is its designation as a non-profit organization by the Lebanese government. This status exempts AQAH from paying taxes, further entrenching its role in Hezbollah’s financial ecosystem. The U.S. government, which sanctioned AQAH in 2007, describes the organization as “a cover to manage [Hezbollah’s] financial activities and gain access to the international financial system.” Despite these sanctions, AQAH has continued to thrive, conducting its operations with little difficulty in Lebanon and across the broader Middle East. In fact, AQAH’s cross-border activities may become even easier following the Arab League’s decision in June to stop labeling Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. This shift in the Arab League’s stance has sparked controversy, particularly within FATF, where the question of Hezbollah’s terror designation remains a contentious issue. The debate over Hezbollah’s classification contributed to a significant delay in FATF’s report on Lebanon, which was finally published in December. Instead of directly naming Hezbollah, the report referred to the group as “a major local paramilitary organization with a well-documented track record of committing terrorist acts.” The report urged Lebanon to assess the risks of money laundering and terror financing associated with this organization and to implement measures to mitigate these risks. Hezbollah has been responsible for numerous terrorist attacks since the 1980s, including car bombings, suicide attacks, and drone strikes that have claimed hundreds of lives, including those of Americans, Israelis, and other civilians. Today, Hezbollah is considered one of the world’s largest private armies, with an estimated 50,000 fighters. The U.S., the European Union, and numerous other countries have designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, largely due to its ties to Iran. Western diplomats argue that a strong stance by FATF is essential to curbing Hezbollah’s financial activities. Without such a stance, Lebanon is unlikely to crack down on AQAH, allowing Iranian funds to continue flowing to Hezbollah unchecked. Moreover, these diplomats contend that a tougher evaluation by FATF could serve as a catalyst for reform within Lebanon, potentially attracting the foreign investment the country desperately needs. However, without assurances that Lebanon is not a haven for money laundering and terror financing, international investors are likely to stay away. One Western diplomat emphasized the potential benefits of a rigorous evaluation, stating, “A tough evaluation would actually help the Lebanese get out of this situation.” This sentiment reflects the broader hope among Western diplomats that FATF’s actions could help stabilize Lebanon’s economy by curbing Hezbollah’s influence and restoring confidence in the country’s financial system. As the global community awaits FATF’s decision, the outcome will have far-reaching implications not only for Lebanon but for the broader Middle East. The battle against Iran’s terror financing is not just a regional issue; it is a global one, with stakes that extend far beyond the borders of Lebanon. The decisions made in the coming weeks could either tighten the financial noose around Hezbollah or allow the group to continue its operations unabated, with consequences that could reverberate across the region and beyond. Credit: Politico 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe -
0
The Emerging Threat of Synthetic Bioweapons: Unseen Dangers in an Advancing World
In cybersecurity, a penetration test mimics an actual attack on a system's defenses, employing the very tactics and tools that a real adversary would use. This method is commonly used by governments and corporations alike, with banks, for instance, routinely hiring experts to breach their systems, steal login credentials, and transfer funds illicitly. Upon completion, these experts report their findings, offering solutions to strengthen security. This decade, humanity itself faced a massive, real-world penetration test: the COVID-19 pandemic. This virus, an unthinking enemy, exposed the world's vulnerabilities in combating new pathogens. By the time the virus had run its course, it was painfully evident that humanity had failed the test. COVID-19 infiltrated every corner of the globe, from remote Antarctic research outposts to isolated Amazonian tribes, wreaking havoc in nursing homes, military vessels, and among both the powerless and the powerful—striking down frontline workers and heads of state alike. The harsh lockdowns enforced by autocracies and the rapid development of vaccines in democracies managed to slow the virus's spread but could not stop it. By the end of 2022, a staggering three-quarters of Americans had been infected at least once, and when China finally abandoned its “zero COVID” policy in December, over one billion of its citizens were infected within six weeks. The relatively low mortality rate of the pandemic was not due to successful containment efforts but rather because the virus was only moderately lethal. In the end, COVID-19 primarily burned itself out. This failure against COVID-19 serves as a sobering reminder of the growing biological threats that the world faces, both natural and human-made. While some threats, like avian flu, arise from nature, others emerge from the rapid advancements in science. Over the past 60 years, scientists have gained profound insights into both molecular and human biology, leading to the development of highly lethal and effective pathogens. They have mastered techniques to create viruses that can evade immunity, engineer them to spread more efficiently through the air, and even increase their deadliness. Although the origins of COVID-19 remain uncertain—whether from a lab or wildlife—it is clear that