A biological attack on USA would likely become a pandemic

"Bubunoic plaque is transmissable via breath, touch, and bodily fluids." No it isn't. And people with the plague were largely know nothing primitives who feared a lot of silly stuff. Please check anything about the actual disease. It doesn't transmit that way. http://en.wikipedia.org... Also, http://www.sciencemag.org... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... http://dx.doi.org... I'm citing medical research you're citing people who were just as likely to attribute it to the devil, kill cats as witches' familiars, and thereby worsen the effect by killing the cats who could kill the rats that carried the fleas that spread the plague that lived in the house that jack built. The disease is blood born, it isn't present in the mouth or on the skin. It survives on the blood within fleas, lice, and humans. -- The fact is the most likely biological attack weapons are not going to be highly contagious. It's pretty easy to have a disease vector that can kill a person but it takes a bit to have them stay alive long enough to spread it and cause a pandemic. This debate isn't about pandemic biological attacks which are certainly feasible, but rather whether a biological attack on the US would be pandemic. The answer is going to be no. The most likely attack would be anthrax because it's really easy and really deadly. It doesn't cause pandemics. Saying that IF they used smallpox, or IF they used Ebola (which there is a vaccine for, we just don't know if it'll work because it was developed towards the end of the last outbreak), then it would be pandemic is a moot point. The question is what kind of biological attack on the US would be the most likely? The answer is anthrax and no, that wouldn't be a pandemic. In fact, of all the biological attacks ever done on the US 100% have been anthrax based. Repeatedly suggesting over and over that a pandemic attack be launched has no bearing on the topic. The question is whether a biological attack would become pandemic. Suggesting that Ebola would become pandemic and the vector of a hypothetical attack is a little self-serving to the idea that the attack would become pandemic, don't you think? -- However, moving along, Ebola transmits through contact with infected fluids and contact with mucus membranes. Although theoretically possible it transmit airborne it is quite difficult in practice. As such the several outbreaks of Ebola within the United States in Virgina and Texas were minor and larger outbreaks could easily be contained. "Avoid fluid contact and you'll live" would suffice to save and prevent Ebola from becoming pandemic along with government set quarantines of infected areas. You would be amazed how many diseases can be stopped by guys with guns saying "Get the hell back in that city or we shoot you!" Smallpox on the otherhand is airborne. It's deadly and despite claims that it's completely eradicated somebody might be able to dig some of it up. However, it only becomes contagious after a rash appears and after a long gestation period. As a consequence is spreads more slowly. While it could certainly kill a lot of people, it could be combated by shooting anybody developing a rash, or a quick quarantine program if one is justifiably worried about human life. The fact that it is unattainable makes it an unlikely vector. Further, a terrorist group infected with smallpox would look like death be covered with sores and need to stand within six feet of a lot of people for prolonged periods of time. As soon as anybody from any medical organization figured it out, you'd be over. When you tell people that people presenting with a rash should be reported to be quarantine there's a quick and obvious response. The death rate is only about 30% most people above the age of 40 are immune having been vaccinated already. With the speed of communication you need to have everybody in the world infected before the disease starts killing people. You need it to be highly contagious, airborne, and deadly only after set period of time. One might be able to genetically engineer a flu virus or one of the many easily transmitted asymptomatic viruses to synthesize immuno-suppressants which increases the death toll considerably, and release the modified virus in a series of high population density areas. That would never be likely, but possible and pandemic and deadly. You'd quickly run into people dying as their immune systems collapsed of various different ailments which could be misdiagnosed a number of different ways. However this is probably well beyond the realm of any potential attacker. -- The most likely biological attacks are simply anthrax and other quick kill infections. You can't make the argument, If pandemic then pandemic. You need to show that the likely biological attack vectors would be pandemic. It would be much easier to dust a football stadium with anthrax than any other potential attack. And that wouldn't be a pandemic. -- You're simply wrong. I'm not saying that a pandemic attack would be impossible, I'm simply pointing out that it isn't the most likely form of biological attack at this time.