Abstract
The US anti-crop BW programme emerged from domestic institutional arrangements that had been established during the late inter-war years, and the mobilisation of the US scientific community in support of the war effort.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Manfred Jonas, Isolationism in America, 1935–1941, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1966, p.206.
David Dickson, The New Politics of Science, University of Chicago Press, 1988, p 25.
See also, Carroll Pursell, Science Agencies in WWII: The OSRD and Its Challengers, in Nathan Reingold (ed.), The Sciences in the American Context: New Perspectives, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC, 1979, pp.359–78.
In a discussion which treats scientific and technological innovation as what is referred to as a global so-called, ‘independent variable’, Barry Buzan, suggests that such innovation has a two-fold effect upon the process of armament: first, states are forced to assess their armament requirements not only in relation to the military capability of an adversary but also in relation to what Buzan refers to as the standard of ‘technological leading edge’, and second by, that the forward march of scientific and technological innovation conditioned the response of military planners which Buzan argues results in the inevitable and permanent institutionalisation of the domestic armament process. Barry Buzan, An Introduction to Strategic Studies: Military Technology and International Relations, Macmillan, IISS, 1987, p.127.
Carroll Pursell, ‘Science Agencies in World War II: The OSRD and its Challengers’, in Nathan Reingold (ed.), The Sciences in the American Context: New Perspectives, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, 1979, p.359.
I. Stewart, Organising Scientific Research for War: The Administrative History of the OSRD, Little, Brown and Co, Boston, 1948, p.50.
Barton J Bernstein, ‘The Birth of the US Biological-Warfare Program’, Scientific American, Vol. 25, 6 June 1987, p.94.
L.P. Brophy, W.D. Miles and R.C. Cochrane, The Chemical Warfare Service: From Laboratory to Field, Office of the Chief of Military History, Department of the Army, Washington, DC, 1959, p.103.
Barton J. Bernstein, ‘Origins of the Biological Warfare Programme in the US, in Susan Wright’, (ed.), Preventing a Biological Arms Race, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., London, 1990, p. 11.
SIPRI, The Problem of Chemical and Biological Warfare: CB Weapons Today, Vol. II, Humanities Press, New York, 1973, p.118.
Laughlin refers to the War ‘Reserve’ Service. See, L. L. Laughlin, U.S. Army Activity in the U.S. Biological Warfare Programs, Vol. I, 24 February 1977, p.I-I.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2002 Simon M. Whitby
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Whitby, S.M. (2002). The Context of US BW Research and Development. In: Biological Warfare Against Crops. Global Issues Series. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230514645_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230514645_5
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-42467-2
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-51464-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)