HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So When are We Going to B...

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:05 AM

 

So When are We Going to Bomb the Chemical Weapons Manufacturers?

It is highly unlikely that Syria manufactured the alleged chemical weapons they've allegedly used. It is far more likely they got those things from foreign sources in Europe or the US.

So when are we going to bomb those facilities here in the US and in Europe that make these weapons of mass destruction?

19 replies, 1709 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:11 AM

1. And ruin a profit industry?

No no no bomb the buyers of our 'goods'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:13 AM

2. Good question. Do the substances have any non-lethal applications? n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:14 AM

3. We will not be bombing Europe and the United States.

Sorry, your wish will not come true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tridim (Reply #3)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:17 AM

4. Apparently your ability to detect sarcasm is impaired.

 

Not to mention the questionable thought that I "wish" we would bomb the US or Europe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Reply #4)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:26 AM

11. That must be it.

However, your post did imply a desire to bomb chemical manufacturers in the US and Europe. Twice.

Sorry that I apparently misread that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:18 AM

5. Heck yeah, great post!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:19 AM

6. You realize Russia has a "MIC" too? I've seen numerous DU'ers seem oblivious to that fact.

 

I believe 4 billion was the amount Russia sold to Syria.

And as I just started searching on this topic it appears that Assad isn't paying up. He ordered some fighter jets and hasn't coughed up the balance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KittyWampus (Reply #6)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:25 AM

9. Good Point!

 

You are so correct.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:22 AM

7. Syria never signed the Chemical Weapons Treaty.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_Weapons_Convention

They should be ostracized for that reason alone.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:22 AM

8. Firms in the UK sold them component chemicals well after the intent of that government was known.

 

The gas that Saddam used on the Kurds and Iranians was made with assistance from companies in the US, UK, France, Germany and the Netherlands. No one did a thing when he used them wantonly. Well, Reagan sent Rumsfeld to shake Saddam's hand 4 months after the largest gas attack since WW1.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #8)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:53 AM

15. Lets bomb England!

 

And then we can bomb ourselves for selling Saddam chemical weapons! Bomb everyone! Yea, thats the answer!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:25 AM

10. What makes you think it is highly unlikely?

You don't think a government with access to common chemicals (phosphorus and fluoride) can manufacture a product that has been known for 75 years?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:28 AM

12. If international law bans the manufacture of these weapons

it probably makes sense to take action against the facilities where they are manufactured. Assuming that we know where those facilities are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:33 AM

13. It was built to counter Israel's 'non-existent' nukes

Syria's chemical weapons program was built to counter Israel

(Reuters) - Syria, defeated by Israel in three wars and afraid its arch enemy had gained a nuclear arsenal, began in earnest to build a covert chemical weapons program three decades ago, aided by its neighbors, allies and European chemical wholesalers.

Damascus lacked the technology and scientific capacity to set up a program on its own, but with backing from foreign allies it amassed what is believed to be one of the deadliest stockpiles of nerve agent in the world, Western military experts said.

"Syria was quite heavily reliant on outside help at the outset of its chemical weapons program, but the understanding now is that they have a domestic chemical weapons production capability," said Amy Smithson of the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies in Washington, an expert on nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

...

The first technology and delivery systems were most probably obtained from the Soviet Union and pre-revolution Egypt, military experts believe, while chemical precursors came from European companies.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/28/us-syria-crisis-chemical-idUSBRE97R0GJ20130828

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 09:44 AM

14. Too many people are making a huge amount of money from it.

See ...you ONLY bomb the users not the makers

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 10:08 AM

16. good question, will never happen as long as there is profit in it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 10:14 AM

17. yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 10:19 AM

18. You might want to check on the shelf life of sarin gas.

And what it is made from.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dballance (Original post)

Sun Sep 1, 2013, 12:17 PM

19. Why would you think it unlikely?

Here's an old report, from April of this year.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/28/17959388-fighting-reported-near-suspected-chemical-weapons-site-in-syria?lite

Barzeh is pretty much due N of downtown Damascus. A N-NW of the center of the city, past the suburbs (sort of defining where the suburbs stop) is Mt. Qasioun, which has hills leading E-NE from the highest elevation. They're sort of a northern limit to Damascus at present.

hills
Mt. Q

Barzeh


(Damascus proper)

(Let's see how DU reformats that)

al-Ghouta is built up suburban areas adjacent to Barzeh. It's not a single spot, it's a strip.

If there's a single most likely place to have chemical weapons used, it's there. If there's a single most likely place to try to do a false-flag operation so everybody suspects Assad used chemical weapons, it's there. If there's a single most likely place for a chemical weapons brigade to be stationed, it's there. If there's a single most likely place for some local commander to panic and use chemical weapons, it's there. If there's a single most likely place for some intermediate commander to order them to use whatever they have and for "whatever they have" to be chemical weapons, it's there.

All within one to two miles.

Depending which precursor chemicals you start with, it can be a little complicated to make sarin or absurdly simple. If I could get one of the two immediate precursors I could make it in high school. I have one of the two essential precursors in my bathroom, isopropyl alcohol. I can get one of the less immediate precursors from my drinking water, NaF. A good university library will have the method for preparing the really hard-to-get essential precursor. Or you can buy it (it's not cheap for laboratory grade stuff) from a chemical company.

You can make sarin and try to store it--but it breaks down over 6 months or so. Impurities in the precursors, failure to eliminate some by products, letting things like moisture into the chemical, all speed the breakdown of sarin and can reduce its shelf life to a few weeks. Or you can just have a chemical shell that keeps the two components separate but allows mixing just before use. If you'll recall, at one point they found such warheads, such shells in one of Saddam Hussein's arms depots.

The first round of chemical weapon claims last year involved sarin in the same area--and that's probably undisputed now. What was disputed was what Russia stated--the impurities in the sarin didn't match what would have been in the Syrian government's sarin. It was of different manufacture. Those impurities are unlikely to break down as fast as sarin. And, in any event, the sarin after it decomposes still leaves traces of reaction productions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread