Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Greese on February 12, 2003, 06:02:19 PM
-
So the inspectors have now found mustard gas, and also discovered some of Iraq's missles go farther than allowed for defense?
I have heard a blip or two, but can't find a whole lot about this. Anyone know the whole story? Is Iraq starting to comply or were these discovered?
-
Mustard gas is probably the least lethal WMD in Iraq's arsnel. It is not a threat at all. In WW1 it killed because it was released in massive clouds and there were no masks to guard against it initally. Now a relatively simple and primitive gas mask will provide adequate protection.
Nerve gas and germ warefare (anthrax) wareheads would be of much more concern.
As far as the missle range goes, I do not think that exceeding the 150 mile or km limit by 30 or 40 miles is any big deal. If you see them joining stages together on the missles then you should get worried.
It is normal when developing a missle to have target distances be exceeded by 10 or 20% when they are calibrating the propellent load.
All in all this is a non story.
-
Originally posted by Habu
(1) Mustard gas is probably the least lethal WMD in Iraq's arsnel. It is not a threat at all. In WW1 it killed because it was released in massive clouds and there were no masks to guard against it intially. Now a relatively simple and primitive gas mask will provide adequate protection.
(2) As far as the missle range goes, I do not think that exceeding the 150 mile or km limit by 30 or 40 miles is any big deal. If you seem then joining stages together on the missles then you should get worried.
(3) All in all this is a non story.
(1) Youre right - its just mustard gas - lets let him have it - he'll only kill a few people. Go read your history books if you need a refresher on how horrible mustard gas was and how "successful" primitive gas masks were in stopping it.
(2) Right again. Why make a ruthless dictator abide by post Gulf War UN sponsored weapons capability limitations. Hell, maybe if we wait long enough Germany will sell them multi-stage rockets.
(3) People ask for proof of chemical and biological weapons... then deem mustard gas as a "non-issue." Ok, right... :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Saurdaukar
(1) Youre right - its just mustard gas - lets let him have it - he'll only kill a few people. Go read your history books if you need a refresher on how horrible mustard gas was and how "successful" primitive gas masks were in stopping it.
(2) Right again. Why make a ruthless dictator abide by post Gulf War UN sponsored weapons capability limitations. Hell, maybe if we wait long enough Germany will sell them multi-stage rockets.
(3) People ask for proof of chemical and biological weapons... then deem mustard gas as a "non-issue." Ok, right... :rolleyes:
Mustard gas in a missle warhead would do squat. All you have to do is protect the mucas membranes and you will be fine in an attack. Simple gas masks are enough protection. Anthrax and Nerve gas require much more elaborate suits. The protective suit for these agents is not a practical means of protection.
The small difference in the range of the missles is not worth making a big deal out of as it give the French and Germans an example of how everyone is over reacting.
There are big reasons to worry about Iraq. These are not them.
-
Is it hot mustard, or that cheap yellow stuff?
-
"Pardon, saddam; you wouldn't have any of the grey poupon...?"
-
Originally posted by Greese
So the inspectors have now found mustard gas
How can we be sure this is not leftover stockpiles of mustard gas that the British didn't use up when they gassed thousands of Iraqis way back when?
-
1. Is Mustard gas a chemical weapon?
2. Is Mustard gas an illegal weapon by the geneva convention?
3. Was said Mustard gas declared back in December by irak?
Material breech, yet again, but hey it's not a big deal.
With us or against us diddlyers, I really don't think you want to be against us....
-
With us or against us diddlyers, I really don't think you want to be against us.... [/B][/QUOTE]
Well, its exactly this way of thinking and speaking who push your
allies far from you.
I dont mean you, you are obviously not the smarter American,
the problem is that this is the official policy of Usa.
Think about a new alliance between Europe Russia and maby
China. Think a lot because thats the point where the policy of
Usa push the other nations.
I want you understand that is not your allies who leave you alone. It is you who push them far from you.
Know your history, and remember when you have win a war without the military and more the political support of your allies.
Diplomacy is an art which you dont even know that exists.
Your allies in europe are (or was) more near to you than you can
imagine. We all have grow up with loosy,lone ranger,manix &
hawai 5-0 :) We all have see the first steps of Armsrong on the
moon and all we was happy. ( nice days :) ).
You cant imagine how big damage in the image of Usa have done
only the last year policy of your goverment.
Have a nice day :)
:)
-
Mustard gas or agent is not only effective it is deadly. Using a mask is NOT a creditable defense against it, as it is skin permeable. Mustard gas is one name for a blister agent. it has effects on the skin alone much less the mucus membranes.
Putting it in a missle IS a big threat unless you feel very confident that you are not in the target zone. It is a true non discriminatory weapon. It affects all who come in contact with it long after it is released. Oh BTW it doesn't just disperse, it's a long term threat. There will be a residual effect as long as it is not chemically neutralized.
Those that have had no training in NBC (nuclear, chemical and biological) warfare should just STFU.
I have had training and this crap scares the bejeebus out of me.
It just cracks me up to see posts defending the dictator who has in the past actually used this stuff on his own people. Why the hell wouldn't he use it again? I suppose he is preferable to the U.S. in some folks eyes.
-
It just cracks me up to see posts defending the dictator who has in the past actually used this stuff on his own people.
We knew all that but still kept selling him the stuff. Let's not get all moralistic about it now.
-
Mustard gas will blister the skin in Gaseous state if it is in high concentrations. A missile is not capable of delivering it in high concentrations over a large area. Mustard gas like all gas will disperse quickly in the atmosphere and can be next to useless if a wind is present. Anthrax however is much more effective if it does disperse in the wind.
As far as the Mucus membranes go if you get it to the mucus membranes then you have a good chance of killing the person. However if it gets on your skin it is far less lethal. Just because you get some nasty blisters on your skin does not mean you are going to die. Tear gas will cause much discomfort if it gets on your skin as well. But it is not considered lethal. It is the ability of the gas to kill large numbers of people that is the concern.
In WW1 they brought the gas to the trenches in tanks and let it out when the wind was right so a big cloud formed and moved slowly over the battlefield killing everything in its path. To achieve this effect the weather had to be perfect (a luxury you have when you are in a stalemate battle and can wait for the right conditions). However the same attack launched in a breeze that was too strong or in the wrong direction would have been next to ineffective.
How do you know that we have no experience in this area? Do not make assumptions. Military training on the effects of weapons such as mustard gas can be much less informed than looking a medical texts and WW1 era reports when the gas was in use in large quantities.
You know yourself that the level of knowledge that a private infantryman will absorb is much less than what say a medical officer will receive. Quite often they will show you horrible slides and say "This can happen to you if you do not take proper precautions" and then tell you the fail safe ways to protect yourself.
To compare the lethal effects of mustard gas with Anthrax just shows me how little you know. One is absolutely a nightmare compared to the other.
BTW I am basing my opinion on information I read in a very excellent book.
No Place to Run: The Canadian Corps and Gas Warfare in the First World War.
TIM COOK. Vancouver: UBC Press 1999. Pp. viii, 296, illus.
Mustard gas is nasty stuff in the right conditions but my conclusions after reading the book is that the right conditions are rarely present and if the other side takes precautions even when the gas is used it is not that effective. This was refected in the relatively low casulity rate for the weapon in major battles where it was used in shells.
It was most effective when it was released as an offensive weapon in perfect conditions than when it was released as a defensive weapon or when it was delivered by shelling.
-
Well..if they have the ablity to deliver one type of gas. What will prevent him from sending another..or for that matter a bio type warhead?
xBAT
-
Habu,
You might have noticed that things have changed a bit since WW1.
Mustard gas is not a gas, it is a liquid and a persistant one at that. For inhalation purposes you need a vaporization effect like the book spoke about. After the vapors settle they still form a threat until chemically negated.
Dropping gas in a trench situation is not the most likely use of this stuff or have you forgotten the scuds dropped on Isreal. Dropping it on a trained military population with the facilities and training to survive it is one thing but that is not the most liely scenario. Ask the Japanese about their subway experiance. Cicilians will take a considerable number of casualties during and after any mustard gas attack as they are not trained and do not have the equipment to deal with it.