modern biological technology, now enhanced by artificial intelligence, has made it easier than ever to produce devastating diseases. Should a synthetic pathogen escape or be deliberately released, the consequences could be catastrophic, potentially killing far more people and causing greater economic damage than COVID-19. In the worst-case scenario, such a pathogen could claim more lives than the Black Death, which decimated one-third of Europe’s population. To prevent such a disaster, world leaders must prioritize the strengthening of defenses against human-made pathogens. This task is as complex as managing nuclear weapons and addressing climate change, two of the early Anthropocene's other grand challenges. To combat this danger, nations will need to fortify their societies against synthetic pathogens. This includes developing early-warning systems capable of detecting engineered diseases, ramping up the production of personal protective equipment, and significantly improving its effectiveness. They will also need to reduce the time required to develop and distribute vaccines and antiviral drugs from months to mere days. Furthermore, there is an urgent need to regulate the technologies used to create and manipulate viruses. And all of this must happen quickly. The Double-Edged Sword of Biological Progress For more than a century, biology has been viewed as a force for progress. By the early 21st century, vaccines had eradicated smallpox and rinderpest and nearly eliminated polio. While many infectious diseases remain incurable, and total eradication of pathogens is rare, the advances have been undeniable. The qualified nature of humanity's accomplishments is perhaps best exemplified by the HIV pandemic. Once a near-certain death sentence, HIV now infects millions annually, but thanks to scientific innovation, it has been transformed into a manageable condition through antiretroviral drugs that prevent viral replication. This kind of medical progress depends on distinct yet loosely coordinated efforts in healthcare delivery, public health management, and scientific research. However, this progress is not without its dangers. The same scientific understanding of microbiology that has led to remarkable advances in human health has also enabled efforts to undermine it. During World War I, the Allies explored the use of bacterial weapons, and German military intelligence used such pathogens to attack animals used by the Allies for transport. These efforts included infecting horses and mules in France and Romania, and in Norway, attempting to infect reindeer that were used by the Sami to deliver weapons to Russian forces. German operatives even managed to infect stables in the United States filled with animals destined for Europe. By World War II, these initiatives had evolved into weapons intended to kill humans. In Japanese-occupied Manchuria, military officer Shiro Ishii oversaw Unit 731, a nightmarish facility where biological weapons were tested on human subjects. Thousands of prisoners were killed through exposure to anthrax, typhoid, glanders, dysentery, and the bubonic plague. Toward the end of the war, Ishii proposed a large-scale biological warfare operation, codenamed "Cherry Blossoms at Night," which involved dispersing plague-infested fleas over major U.S. West Coast cities. However, the plan was vetoed by Japan’s army chief of staff, who feared that such an operation would escalate the war to a never-ending battle between humanity and bacteria. Despite this caution, other nations continued to develop biological weapons. In the 1960s, the U.S. Department of Defense launched Project 112, experimenting with ways to mass-distribute pathogens. The U.S. military dispersed spores in the New York City subway tunnels, released bacteria from boats in San Francisco Bay, and sprayed chemicals from aircraft over vast areas, from the Rockies to the Atlantic and from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico. These weapons were intended as a backup plan in case of a Soviet nuclear strike, providing a means to retaliate with biological devastation. By the mid-1960s, government scientists were producing significant quantities of lethal bacteria and toxins designed to "confound diagnosis and frustrate treatment," according to microbiologist Riley Housewright. These developments alarmed civilian researchers, who successfully lobbied against Washington's plans. President Richard Nixon, influenced by these concerns, halted the U.S. biological weapons program in 1969 and called for an international treaty to ban such weapons. Nobel Prize-winning biologist Joshua Lederberg supported this move, warning Congress that biological weapons could be as deadly as nuclear ones but easier to develop. Unlike nuclear weapons, which had been monopolized by the great powers and sustained a balance of deterrence, "germ power will work just the other way," Lederberg cautioned. However, the Soviet Union remained unconvinced. In 1971, as negotiations for a treaty were underway, the Soviets released a weaponized strain of the smallpox virus on an island in the Aral Sea, causing an outbreak in present-day Kazakhstan. The outbreak was contained due to the region's sparse population and widespread vaccination, but it highlighted the dangers of biological weapons. Later that year, the Soviet Union and the United States agreed to the Biological Weapons Convention, a treaty banning biological weapons, which was widely praised and signed in 1972. Despite this, the Soviets continued their biological weapons program in secret until the collapse of the Soviet Union, with some 60,000 people employed at its peak. Credit: Foreign Affairs 2024-08-27 Get the ASEAN NOW daily NEWSLETTER - Click HERE to subscribe
-
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now