It's not easy to get rid of chemical arms
By The Associated Press
Published: Friday, Sept. 13, 2013, 7:18 p.m.
The United States has made significant progress in eradicating 90 percent of the 31,500 tons of chemical weapons it once possessed, but the military doesn't expect to complete destruction until 2023.
Experts say it's probably simpler to make chemical weapons than to get rid of them.
“Disposal requires such rigorous processes to ensure there is no pollution or residual agent,” said Susannah Sirkin, international policy director for Physicians for Human Rights, which has been monitoring weapons of mass destruction for more than two decades. “On average it is costing about 10 times more to destroy than it did to make the munitions.”
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Sandy Hook 911 calls fuel sensitivity debate
- Bashir resigns over comments about Palin
- NYC train car lacked safety alert, source says
- 2 million Facebook, Twitter, Google passwords pilfered
- Fatal mishap behind them, skydivers return to air
- Arctic front blasts deep into U.S., will shift east
- Lawmakers enjoy hearing on aliens
- 9 injured in mishap in Oakland tunnel
- Obama says income gap defining U.S. challenge
- Health care website to meet its goals, feds say
- Detroit retirees antsy as hit to pensions unclear