Just why are you so fond of this stuff anyhow? Why is it you don't seem to care that the one person who has the MOST experience using it in the last 30 years and has expressed no remorse over using it (VERY successfully I might add) only wants to get more and more means of delivering it?
BTW My info was much more recent than a book about WW1. I went through the training and learned how to deal with it. Even with the proper gear the combat effectiveness of a unit under active chemical attack is considerably diminished.
What experiance have you had in NBC?
-
3. Was said Mustard gas declared back in December by irak?
AFAIK, the mustard gas they have "found" now is a batch of shells that were scheduled for destruction by UN arms inspectors back in the 90s, before the inspection regieme collapsed.
They are not a breach. If there is a different story, about new finds of mustard gas, it hasn't appeared on any news sources I have seen.
-
Just my opinion but I think that since Mustard gas is so primative and ineffective that any they find is just left over and was forgotten.
I think the real threat is the nerve gas and the biological weapons that are much more advanced and deadly.
A terrorist can launch a biological attack by disperseing Anthrax or some other agent in a crowded area and then leave and escape. It will not be for days until the attack is discovered.
That is the type of weapon that scares me and that is the type of weapon that the inspectors should be looking for in ernest. And if they find any then I say make Bagdad a glass parking lot. Because it is not for any other reason that such a thing would be made by Iraq except for an attack on the US mainland or Israel.
-
Originally posted by Udie
1. Is Mustard gas a chemical weapon?
2. Is Mustard gas an illegal weapon by the geneva convention?
3. Was said Mustard gas declared back in December by irak?
Material breech, yet again, but hey it's not a big deal.
With us or against us diddlyers, I really don't think you want to be against us....
1. yes
2. yes
3. yes - that's how the inspectors knew about it.
Rather than a material breach of 1441, it was cited by Hans Blix as being a positive improvement in the substance of their compliance, as well as the process. A long way to go, but in the right direction.
-
Originally posted by Dowding
We knew all that but still kept selling him the stuff. Let's not get all moralistic about it now.
So what the diddly does that have to do with anything?
He used WMDs on his own population.
Read above sentence 10 times.
-
Originally posted by Habu
Just my opinion but I think that since Mustard gas is so primative and ineffective that any they find is just left over and was forgotten.
You should try sitting in a subway car when someone detonates a bomb containing such a primitive and ineffective substance... might change your view on things.
-
How would you get the Mustard gas into the subway and set it off so it disperses so quicky that it overwhelms everyone without then being warned by the screams and running away?
You need a pretty complicated system to get it aerosolized and dispersed quickly.
There are much quicker and easier ways to achieve the same effect.
Just because it can kill does not make it an effectice WMD. A car can be a lethal weapon too if you decide to use it that way. But when trying to kill 1000's of people a car is not effective.
Chemical warfare is banned (and for good reason). If Iraq decided to produce Mustard gas again after the ban they are idiots. Mustard gas is primitive. There are much more scary things that should be the priority. If they find a nerve gas stockpile invade. If they find a biological warfare lab invade. If Iraq resists the inspections invade. But to invade over a primitive and ineffective thing like Mustard gas only gives the French and Germans a reason to say the US is over reacting.
As much as I would like to see Saddam gone, you have to have a good reason to invade. Or else the rest of the world will say they did it over a technicality and not a real threat.
-
Habu,
You are so naive that it boggles the mind.
Getting a canister of gas onto a train is not difficult. It doesn't take much to know that not all freight is scanned.
Getting it on the subway is even easier. Using a few, very few, cantidates for muslim heaven with a briefcase each would decimate a subway train in minutes. It can't be stopped by the passengers and there is no way off until it DOES stop. When the doors open there will be additional victims waiting on a crowded ram waiting to enter the coaches. This act would take FAR less coordination that the WTC did.
You say there is no reason to take this animal out?????? I can't see leaving the one leader in the world who has repeatedly used WMD's still holding them and passing them on to enemies who would be tickled pink to get a ticket to heaven with conventional explosives much less using a WMD.
Perhaps you could just take a trip over there and convince him to give up voluntarily. The sooner the better.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Habu,
You are so naive that it boggles the mind.
