› ›

Remember when I said we don't know...

centermass556centermass556 Senior MemberPosts: 3,373 Senior Member
in Second Amendment/Politics #1
We know where Assad has his weapons. But we don't know what he got rid of, or had stolen and claimed he got rid of it...

And so we have this...


http://www.newsweek.com/isis-militants-chemical-weapons-attack-soldiers-iraq-585174




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."

Comments

  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 7,791 Senior Member
    #2
    "ISIS militants launched a rocket filled with what was believed to be chlorine at Iraqi military positions"

    That sounds more like an improvised munition. Chlorine isn't a very effective chemical agent unless all you want to do is irritate a few people and make them puke. Really hard to kill people with chlorine unless you lock them in an unventilated room with a bunch of the stuff. I'd venture to guess that the soldiers hospitalized are happy the rockets contained chlorine and not high explosives because they'd probably be dead.

    Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • centermass556centermass556 Senior Member Posts: 3,373 Senior Member
    #3
    I would like to believe that. However, they don't know. That's is what the news is reporting. Previous attacks have shown an agent close to mustard gas. It is not easy to weaponize agents. It is not something you do in your garage if you want to have any degree of success.

    Here is the Washington times

    http://m.washingtontimes.com


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    "To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
  • JayhawkerJayhawker Moderator Posts: 13,523 Senior Member
    #4
    alphasigmookie wrote: »
    "ISIS militants launched a rocket filled with what was believed to be chlorine at Iraqi military positions"

    That sounds more like an improvised munition. Chlorine isn't a very effective chemical agent unless all you want to do is irritate a few people and make them puke. Really hard to kill people with chlorine unless you lock them in an unventilated room with a bunch of the stuff. I'd venture to guess that the soldiers hospitalized are happy the rockets contained chlorine and not high explosives because they'd probably be dead.

    Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

    Yeah...because no one died from being gassed with chlorine in WWI....
    Sharps Model 1874 - "The rifle that made the west safe for Winchester"
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 7,791 Senior Member
    #5
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Yeah...because no one died from being gassed with chlorine in WWI....[/QUOTE

    In WWI the only reason it killed is because of long, continuous exposure in trenches, it basically asphyxiated people. Cl2 is heavy and would stay in trenches and soldiers weren't able or allowed to leave the trenches. It was a weapon with very specific applicability to that kind of warfare. In modern warfare all it will do is make your enemy move a would function a bit like extra powerful tear gas. Not useless per se, just not even in the same ballpark as the Sarin Assad was using.
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • tennmiketennmike Senior Member Posts: 21,448 Senior Member
    #6
    alphasigmookie wrote: »
    Jayhawker wrote: »
    Yeah...because no one died from being gassed with chlorine in WWI....[/QUOTE

    In WWI the only reason it killed is because of long, continuous exposure in trenches, it basically asphyxiated people. Cl2 is heavy and would stay in trenches and soldiers weren't able or allowed to leave the trenches. It was a weapon with very specific applicability to that kind of warfare. In modern warfare all it will do is make your enemy move a would function a bit like extra powerful tear gas. Not useless per se, just not even in the same ballpark as the Sarin Assad was using.

    You should probably look up what chlorine gas exposure on the body actually does. It does not axphyxiate; the lining of the lungs are blistered and the victim can drown from fluid buildup in the lungs. Lots of difference between being oxygen deprived and drowning in your own bodily fluids in the lungs. Chlorine gas is also a blistering agent especially on sweaty skin(reacts with skin to form acids), and a severe eye irritant that can blind. Tear gas? YOU WISH!
    A double action revolver is a semiauto firearm. It fires once for every trigger pull.



  • Diver43Diver43 Senior Member Posts: 7,295 Senior Member
    #7
    tennmike wrote: »
    alphasigmookie wrote: »

    You should probably look up what chlorine gas exposure on the body actually does. It does not axphyxiate; the lining of the lungs are blistered and the victim can drown from fluid buildup in the lungs. Lots of difference between being oxygen deprived and drowning in your own bodily fluids in the lungs. Chlorine gas is also a blistering agent especially on sweaty skin(reacts with skin to form acids), and a severe eye irritant that can blind. Tear gas? YOU WISH!

    I could not agree more. I do not have enough fingers and toes to count the times we were taught that in NBC training. Chlorine gas is a horrible way to die.
    Logistics cannot win a war, but its absence or inadequacy can cause defeat. FM100-5
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 7,791 Senior Member
    #8
    I'll try a different tactic. Using small arms calibers as an analogy between the lethality of various chemical agents:

    CS/tear gas - airsoft gun
    Cl2 - BB gun
    Mustard - 9mm
    Sarin - .223
    VX - .300 win mag

    And for comparison
    Bio agents - 155 mm howetzer

    And yes this is based on years direct professional experience modeling the risk of these various agents.


    Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • centermass556centermass556 Senior Member Posts: 3,373 Senior Member
    #9
    alphasigmookie wrote: »
    I'll try a different tactic. Using small arms calibers as an analogy between the lethality of various chemical agents:

    CS/tear gas - airsoft gun
    Cl2 - BB gun
    Mustard - 9mm
    Sarin - .223
    VX - .300 win mag

    And for comparison
    Bio agents - 155 mm howetzer

    And yes this is based on years direct professional experience modeling the risk of these various agents.


    Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk

    I'm not going to question your professional expertise in this. However, what you miss outside of lethality is the effects that chemical warfare carries. Everything above CS has catastrophic bleed over effects. It is not just the medical damage the Agent inflicts, it is everything that happens along with it.
    As soon as Chemical weapons come into play, you bring an unknown into the battlefield that will effect the morale of the Soldiers. Maybe not all of them, but it will shake a good portion of them. It is just natural. I remember the look on faces when we had to mask up in 2003 with the Al samood attacks. Chemical wounds are scary. I can't apply an Israeli bandage or tourniquet to chemical effects and tell my buddy he is going to be okay. No, I have to watch him struggle for air as I freak out and put my mask on before it gets to me. That brings the next part.
    When someone is wounded from an agent, everything stops. Violence of action goes out the window. Everyone dons their protective gear. And, then the wounded+two rule applies. There is no sweeping the objective and coming back to the wounded. Additionally, you lose guns while someone breaks out the test kit to see what they were struck with...even if it is chlorine.
    Then comes the operation with NBC gear on. Because even if it is only Chlorine, you are still going to suit up with your mask and JLIST. No matter what we would like to think, we have a degraded fighting capability when trying to operate in NBC gear. One reason is because we haven't trained for it since 2003, and the other is because the crap sucks. You wear a suit for 8-12 hours, that doesn't breath, gets heavy, and is bulky. Try to do anything remotely physical while wearing a M40 series protective mask. After 1 hr, let me know it works out for you. You'll damn near drown in your sweat trapped inside the mask. not to mention you are scared as hell about breaking the seal on your mask, so you are not moving like you should. And, you can' shoot for crap.
    All Weapons have implications outside of lethality. Sometimes it is just the idea of he weapon. Snipers are morale killer. My last tour in Iraq, the morale killer was the EFP. I am not going to lie, it scared the hell out of me. It was an unseeable threat that I couldn't do anything to stop. That thing was cutting through vehicle armor like it was hot knife through butter.
    "To have really lived, you must have almost died. To those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know."
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 16,548 Senior Member
    #10
    Having been exposed to low levels of chlorine gas thanks to an IDIOT, (DON'T MIX 1 gallon of SUDSY AMMONIA and 1 gallon of CLOROX to clean the floor of the ambulance bay) I know how aggravating even a low concentration is.
    No, it didn't kill me, but for the rest of that day, and the next few days , I almost wished it had

    edited to add:
    CM, I hate to show my ignorance, but what is EFP :uhm:
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • JermanatorJermanator Senior Member Posts: 13,742 Senior Member
    #11
    knitepoet wrote: »
    CM, I hate to show my ignorance, but what is EFP :uhm:
    I had to look it up too...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator
  • knitepoetknitepoet Senior Member Posts: 16,548 Senior Member
    #12
    Jermanator wrote: »
    I had to look it up too...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator
    Thanks Jerm :beer:
    Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates, Rule #37: There is no “overkill”. There is only “open fire” and “I need to reload”.


  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Senior Member Posts: 4,948 Senior Member
    #13
    alphasigmookie wrote: »
    I'll try a different tactic. Using small arms calibers as an analogy between the lethality of various chemical agents:

    CS/tear gas - airsoft gun
    Cl2 - BB gun
    Mustard - 9mm
    Sarin - .223
    VX - .300 win mag

    And for comparison
    Bio agents - 155 mm howetzer

    And yes this is based on years direct professional experience modeling the risk of these various agents.


    Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


    I'm sure that this is based on "direct professional experience" that you gleaned from the internet rather than your own. Some states consider pepper spray less harmful than tear gas (Wisconsin for one) and allow pepper spray but not tear gas sprays. I've experienced pepper spray and cs in the military and I've been hit by paintballs and BB guns so I have a little experience with both. If you show up to the next SE shoot, I'll let you shoot me in the face with a paintball gun (wearing eye protection, just safety glasses, not full goggles) if I can blast you in the face with bear spray with the same eye protection. This might make you reevaluate your concept of how harmless or insignificant some agents are compared to others. When you're sitting up in the tower that you place yourself in, you'll never be exposed to any of it but you'll still argue and the effects based on experience that you don't possess.
    snake284 wrote: »
    For my point of view, cpj is a lot like me
    .
  • cpjcpj Senior Member Posts: 36,638 Senior Member
    #14
    Fisheadgib wrote: »
    I'm sure that this is based on "direct professional experience" that you gleaned from the internet rather than your own. Some states consider pepper spray less harmful than tear gas (Wisconsin for one) and allow pepper spray but not tear gas sprays. I've experienced pepper spray and cs in the military and I've been hit by paintballs and BB guns so I have a little experience with both. If you show up to the next SE shoot, I'll let you shoot me in the face with a paintball gun (wearing eye protection, just safety glasses, not full goggles) if I can blast you in the face with bear spray with the same eye protection. This might make you reevaluate your concept of how harmless or insignificant some agents are compared to others. When you're sitting up in the tower that you place yourself in, you'll never be exposed to any of it but you'll still argue and the effects based on experience that you don't possess.
    Hate to side win the liberal again, but, he specifically said "between the lethality of various chemical agents."
    He didn't say they were harmless or insignificant.
    "I'm here for the guns, hunting, and skirt wearing men."
    Zee
  • Wambli SkaWambli Ska Moderator Posts: 25,001 Senior Member
    #15
    knitepoet wrote: »
    Having been exposed to low levels of chlorine gas thanks to an IDIOT, (DON'T MIX 1 gallon of SUDSY AMMONIA and 1 gallon of CLOROX to clean the floor of the ambulance bay) I know how aggravating even a low concentration is.
    No, it didn't kill me, but for the rest of that day, and the next few days , I almost wished it had

    edited to add:
    CM, I hate to show my ignorance, but what is EFP :uhm:
    That's a little different. Chlorine and ammonia together produce a few highly toxic fumes, not Chlorine gas. Not saying Chlorine gas is not bad stuff, just saying adding ammonia amps it up a notch.
    "Attack rapidly, ruthlessly, viciously, without rest, however tired and hungry you may be, the enemy will be more tired, more hungry. Keep punching." General George S. Patton
  • alphasigmookiealphasigmookie Senior Member Posts: 7,791 Senior Member
    #16
    centermass556 wrote: »
    I'm not going to question your professional expertise in this. However, what you miss outside of lethality is the effects that chemical warfare carries. Everything above CS has catastrophic bleed over effects. It is not just the medical damage the Agent inflicts, it is everything that happens along with it.
    As soon as Chemical weapons come into play, you bring an unknown into the battlefield that will effect the morale of the Soldiers. Maybe not all of them, but it will shake a good portion of them. It is just natural. I remember the look on faces when we had to mask up in 2003 with the Al samood attacks. Chemical wounds are scary. I can't apply an Israeli bandage or tourniquet to chemical effects and tell my buddy he is going to be okay. No, I have to watch him struggle for air as I freak out and put my mask on before it gets to me. That brings the next part.
    When someone is wounded from an agent, everything stops. Violence of action goes out the window. Everyone dons their protective gear. And, then the wounded+two rule applies. There is no sweeping the objective and coming back to the wounded. Additionally, you lose guns while someone breaks out the test kit to see what they were struck with...even if it is chlorine.
    Then comes the operation with NBC gear on. Because even if it is only Chlorine, you are still going to suit up with your mask and JLIST. No matter what we would like to think, we have a degraded fighting capability when trying to operate in NBC gear. One reason is because we haven't trained for it since 2003, and the other is because the crap sucks. You wear a suit for 8-12 hours, that doesn't breath, gets heavy, and is bulky. Try to do anything remotely physical while wearing a M40 series protective mask. After 1 hr, let me know it works out for you. You'll damn near drown in your sweat trapped inside the mask. not to mention you are scared as hell about breaking the seal on your mask, so you are not moving like you should. And, you can' shoot for crap.
    All Weapons have implications outside of lethality. Sometimes it is just the idea of he weapon. Snipers are morale killer. My last tour in Iraq, the morale killer was the EFP. I am not going to lie, it scared the hell out of me. It was an unseeable threat that I couldn't do anything to stop. That thing was cutting through vehicle armor like it was hot knife through butter.
    I would agree with all of the above. The psychological and impact on combat effectiveness are the tactical benefits of deploying chemical weapons. They are also fairly effective at clearing out hardened and dug in positions, especially when the enemy doesn't have proper protective gear.

    Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk
    "Finding out that you have run out of toilet paper is a good example of lack of preparation, buying 10 years worth is silly"
    -DoctorWho
  • TeachTeach Senior Member Posts: 17,910 Senior Member
    #17
    "He jests at scars that never felt a wound"

    :roll:
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    ASK-HOLE Someone who asks for advice and always does something opposite
  • RocketmanRocketman Banned Posts: 1,118 Senior Member
    #18
    He would have done more damage with the purified contents of castor beans. Easy peasy..

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Format
Heading 1Heading 2
QuoteCodeSpoiler
Emoji
:):D:(;):/:o:s:p:'(:|B):#:*<3o:)>:)
Url
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Home • Second Amendment/PoliticsComment As ...