|
Possible chemical weapon usage reported in Syria (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| itsamemario |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Since atropine injections when exposed to BZ are detrimental, hopefully this is not an attack to confuse populations that have been distributed autoinjector kits when actual nerve agents are used, causing them to not take antidotes. |
atropine is pretty dangerous in itself, you hsould be 100% youve been exposed to organophosphates before jamming that thing in your thigh.
hah, reminds me of the week we did gas training. we were paired up and we were the first on the atropine station, and my buddy was up first and he was getting sweaty and the instructor started yelling at him. turns out he thought they'd only taken out the atropine and left the needle in. hah. however would he get that idea? :gsmile: |
|
|
| itsamemario |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Its like choking and trippin on acid at the same time! :wtf:
But yea, not as bad as GB, VX, or even HD.
They break out those three and we got some serious on our hands. |
This is what Syria has
Sarin, Tabun, VX, and mustard gas types of chemical weapons
and they've done extensive research into weaponizing "anthrax, plague, tularemia, botulinium, smallpox, aflotoxin, cholera, ricin and camelpox". Even so far as to fitting anthrax to warheads. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
Yea, atropine can cause similar effects to BZ, and its actions would work to counter-act the effects of acetylcholine degradation inhibitors like organophosphates.
lol @ autoinjectors.
I wish all injected drugs were done in autoinjectors, I don't personally have a problem with needles, but I bet a lot more people would go to the doc if they didn't have to see the needle. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by itsamemario
This is what Syria has
Sarin, Tabun, VX, and mustard gas types of chemical weapons
and they've done extensive research into weaponizing "anthrax, plague, tularemia, botulinium, smallpox, aflotoxin, cholera, ricin and camelpox". Even so far as to fitting anthrax to warheads. |
Yea, though their VX is rumored to be of Iraqi origin, or at least produced with Iraqi equipment, which according to a number of sources produced fairly low quality, low yield batches. Iraq had a lot of problems with the final stages of VX production and they never had as large a scale production of VX as they did GB and HD.
Their GB production also is most likely similar to Iraq, especially since there is confirmation that Sarin was stored in binary precursors. Poor quality precursors with impurities can lead to Sarin that rapidly (over the course of a few weeks to months) looses its effectiveness.
Of course talking about quality is very relative here, there is no doubt that they have enough nerve agent of any quality to kill tens of thousands of people easily.
A couple years ago I researched quite a bit on the bioweapons programs of the former Soviet Union and Russia and reading into that, I doubt that Syria's bioweapons program is all that advanced. Bioweapons require a LOT of skill and investment in time, especially to be weaponized in any significant amount. |
|
|
| itsamemario |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
Yea, though their VX is rumored to be of Iraqi origin, or at least produced with Iraqi equipment, which according to a number of sources produced fairly low quality, low yield batches. Iraq had a lot of problems with the final stages of VX production and they never had as large a scale production of VX as they did GB and HD.
Their GB production also is most likely similar to Iraq, especially since there is confirmation that Sarin was stored in binary precursors. Poor quality precursors with impurities can lead to Sarin that rapidly (over the course of a few weeks to months) looses its effectiveness.
Of course talking about quality is very relative here, there is no doubt that they have enough nerve agent of any quality to kill tens of thousands of people easily.
A couple years ago I researched quite a bit on the bioweapons programs of the former Soviet Union and Russia and reading into that, I doubt that Syria's bioweapons program is all that advanced. Bioweapons require a LOT of skill and investment in time, especially to be weaponized in any significant amount. |
I've actually been reading alot about nerve agents and other chemical stuff lately.. mostly iraq/iran/kurds when it comes to battles, but generally a lot about the subject..
Regarding your comment on BZ+Atropine. There are two reasons that I see, for why they would choose to use BZ.
-Depleting atropine supplies/exarberating PNS effects in BZ poisoning.
-Letting the world know that they are now using CWC Schedule II substance weapons and that it's only a matter of time before they're gonna do the bump up to Schedule I.
The WMD's they didn't find in Iraq is definitely in Syria. like that just doesn't go missing on the way to destruction, and if I remember the disrepency wasn't small. And remember binary weapons have practically indefinite shelf life.