Getting a canister of gas onto a train is not difficult. It doesn't take much to know that not all freight is scanned.
Getting it on the subway is even easier. Using a few, very few, cantidates for muslim heaven with a briefcase each would decimate a subway train in minutes. It can't be stopped by the passengers and there is no way off until it DOES stop. When the doors open there will be additional victims waiting on a crowded ram waiting to enter the coaches. This act would take FAR less coordination that the WTC did.
You say there is no reason to take this animal out?????? I can't see leaving the one leader in the world who has repeatedly used WMD's still holding them and passing them on to enemies who would be tickled pink to get a ticket to heaven with conventional explosives much less using a WMD.
Perhaps you could just take a trip over there and convince him to give up voluntarily. The sooner the better.
Man I wish I was in the weapons business and you were a buyer. l I could load you up with useless toejam.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Habu,
You are so naive that it boggles the mind.
Getting a canister of gas onto a train is not difficult. It doesn't take much to know that not all freight is scanned.
Getting it on the subway is even easier. Using a few, very few, cantidates for muslim heaven with a briefcase each would decimate a subway train in minutes. It can't be stopped by the passengers and there is no way off until it DOES stop. When the doors open there will be additional victims waiting on a crowded ram waiting to enter the coaches. This act would take FAR less coordination that the WTC did.
You say there is no reason to take this animal out?????? I can't see leaving the one leader in the world who has repeatedly used WMD's still holding them and passing them on to enemies who would be tickled pink to get a ticket to heaven with conventional explosives much less using a WMD.
Perhaps you could just take a trip over there and convince him to give up voluntarily. The sooner the better.
I think you are misunderstanding my arguement. I am saying the inspectors should be really focused on finding evidence of biological or nuclear weapons production or research.
That is the real scary stuff.
Oh and regarding your argument. Imagine I am in a subway car and a terrorist in the next car sets off a device with Mustard gas. I hear all sorts or screaming and I see people chokeing and collaspeing. I hit the stop strip. Run to the end of the train (or force open a door and jump down) and keep on running.
Now imagine the same terrorist with a few belts of explosives around him and you are in the car where I was with the last guy. He sets them off and guess what? You probably don't even know what hit you. And the explosion can set off secondary explosions if it is placed in an area with other explosive materials around (like a propane truck for example).
A primitive explosive is more effective that the gas you seem fixated on. The reason? You can't spread the gas quickly. And you can't carry the quantity necessary to do major killing by hand.
If I were trying to commit a terrorist act I would not be chooseing mustard gas to do so. I would be buying bags of Ammonium Nitrate and mixing it with diesel. Oh wait. That is exactly what terrorists seem to be doing these days. I wonder why?
-
Originally posted by Habu
Man I wish I was in the weapons business and you were a buyer. l I could load you up with useless toejam.
I am not in the market for a wmd. You are the one saying it's no threat based on a book from a conflict that was over80 years ago. I told ya before and won't go through the same excercise of letting you know my training is a hell of a lot more recent than WW2.
This has gotten to the stage of being pointless. You do not have anything to back your opinion and this discussion is over.
I sincerely hope you never have to deal with any WMD in any form. I also hope those with more on the ball than you, do prevent any attack by wmd anywhere.
-
some of you people just don't get it
THE UN INSPECTORS ARE NOT SUPOSED TO LOOK FOR WEAPONS
THE UN INSPECTORS ARE SUPOSED TO VERIFY THAT THE WMD HAVE BEEN DESTROYED
saddam loves you guys , he really does
france ..."the inspectors need more time to LOOK for WMD"
it's hard to "look" with your head in the sand
-
It seems that many of you have somekind of a fake illusion that AQ and the likes really need Saddam to produce chemicals for them..
Unfortunately that's not the case. A huge variation of chemical agents suitable for an attack can be manufactured in a simple home laboratory, and this is exactly the approach AQ most likely takes.
Why deliver the stuff from Iraq when you can build it a 100 yards away from the strike point?
-
Well, personally I think the bio threat is worse
-
a "simple home laboratory" blew up today in gaza, took out 3 hamas bomb makers.