Is biological warfare unethical?

Question

Or is all fair in war.

Answer 1

It appears as though the goal of warfare is to kill or disable lots of the enemy without killing yourself or many of your friends.

The more reliable and controllable the weapon, the better.  We don't want the weapon hanging around forever and continuing to endanger us during peace time.

Although all weapons suffer from these drawbacks to some extent.  Biological weapons are scarrier, believed to be less predictable or controllable, and are thus considered unethical by the world.

Answer 2

Biological warfare is unethical. Its just wrong it does kill the enemy but it also kills many innocent people.

Answer 3

All is fair when we're fighting the enemy (Iraq).  

Answer 4

Is killing someone ethical? That is the question you need to begin with. Is it ever necessary? For example, during times of war? Is war itself ever ethical? Is there such a thing as a "just" war? If so, would killing innocent people during aforementioned "just" war be ethical? This is one of those questions that has no answers, only opinions. I believe that biological warfare is unethical because it kills innocent people, there's no way around that fact. It kills people who are not involved with the warring factions' disputes and who often do not care to be.

Answer 5

All warfare is unethical

Answer 6

Very unethical. Except for the g*y bomb which is just funny. Basically it was a bomb that would produce a gas filled with strong homosexual aphrodisiacs that would cause enemy soldiers to suddenly stop fighting and start having s*x with each other. Highly doubt it would have work but it was actually seriously considered at one point.

Answer 7

WAR IS UNETHICAL . BIOLOGICAL OR OTHER.

Answer 8

It's unethical in all situations because it doesn't differentiate between soldiers and civilians.

It's a genocidal weapon.