What do you think?
Rate this book
World at Risk: The Report of the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism
“The greatest danger of another catastrophic attack in the United States will materialize if the world's most dangerous terrorists acquire the world's most dangerous weapons.” —The 9/11 Commission Report
The bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism was established by the U.S. Congress to build on the work of the 9/11 Commission by assessing our nation's progress in preventing weapons of mass destruction proliferation and terrorism, and providing a roadmap to greater security with concrete recommendations for improvement.
The Commission has interviewed over 200 experts inside and outside of government. They have met with counterterrorism and intelligence officials here at home and abroad who are working to stop proliferation and terrorism The Commission's report examines the government's current policies and programs, identifies gaps in our government's prevention strategy and recommends ways to close them.
The threat of terrorist attacks in the United States and elsewhere is still very real. The world remians at risk There is more that can and must be done. Our security depends on it.
The bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism was established by the U.S. Congress to build on the work of the 9/11 Commission by assessing our nation's progress in preventing weapons of mass destruction proliferation and terrorism, and providing a roadmap to greater security with concrete recommendations for improvement.
The Commission has interviewed over 200 experts inside and outside of government. They have met with counterterrorism and intelligence officials here at home and abroad who are working to stop proliferation and terrorism The Commission's report examines the government's current policies and programs, identifies gaps in our government's prevention strategy and recommends ways to close them.
The threat of terrorist attacks in the United States and elsewhere is still very real. The world remians at risk There is more that can and must be done. Our security depends on it.
132 pages, Paperback
First published December 3, 2008
1 person is currently reading
27 people want to read
About the author
Bob Graham
13 books6 followersDaniel Robert "Bob" Graham (born November 9, 1936) is an American politician and author. He was the 38th Governor of Florida from 1979 to 1987 and a United States Senator from that state from 1987 to 2005.
Graham tried unsuccessfully to run for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, but dropped out of the race on October 6, 2003. He announced his retirement from the Senate on November 3 of that year.
Graham is now concentrating his efforts on the newly established Bob Graham Center for Public Service at his undergraduate alma mater, the University of Florida. He served as Chairman of the Commission on the Prevention of WMD proliferation and terrorism. Through the WMD policy center he advocates for the recommendations in the Commission report, World at Risk.
Graham also served as co-chair of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling and a member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and the CIA External Advisory Board.
In 2011, Graham published his first novel, the thriller The Keys to the Kingdom. Graham has written three non-fiction books. Workdays-Finding Florida on the Job; Intelligence Matters and America: The Owners Manual.
Source: Wikipedia.
Graham tried unsuccessfully to run for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination, but dropped out of the race on October 6, 2003. He announced his retirement from the Senate on November 3 of that year.
Graham is now concentrating his efforts on the newly established Bob Graham Center for Public Service at his undergraduate alma mater, the University of Florida. He served as Chairman of the Commission on the Prevention of WMD proliferation and terrorism. Through the WMD policy center he advocates for the recommendations in the Commission report, World at Risk.
Graham also served as co-chair of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling and a member of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and the CIA External Advisory Board.
In 2011, Graham published his first novel, the thriller The Keys to the Kingdom. Graham has written three non-fiction books. Workdays-Finding Florida on the Job; Intelligence Matters and America: The Owners Manual.
Source: Wikipedia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 4, 2015
Commission reports are akin to a government band-aid. It shows that they did something but more than likely most of the recommendations will be unfortunately ignored.
The biggest threats to the US security from Terrorists would be them obtaining Weapons of Mass Destruction according to the Commission (2008). The most dangerous of these threats would be from a Biological or Nuclear attack. Terrorists have shown a desire to obtain WMDs in the past and haven't given up on it yet. Though not completely insurmountable, terrorists would be hard pressed to manufacture their own WMDs either Biological or Nuclear without the technical expertise and equipment. This leaves theft of either of these weapons through lax security as the most likely scenario for obtaining these weapons.
The commission recommends increased security measures at all Nuclear and Biological facilities to thwart these weapons from being stolen. While this is an obvious solution the practice is a little more tricky. This is because the US does not have control of the Nuclear and Biological weapons in other countries. The additional challenge of the biological weapons coming from research facilities that are also providing beneficial research. Since, according to the commission 95% of all Nuclear weapons are possessed by either the US or Russia the solution for tighter controls on Nuclear Weapons can and has been largely hashed out between both of them. The Biological weapons are a much greater challenge. Without even a complete and accurate picture of how many Biological research facilities there are around the globe this is the most disconcerting of the challenges.
While the Nuclear threat is very real, at least the technical aspects of it make it somewhat more difficult and thus unlikely for Terrorists to easily acquire. The Biological weapons are both easier to obtain and distribute. The delayed symptoms from Biological Weapons can also make them virtually un-traceable as the perpetrators will have left the scene of the crime for days before the attack was even recognized. These factors make the biological weapons of much greater concern, in their lethality, vulnerability to theft and ease of distribution.
Of all the recommendations made by the commission the need to better regulate the Biological weapons is the one that needs to be given much higher priority. The incalculable damage from a biological attack would be hard to even accurately estimate with far-ranging repercussions lasting far after the attack. The most shocking part of the whole report is how little has been done up to this point in regards to verification and enforcement methods.
The US has had some success in the past with Nuclear Arms Control and reduction with Russia. The Biological Weapons Convention could use the same template and use the recommendations of the commission to build support in the scientific community through out-reach programs that stress the importance of compliance.
The biggest threats to the US security from Terrorists would be them obtaining Weapons of Mass Destruction according to the Commission (2008). The most dangerous of these threats would be from a Biological or Nuclear attack. Terrorists have shown a desire to obtain WMDs in the past and haven't given up on it yet. Though not completely insurmountable, terrorists would be hard pressed to manufacture their own WMDs either Biological or Nuclear without the technical expertise and equipment. This leaves theft of either of these weapons through lax security as the most likely scenario for obtaining these weapons.
The commission recommends increased security measures at all Nuclear and Biological facilities to thwart these weapons from being stolen. While this is an obvious solution the practice is a little more tricky. This is because the US does not have control of the Nuclear and Biological weapons in other countries. The additional challenge of the biological weapons coming from research facilities that are also providing beneficial research. Since, according to the commission 95% of all Nuclear weapons are possessed by either the US or Russia the solution for tighter controls on Nuclear Weapons can and has been largely hashed out between both of them. The Biological weapons are a much greater challenge. Without even a complete and accurate picture of how many Biological research facilities there are around the globe this is the most disconcerting of the challenges.
While the Nuclear threat is very real, at least the technical aspects of it make it somewhat more difficult and thus unlikely for Terrorists to easily acquire. The Biological weapons are both easier to obtain and distribute. The delayed symptoms from Biological Weapons can also make them virtually un-traceable as the perpetrators will have left the scene of the crime for days before the attack was even recognized. These factors make the biological weapons of much greater concern, in their lethality, vulnerability to theft and ease of distribution.
Of all the recommendations made by the commission the need to better regulate the Biological weapons is the one that needs to be given much higher priority. The incalculable damage from a biological attack would be hard to even accurately estimate with far-ranging repercussions lasting far after the attack. The most shocking part of the whole report is how little has been done up to this point in regards to verification and enforcement methods.
The US has had some success in the past with Nuclear Arms Control and reduction with Russia. The Biological Weapons Convention could use the same template and use the recommendations of the commission to build support in the scientific community through out-reach programs that stress the importance of compliance.
Displaying 1 of 1 review