Regarding impurities;
"CIA BELIEVES THAT A SUBSTANTIAL SEGMENT OF IRAQ'S NERVE AGENT
STOCKPILE CONSISTS OF BINARY CHEMICAL WEAPONS--WHICH WOULD NOT
BE SUBJECT TO DEGRADATION. CIA ALSO BELIEVES THAT THE SHELF
LIFE PROBLEM WAS ONLY TEMPORARY AND THAT THE IRAQIS EVEN NOW
MAY BE ABLE TO PRODUCE UNITARY AGENTS OF SUFFICIENT QUALITY BY
ADDING A STABILIZER OR IMPROVING THEIR PRODUCTION PROCESS."
And dont forget that Syria is Russia-backed. If they have access to a Novichok-5 derived weapon? Even access to the data of the research program puts them ahead of Rihab Taha aka Dr Germ's iraqi weapons program. Having said that, there are striking similarities between the Iraqi and the Syrian bio weapons programs. Almost seems like a continuation. And if I remember my history correctly Gorbachev supplied Iraq with weapons during the first gulf war. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
I should clarify on binary sarin. The fact that it is binary is not an indication that it is poor quality. It is indicative in this case though because the binary components were not in a deliverable weapon, but mixed prior to filling bombs (and probably sprayers). This is likely evidence that the Syrians have had major impurity problems and are keeping the DF (methylphosphonyl difluoride) and OPA (isopropyl alcohol and isopropyl amine) in different containers, as they do not degrade as much.
The US and Soviets had binary delivery devices, artillery shells and airdropped bombs that stored the precursors in the same vessel and they were mixed in flight to the target.
Furthermore, as I said in the last thread on this subject, the evidence that they have those problems means that their sarin is degrading, and logically you'd only want to mix it right before it is used (within a few weeks of use). |
|
|
| enydo |
| Thank god for wikipedia, right Nou? |
|
|
| itsamemario |
| quote: | Originally posted by Joss Weatherby
It is indicative in this case though because the binary components were not in a deliverable weapon, but mixed prior to filling bombs (and probably sprayers). |
I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. Are you saying Iraq did not possess binary chemical munitions?
Also see edit above |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by enydo
Thank god for wikipedia, right Nou? |
haha... sadly I have known about a lot of this stuff for a long time. :( But wikipedia is good too. I contribute to some of the articles! :D |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
| quote: | Originally posted by itsamemario
I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. Are you saying Iraq did not possess binary chemical munitions?
Also see edit above |
They did not possess binary delivery devices (to any significant degree). They did store it in binary though. During that Iran-Iraq war they probably mixed the sarin at munitions dumps before sending them to the troops (most of their delivery methods were artillery rounds).
They also had unitary sprayers (what they used against the Kurds).
Later on they might have had stabilized Sarin (they also experimented with mixing Sarin and Cycloserin, though I am not sure if that mix helped stabilize it in unitary format) but it was probably after 91, and not produced in the quantities that they were producing agents before Desert Storm.
Using Iraq as an example, and from what intelligence reports have said about how the Syrians are handling their Sarin, it seems that they have impurity problems because they appear to have unitary delivery devices (bursting air-delivered bombs), but store their sarin in binary.
Remember though that sarin breaks down with out a stabilization technique even with out precursor impurity. Iraq had plenty of sarin, had full production, and the report you quote also I believe says that their impurity problem was temporary. They did have unitary shells, that were pre-loaded for significant periods of time (insurgents detonated one during the insurgency, but it had degraded significantly).
I don't think that Syria's impurity problem was temporary. Because of the nature of sarin, their production probably continued till recently, and because of tighter restrictions on the precursor chemicals, they probably were using less pure precursors or diluting them where possible. Iraq was producing a lot of their weapons openly during the 1980s, with help from european sources. Syria has mostly been clandestine in its program.
Anyway, that is my speculation based on what I have heard about Syrias programs and what I know about Sarin in general, and about the Iraqi CW program. |
|
|
| Joss Weatherby |
On the note of delivery devices, information on Soviet made devices that were binary is very limited... I wish I could find more information on them. :( A lot of information on Soviet WMD programs is single sourced and even to this day is suppressed inside the country.
Also on Syria, their VX stockpile is very limited, that is the silver lining to this whole mess. Granted its large enough to be trouble, but I am glad that they did not produce or acquire it in as much quantity as they did sarin. Treating a Sarin attack is much more easy to handle, where as VX (or Cyclosarin as well) requires much more protection and time and clean up. |
|
|
| Marcus Summers |
| The videos are definitely not victims of sarin, Tabun, VX, or mustard gas. |
|
|
|
|
