ISIS seizes Saddam's chemical weapons

Assad, who Russia is helping, prob'ly sold `em the chemical weapons...

Russia, China Warn of Chemical Weapons Threat for Europe
April 13, 2016 - Russia and China want countries neighboring Syria to inform the U.N. if they find any extremist group trying to get chemical weapons, warning that they may be used in Europe.

See also:

IS Leaves Deadly Trail of Mines in Syria, Iraq
April 13, 2016 - More than a year after their liberation from the Islamic State (IS) group, residents in the Syrian town of Kobani are suffering from the deadly fallout of a four-month occupation.

 

Actually, all of the attacks by ISIS have ussed Chlorine Gas, which is stupid-simple to make. The components required are available in any grocery store.

As for Sarin, that has primarily been used by the Syrian government. That is also a stupid-simple agent to make. A few decades ago a terrorist group in Japan made some in their apartments with commonly available materials. Syria, with it's multiple chemical and refining facilities would have no problem making this agent.

Outside help is not needed, since all of the agents used so far in the conflict are the most basic and easiest ones to make.

 

Mebbe dey'll get `em from China...

IS Seeks Biological, Nuclear Materials, Counterterror Officials Warn
April 19, 2016 - European counterterror chiefs warned at a London conference Tuesday that Islamic State militants are seeking to secure biological and nuclear materials to build rudimentary weapons of mass destruction.

See also:

Pollution Scare Exposes China’s Oversight in Hazardous Chemicals
April 19, 2016 - Anxiety is growing among parents in eastern China about contaminated soil and underground water after nearly 500 students from a middle school developed illnesses that are possibly linked to chemical pollution at a nearby site.

 

Once again, super-simple to make.

All they have to do is take over a single hospital, and they will have enough radiological materials for several simple radioactive bombs. Biologicals are also super-simple, especially if there is no problem with recruiting people willing to die for their cause. Simply infect a group of people with something, then send them to the enemy, either to be captured or to infiltrate.

Most nations have problems making biologicals because it can be hard to weaponize them. But when you have people willing to die for a cause, delivery becomes rather simple.

Radiological weapons have been known in theory for a century. Other nations have simply not used them because they are easy to detect, and considered by the world as the same as other NBC agents.

One of the main reasons that Hitler did not agree to the early proposals of the early Atomic programs is that he thought it was just another kind of poison bomb. He understood what radioactivity was when they described the secondary effects, but he could not comprehend the power of a fission reaction.

 

We watched in REAL TIME as a large Iraqi Convoy of trucks loaded with Saddam's chemical weapons left Iraq nd went over the Syrian Boarder just before the U.S. Invasion.

Those were all Soviet made Chemical Weapons and Assad has them placed within dense Syrian population centers.

This surprised the HELL out of us as Saddam and Assad's father were SWORN ENEMIES.

But Mushroom is right....they can easily make them.

AA

 

And as their air force was being systematically destroyed on the ground they sent 125 of their aircraft to Iran. And if there was a country that Saddam hated more, I am not sure what it was.

One thing about Mad-dash Hussein, was that he was unpredictable as hell.

 

They flew their aircraft to Iran during Desert Storm.

They moved their chemical weapons to Syria right before we invaded Iraq.

This was a HUGE surprise.

And even though we watched it happen it's not like we could bomb the convoy.

AA

 

ISIS Saddam's old chemical weapons?...

Islamic State using chemical weapons in Iraq, Kurds say
April 22, 2016 - The assault was an indication IS is prepared to defend the captured city of Mosul.

 

I know they flew the aircraft during GWI. And you are right, it was a huge surprise, it shocked myself and a lot of other people in the military, knowing how much Iraq absolutely hated Iran.

But the movement of chemical weapons as you said was over a decade later. So why would that have been a surprise to anybody? We already knew he was more willing to give away his stuff rather than see it captured or destroyed. And he performed a classic "scorched earth" withdrawl from Kuwait when he realized he would not be able to hold onto it.

So why would his movement of chemical weapons have surprised anybody? Sorry, it is the claim that anybody would have been surprised by that which leaves me puzzled.

