Kerry and WMD. So who really has used WMD in the last 100 years?

alib

LE
I think he is forgetting about the 200,000 or so Jap. civilians the US obliterated in 1945.
Rather more than that, estimates vary between 240K and 900K. Nukes being a bit of a sideshow, a whole string of cities were destroyed mostly with simple and rather efficient incendiary bombs. First use of Napalm I believe.

After WWII firebombing was viewed as a little unsporting and eventually the use to destroy civilian populations became unfashionable. I can still recall Napalmed Vietnamese scampering on the tele. These days if you are playing the White man you are only meant to do it "accidentally" with a spot of white phosphorus. These "international norms" didn't stop Vlad toasting lots of Chechens like they were VC during Grozny II.

The linkage of not very effective tactical chemical warfare to very effective strategic nuclear weapons via the phrase WMD was a very dubious propaganda ploy used to facilitate the Iraqi invasion. I do wonder that mugs out there are still falling for a variety of the same thing.

It's regime conventional tube artillery (used in a rather sloppy and sporadic way) and troops/militiamen who are killing most of the non-combatants not CW. And about a third of the casualties are regime fighters according to the UN. The distinction between being roasted, poisoned or as is far more common in Syria terrorized by shell fire finally to be mangled by shrapnel seems rather academic. The prospect of living under threat from city killing nuclear weapons is a whole different ball game.
 

Dwarf

LE
Have you not noticed that the truth is not something that matters to the yanks?

I had my Irony State setting on high when I posted. But I've also learned more about the past usage of CW and similar which was the aim of the exercise, especially about Japanese usage of which I was largely unaware.

Truth? With politicians? This was my dog's reaction: Laughing Dog - YouTube
 
Have you not noticed that the truth is not something that matters to the yanks?

You are correct about the yanks in DC, but many in fly over country the truth matters very much. We have too many entitlement mentality types that are the death knell of this country.

Judy
 
I have thought this have have a staunchly republican friend in up state NY who is also against action and says a lot of his (ex mil) buddies are also.

Kirchner in Argentina is well versed in playing the Malvinas card to take the domestic populations eye of the internal problems and the rampant inflation.

We are not seeing to much this side of the pond regarding Benghazi, could it really be the issue to undermine Obama internally?

I'm a registered Independent, basically conservative, usually hawkish (kick ass and get names later), but our involvement in the middle east is pure insanity. They hate us (probably with reason) and nothing we can do will change that. We need to stay home and clean house. I am for continuing to send money to the Egyptian army though, they seem to be cleaning house.

There are many people here that are still screaming about Benghazi, but the powers that be are doing everything they can to sweep it under the rug, so its not so much in the lime light. Look for it to bite Hitlery on the ass in '16.

Judy
 

Dwarf

LE
Can we please ignore the whys and wherefores of any action in Syria as there are other threads for this, and stick to the NBC element, he says trying to avoid a hi-jacked thread.
 
Interesting the Japanese wide usage that really is unknown in the wider world. Couldn't be because they are now an ally, could it? Or was it just because it was in an obscure (to us) conflict and horrible things happened there as a matter of course. Had they used it against us or the Yanks then perhaps there would have been an outcry and it would have been shouted out. Seems that when a peasant people have no voice then it doesn't matter much what happens to them.

Harris, R. and Paxman, J. 1982. 'A higher form of killing: the secret story of chemical and biological warfare' is a good source. The IJA were using Manchurian villages as targets for practising aerial delivery of bubonic plague as well. The chosen vector was fleas and they eventually settled on dropping them from planes in clay 'bombs' as these shattered quite easily on impact and didn't require any explosive charge to break the casing.

Of course, it was rather hard on the locals particularly since Manchukuo was supposedly a Japanese ally. It made me wonder exactly why Chandra Bose's lot were so confident of a brave new world if the Japanese had 'liberated' India.
 

Dwarf

LE
Thanks Carrots
 

Grumblegrunt

LE
Book Reviewer
don't forget the use of agents orange blue and white(?) in NAM and fuel air explosives in the gulf. plus that experiment which was two bombs on japan to see which worked best and what the effects would be.
 
Rather more than that, estimates vary between 240K and 900K. Nukes being a bit of a sideshow, a whole string of cities were destroyed mostly with simple and rather efficient incendiary bombs. First use of Napalm I believe.

After WWII firebombing was viewed as a little unsporting and eventually the use to destroy civilian populations became unfashionable. I can still recall Napalmed Vietnamese scampering on the tele. These days if you are playing the White man you are only meant to do it "accidentally" with a spot of white phosphorus. These "international norms" didn't stop Vlad toasting lots of Chechens like they were VC during Grozny II.

The linkage of not very effective tactical chemical warfare to very effective strategic nuclear weapons via the phrase WMD was a very dubious propaganda ploy used to facilitate the Iraqi invasion. I do wonder that mugs out there are still falling for a variety of the same thing.

It's regime conventional tube artillery (used in a rather sloppy and sporadic way) and troops/militiamen who are killing most of the non-combatants not CW. And about a third of the casualties are regime fighters according to the UN. The distinction between being roasted, poisoned or as is far more common in Syria terrorized by shell fire finally to be mangled by shrapnel seems rather academic. The prospect of living under threat from city killing nuclear weapons is a whole different ball game.

That isn't a 'nice' analysis, nor - as a consequence - is it likely to be a popular one.

Difficult to fault it, nevertheless.
 
Harris, R. and Paxman, J. 1982. 'A higher form of killing: the secret story of chemical and biological warfare' is a good source. The IJA were using Manchurian villages as targets for practising aerial delivery of bubonic plague as well. The chosen vector was fleas and they eventually settled on dropping them from planes in clay 'bombs' as these shattered quite easily on impact and didn't require any explosive charge to break the casing.

