Article

Weapon system selection and mass-casualty outcomes

Arpad Palfy

• Terrorism and political violence, Vol. 15, no. 2, Summer 2003, p. 81-95

English

Photocopies

If contemporary terrorism is assumed to be increasing in lethality, and chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) weapons theoretically are assumed to provide interested groups with the ability to achieve a higher kill ratio per incident, why have terrorist organizations, specifically those seeking to produce large amounts of casualties, continued to predominantly employ conventional weapon systems instead of chemical and biological ones? Not negating the possibility of such occurrences, I found that missions and groups specifically seeking to produce large amounts of casualties will prefer employing conventional weapons systems, while others predominantly focusing on inciting fear, panic and general disruption – regardless of the amount of resultant casualties, may be more tempted to use unconventional weapons.

• More information is available for logged in users