Mustard gas in Iraq?

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2003-02-11 03:03pm

Just heard on the news that the inspectors have found 4 canisters of mustard gas in Iraq.

Does anyone know more about this?

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-02-11 03:14pm

No though I wonder where is the other 7200+ Cansters Order Destroyed after 96 that never were, nor the machinary to make more was moved to after 97

jegs2 · Post by **jegs2** » 2003-02-11 03:59pm

Sir Sirius wrote:Just heard on the news that the inspectors have found 4 canisters of mustard gas in Iraq.

Does anyone know more about this?

Mustard would be the least of our worries. Saddam likely has enough Sarin and VX to kill a few small nations...

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2003-02-11 04:55pm

It doesn;t mean a damn thing. we could recover a video of saddam polishing a 10 megaton warhead saying "Soon i vill bomb de eeeevil americans! bwo-ha-ha-ha-ha-hah!" and France wouldn't see the justification for war.

Admiral Johnason · Post by **Admiral Johnason** » 2003-02-11 05:02pm

At least we still have England.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-02-11 05:22pm

Iraq really is not an issue, it's North Korea. They HAVE nukes and wouldnt hesitate to use them. Iraq _MIGHT_ use them if Saddam does indeed have them, North Korea undoubtedly will.

Iraq is more worrisome because of regional instability. Middle Eastern governments are overthrown every few years, so civil war with nukes is possible, as is the rise of governments more willing to use nukes then the present regimes.

Thats the thing with NBC weapons, theyre not too expensive such that only the richest nations could make them. They're simple enough so that even barely-stable countries can develope them. I mean, you can get enough anthrax by infecting an animal and letting it become a living petri dish long enough. And various forms of chemical warfare are so simple that all you need is water cleaner as a chlorine source. It's really very simple to produce such weapons, for a nation such as Iraq. The issue is really the use of said weapons, which is what this whole thing is about. The reason noone is going after the US for having the most nukes and the worst chemicals is because the US isnt likely to unleash hellfire on Canada over a dispute about an island or something ridiculous. Saddam, on the other hand, is likely to do that.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-02-11 06:46pm

They won't hesistate to use Nukes if Attacked, But IF NOT
Who will they use it on? They have nothing vital they can blow up with a few well places Nukes

Let me ask you this Kojikun
If NK Nuked SK into Ashs would we be affected in any way(Asisde from dead troops)

How about Japan? They don't have enough Missiles to Ash the Entire Country and the makeup of the Island means if you miss the city by more than X you do no long term damage because you, woops hit the next Vally over

NK can use Nukes to Kill Civilians
Iraq could destroy(In the short term anyway) the US Ecnomey if it has Nukes

Besides Kojikun
What CAN we do with NK?
Invade? They Nuke SK in response
Nuke them? See above
We are faced with a Diplo only solution that does not require six carriers to be on hand(Which we happen to have in the Gulf)

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2003-02-11 06:54pm

NK can use Nukes to Kill Civilians
Iraq could destroy(In the short term anyway) the US Ecnomey if it has Nukes

If NK nuked Tokyo, it would do more damage to the planetary economy than Saddam could ever hope.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-02-11 06:58pm

If NK nuked Tokyo, it would do more damage to the planetary economy than Saddam could ever hope.

Realy? And you don't think a 23% Drop in Oil Exports Worldwide would not put a Dent in the Ecnomey? Espielly when a 2% Drop was enough to cause all those gas lines
Remeber those days?

And kindly name for me all the Manfucating Plants Located in Toyko

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-02-11 07:20pm

kojikun wrote:Iraq really is not an issue, it's North Korea. They HAVE nukes and wouldnt hesitate to use them. Iraq _MIGHT_ use them if Saddam does indeed have them, North Korea undoubtedly will.

Exactly. Strategic paralysis has now set in, and North Korea can now only be dealt with via the same long term economic measures that brought down the Union. The idea is to invade Iraq before that happens.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-02-11 09:13pm

Bean, you're quite right that if we start shit with NK they will start throwing nukes, but the problem with NK is that theyre going to start anyway:

If we get into a war with Iraq, where do you think their missiles will come from? North Korea. We're going to politely demand that North Korea stop supplying weapons to Saddam Hussein. They will, ofcourse, refuse, and we will do various things like blockade NK waters, etc. They will start shelling and shooting missiles at our ships, but also our bases in South Korea and Japan. That ofcourse will be followed up by attacks on NK by the US, South Korea, and Japan, and NK will promptly begin fighting wholely and entirely. If they use nuclear weapons, you can be guaranteed that China and Russia will steam roll NK long before the US begins D-Day 2. After that, China and Russia will fight against Iraq because they're now in the war on our side. The war will be over in months if NK starts shit.

But NK alone will have to start shit. The US isnt about to invade NK for no reason. Unfortunately, the way things are going, its almost guaranteed that NK will start shit.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-02-11 11:57pm

I don't think Kim Jong-Il will start any shit. Doing so will mean the end of his regime, and he should know by now that if he starts a shooting war it'll almost certainly escalate all the way and we have a lot more warheads than he does.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-02-12 05:36am

The day China and Russia work togther is the day I take a nap

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-02-12 05:45am

Mr Bean wrote:The day China and Russia work togther is the day I take a nap

In terms of arms, China is a big buyer. Either the first or second, either that or India. But China's definitely top two. Russia has sold China lots of arms.

Regardless, China could steamroll North Korea on the ground without Russia's help- though I see the Russian strategic bomber force doing the air work. It'd be a cakewalk (before anyone makes any smartass delapidated Russian military remarks- the strategic bomber force definitely does not fall under the cliche).

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-02-13 06:55pm

I'd hate to be on the receiving end of a Backfire strike with the DPRK's air-defense resources.

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2003-02-13 07:30pm

I'd hate to be an Iraqi soldier right about now.

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2003-02-13 07:57pm

This seems timely given the topic:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2757923.stm

Japan has stated that any missile attack against them will result in retaliation. At the same time, North Korea has stated that it will consider UN sanctions a "declaration of war".

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2003-02-13 09:31pm

Er, aren't there already UN sanctions in place from god-knows-when?

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2003-02-13 09:35pm

Hmmm, could be. Iran announced their intention to restart their nuclear program recently, too. Anyone getting the impression that certain countries have decided to take advantage of american preoccupation with Iraq?

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2003-02-13 10:48pm

Admiral Johnason wrote:At least we still have England.

*repeatedly thwaps the idiot*

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-02-14 03:45am

Oh, and as for the mustard gas, this was 4 canisters of mustard gas previously tagged by inspectors in the previous inspections, found exactly where it was left years ago. Hardly a new find. Devil in the details. It was also, if I heard correctly a few days ago, destroyed.

Icehawk · Post by **Icehawk** » 2003-02-14 03:53am

Japan has stated that any missile attack against them will result in retaliation. At the same time, North Korea has stated that it will consider UN sanctions a "declaration of war".

Just a question but I thought Japan's forces were limited to strictly defending there nation from an attack and are forbiddon to ever wage an offensive war against anyone ever again. How can they retaliate when they arent even allowed to?

EDIT: Just read the article. Apparently Japan's defense minister thinks that a pre-emptive strike against an enemy is a "Self defense measure"

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Mustard gas in Iraq?

Mustard gas in Iraq?

Re: Mustard gas in Iraq?