[crypt2k]

The Israeli radar system warns of an attack by 15 missiles launched from Iraq. Twelve of the missiles are intercepted by Arrow missiles and three missiles bearing chemical warheads land in Haifa, Tel Aviv and Yavneh.

If missiles bearing chemical/biological agents are intercepted over the target country, doesn't that INCREASE the efficiency of dispersal?

[Tree of Liberty]

I might be wrong, but the heat of the explosion might kill most of the microbes in a biological weapon. I don't know how this would effect a chemical weapon.

[Phil V.]

There is probably no pat answer to your question. If the effect is a function of concentration then dispersal at high altitude MIGHT diminish or negate the effect. Probably depends on the threshold needed to cause harm

[xzins]

Not true of chemical, but it may be true of biological. If I remember correctly, chems have a particular dispersal rate and time of effectiveness. They're used as blocking weapons to channel enemy forces into certain avenues of approach and to deny other avenues of approach for just those reasons.

When the chem has reached its limit then the friendly forces are then able to use the contaminated area.

[zeromus]

The article just said there were 15 missiles incoming. I suppose in the situation, one should shoot first, and ask questions later. Youd have a much easier time explaining the consequences of shooting down missiles of unknown character than letting them hit their urban targets!

[LurkingSince'98]

dispersal is good if it's far away. The solution to pollution (chem weapons) is dilution. By the time it fell on their heads, it would be too diluted to even cause the sniffels. Regards, Lurking'

[Poohbah]

If (a) the missiles are intercepted prior to their designated detonation points and (b) they actually distribute their payload more efficiently...then the missiles were badly mistargeted to begin with.