Home Main Category Second Amendment/Politics

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

centermass556centermass556 Posts: 3,618 Senior Member
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."

Replies

  • centermass556centermass556 Posts: 3,618 Senior Member
    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 Posts: 18,358 Senior Member
    "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"
  • tennmiketennmike Posts: 27,457 Senior Member
    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!
      I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that I don't know the answer”
    ― Douglas Adams
  • Diver43Diver43 Posts: 12,752 Senior Member
    tennmike 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
  • centermass556centermass556 Posts: 3,618 Senior Member
    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."
  • JermanatorJermanator Posts: 16,244 Senior Member
    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
    Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it.
    -Thomas Paine
  • FisheadgibFisheadgib Posts: 5,797 Senior Member
    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
    .
  • TeachTeach Posts: 18,428 Senior Member
    "He jests at scars that never felt a wound"

    :roll:
    Jerry
  • RocketmanRocketman Posts: 1,118 Senior Member
    He would have done more damage with the purified contents of castor beans. Easy peasy..
Sign In or Register to comment.
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Guns & Ammo stories delivered right to your inbox every week.

Advertisement