 

Well we felt that there was no way Saddam would send the chemical weapons to Iran as Saddam had used them on the Iranian's.

We also felt that Saddam would rather destroy them or attempt to bury them rather than give them to his sworn enemy in Syria.

The loss of the aircraft to Iran was NOT of Saddam's doing.

That was the Iraqi Air Force that KNEW to fly up against U.S. aircraft and pilots spelled death.

AA

 

Saddam had also flown his aircraft against Iran, yet he sent them there anyways rather then see them destroyed.

And yes, it was a planned action, that Saddam knew of. After all, we are talking about over 125 aircraft, that went out unarmed in a war zone to land in what had formerly been an enemy country. This was not just pilots getting scared and running away, this was a highly planned operation. And if Saddam was opposed to it, within a day the equivelent of the Air Force Chief of Staff would have been 6' under and somebody else would have been in charge.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/fogofwar/archive/post012891.htm

So you may have been surprised, I was not at all at the movement of chemical weapons into Syria. No more than I was in ""Oil for Food", using images of the population he himself was starving to try and get sympathy and purchase more weapons right under the noses of the UN. As much as Saddam may have hated his neighbors, he hated the US more. And I would not even be surprised if he knew since 2002 he was living on borrowed time, and simply thought that by giving the weapons away he could conduct another "Samson" type of strike even after he was gone. Because who else would Syria have likely used such weapons, except against the Kurds, Israel, or the US?

 

To be fair even Oppenheimer didn't have anything but an intellectual grasp of the terrible power uncontrolled nuclear reactions until he watched the first cloud, but let's all be glad Hitler was a speeded out syphillitc (*)(*)(*)(*) head because the nazi's with nukes would've been bad.

 

Good point.

AA

 

Just be glad he did not understand what a nuclear weapon was, and physics works the way it does..

When the same type of advisors who approached FDR went to der paper hangar and described what such a weapon would do, they over-emphacized the effects of radiation and underestimated the effect of the blast itself. After all, radiation had been known about for decades by this time. And so because of this, old Hitler assumed it was some kind of new-fangled toxic weapon. Instead of spreading chemicals it would kill by spreading poisonous radiation (what we would today call a "dirty bomb").

And since he refused to allow any use of chemical weapons of any kind, he quickly quashed any serious research into the makings of fission weapons. There were some attempts to create fusion weapons, but without the heat and pressure of a fission explosion none of them ever went anywhere.

But if physics worked differently and his scientists had been able to create a direct fusion weapon it would have been horrifying. Massive explosive potential, without the radioactive fallout.

 

Only a Cold Fusion Device is capable of creating an enormous blast with low levels of radiation.

We currently use a Fission detonation to trigger Fusion.

AA

 

Cold Fusion is largely junk science from a couple decades ago. And it had nothing to do with weapons, but nuclear power. So no, not only does a "cold fusion device" not exist, it would not be explosive even if it did. The very theory relies upon their sustaining a low level fusion reaction.

What you are talking about is a Pure or Direct Fusion Weapon. The US-USSR poured billions into researching these, and have all pretty much agreed that for the forseeable future, they are impossible. Basically you do it the same way the sun does. Take an element (hydrogen) and compress it to an insane degree until it heats up and spontaniously starts a fusion reaction. And there have been many attempts at doing it, from the implosion of "heavy water" by explosives by the Germans during WWII, to more modern techniques using LASERs, radiation and magnetic forces to try and compress the element enough to start the fusion resaction. None have been successful in any way and research has pretty much been abandoned decades ago.

Trust me, Cold Fusion was claimed to be safe and effective and the solution to all problems. Pretty much all now CT fodder. Direct Fusion would have been the exact opposite of "cold".

 

I never said we have Cold Fusion but such a bomb is theoretically possible and is the only way to have a Fusion Blast with low radiation release.

Lockheed Martin has just had it's 4th successful Low Temp. Micro Fusion Generation test.

This is not Cold Fusion as the reaction generates a great deal of heat but they use the least possible number of Hydrogen Atoms and fuse them into Helium.

AA