Of course, it was rather hard on the locals particularly since Manchukuo was supposedly a Japanese ally. It made me wonder exactly why Chandra Bose's lot were so confident of a brave new world if the Japanese had 'liberated' India.

The Japs also had agents traveling on the Chinese railway system releasing birds contaminated with Anthrax. There was a deal done at the end of WW2 whereby the people behind the various programmes got immunity from prosecution in return for all the research data.
 

alib

LE
Harris, R. and Paxman, J. 1982. 'A higher form of killing: the secret story of chemical and biological warfare' is a good source. The IJA were using Manchurian villages as targets for practising aerial delivery of bubonic plague as well. The chosen vector was fleas and they eventually settled on dropping them from planes in clay 'bombs' as these shattered quite easily on impact and didn't require any explosive charge to break the casing.
....
I'd not compare nascent bio-warfare with the tactical deployment of toxic chemicals. The former might one day be a genocidal killer like the nuclear weapons we favor the latter has recently been exceeded in atrocity by mobs with machetes.
 
I'd not compare nascent bio-warfare with the tactical deployment of toxic chemicals. The former might one day be a genocidal killer like the nuclear weapons we favor the latter has recently been exceeded in atrocity by mobs with machetes.

It was simply an aside to show that the IJA had used more than one form of WMD as a normal part of their arsenal without prompting lines of any colour to be drawn.
 
Also the 'Yellow Rain' allegations of the 1980's .
Yellow rain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, this is (Depending on your viewpoint) either another early example of 'dodgy dossier', Cold War disinformation, or perhaps something else.
Also interesting to note the amount of independent scientific investigation that took place, but also just how disputed it all was.
 

Tuffty

War Hero
I just saw a clip of John Kerry where he made the claim that Chemical weapons have been banned for 100 years and the only people to use them in that time have been Adolf Hitler and Saddam Hussein.

Now *gasp* a US Secretary of State can't be telling untruths to whip up world opinion on his side can he now? Or putting a certain deceptive spin on the real gen so as to con people into supporting his story. No, impossible of course.
But maybe he was genuinely and accidentally wrong or mis-briefed by his aides who, after all, being Americans generally have a hazy idea of history and things outside the US. Yes, that must be it.

Yet that statement can be pulled apart can it not?

When have chemical weapons etc. been banned since? Have they really?

Hague convention 1899 and 1907 had a lot of signatories and was merely hollow, also unsigned by the US.
1925 Geneva Protocol unratified by the US till 1975, just after Vietnam and Agent Orange.

Who has used them in the last 100 years apart from Adolph, in the camps but not on the battlefield, and Saddam on Iraqis and Kurds?

WW1 Both Tommies and Fritz used gas.

From Here;
Kerry's incomplete list of 'tyrants' using chem weapons - The Washington Post

"We consulted with Jeffery K. Smart, a military historian who has written extensively on the use of chemical weapons. “There have definitely been chemical weapons used in other instances,” he said.

First, in 1934, Italy’s fascist dictator, Benito Mussolini, invaded Ethiopia and used chemical weapons, such as mustard bombs, despite having signed and ratified the Geneva Accord. Emperor Haile Selassie told the League of Nations that there were “tens of thousands” of victims, including women and children, but the League did nothing and the Ethiopian forces were routed. (The Italians claims the use of chemical weapons was justified because of an exception in the treaty that allowed for reprisal against illegal acts of war.)

Then, in 1937, Imperial Japan invaded China and used chemical weapons, including mustard agent by 1939. (The toll from the chemical weapon use is unknown, but an estimated 300,000 people, including civilians, died during the Sino-Japanese conflict.)

Finally, during the Yemen civil war between 1963 and 1967, Egyptian President Gama Abdul Nasser ordered the use of chemical weapons against royalist forces -- villagers supporting them. Egypt repeatedly denied using such weapons, but the International Red Cross declared they had been used after forensic examination. Egypt also had signed the Geneva Accord and the United States, preoccupied with the Vietnam war, made little protest.

We should also note that while the United States apparently has not used chemical weapons, it had an extensive chemical weapons program and did not ratify the Geneva Protocol until 1975. President Franklin Roosevelt established a policy of “no first use,” but in 1943 an American ship secretly loaded with mustard agent bombs was destroyed during a German air raid in Italy, resulting in more than 600 casualties and nearly 100 deaths. The civilian toll is unknown.

Update: A reader shared a link to a declassified CIA study showing that the Soviet Union likely used lethal chemical weapons in Southeast Asia and in Afghanistan in the 1970s, possibly killing thousands."


Then we aren't counting Agent Orange in Vietnam and further WMD in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I also don't recall that whilst awaiting Ivan in the long gone days of the Cold War that mere protests and signatures on documents would have stopped either side from the use of NBC Warfare, although in the case of B&C Nato did decline First Use while retaining the capability and expecting to use it. Ivan would have had no scruples whatsoever, as many hours stuffed into noddy suits can testify.

OK so have I missed any other incidents that Arrsers know of?

An ex Yank Marine friend of mine did tell me about a demonstration he witnessed in S Korea where the police used helicopters and a non-lethal form of liquid CS Gas. Apparently when the crowd started to get aggressive the heli’s dropped the stuff on them – end result no more demonstration.
 
Yet again, some yank using lies as an excuse to 'kick some ass pronto'.

Woulden't anyone class 'Agent Orange' as a chemical weapon? Or atleast it's use during Vietnam as a Chemical Weapon seeing as it was used to fight the guerilla forces, and severely f***ed up a whole bunch of people, including the civillian population?

Hopefully, Congress wont have the same 'YEEHAW GAD DAMN IT!' attitude when hearing that pack of bullshit.
 

Latest Threads

Top