Possible Chemical Attack in Iraq

[Bill Moore]

It is unclear if this is an accident or a deliberate attack, but I would lean towards deliberate. Once the dust settles we'll see exactly what this was and perhaps what it means. There are a number of potential industrial chemicals such as chlorine that terrorists can use a weapon. Chlorine is one chemical that has been used ineffectively several times by several groups. These guys got it right, or they just got lucky.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/...ain/index.html

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A cloud of deadly toxic gas engulfed an Iraqi town Tuesday, killing six people and leaving dozens of others choking on fumes after a tanker carrying chlorine exploded outside a restaurant.

An Iraqi Interior Ministry official said the blast in the town of Taji, 12 miles (20 km) north of Baghdad, was caused by a bomb on board the tanker.

There were contrasting figures on the casualty toll. Baghdad security plan spokesman Gen. Qassim Atta told state-run al-Iraqiya TV that five people died in the blast and 148 were poisoned by the gas.

[tequila]

This vaguely reminded me of this story from back in 2003.

[Bill Moore]

The only parallel I see is both are chemical weapons, and while the press sensationalized the lethality of this bomb (pardon me for being a doubting Thomas that this bomb could have killed thousands), the reality is most of these weapons fail, which is why we haven't seen too many successful attacks outside of the one in Iraq recently and of course the infamous subway attack in Tokyo (more a failure than success).

I think the USG ignored the story because they would have presented a problem they don't have an answer for. None the less it sounds like many law enforcement agencies and officers missed a well deserved public thanks for this one.

I'm going to also post your link in the discussion about gangs. Great post, much thanks, Bill

[120mm]

The problem with WMD, is that the .gov has been hysterically overstating the effects of WMD for so long in order to get people to take it seriously, that even official agencies believe their own bull####.

Chemical weapons are not used very often, because they are generally not very useful. Those that are extremely lethal are extremely fragile and have to be applied directly into the area you want to affect (such as the Tokyo subway). The ones that are not fragile are not very lethal, and you have to be pretty dumb to get "slimed" by them.

[Bill Moore]

120mm's statements are correct, but there are specific conditions and freak circumstances (although rare) where chemical attacks and accidents have had a WMD effect.

Estimated 5,000 killed and several thousand wounded in the Halabja chemical attack (1988)

Bhopal, India: 1983 approximately 3,000 killed, and several thousand injured/sick after industrial chemical leak.

[Stan]

We have confiscated French files complete with jpegs on eight various chemical IEDs produced for al-Qaida trainees. I have already translated most of them and will send them to anybody interested. They are large files.

Number 6 is exactly what recently ocurred and 120 is dead on the money. Chlorine based IEDs are stable, product easy to procure and even easier to employ, but in order to affect enough people, it's going to be huge and you will have more than enough time as a trained soldier to get out of harm's way or simple dawn your gas mask. The average adult male would need to receive a dose of 19000mg/m3/min. in order for the situation to become fatal.

That's a Sierra load of chlorine folks !

120 said it in plain terms:

The ones that are not fragile are not very lethal, and you have to be pretty dumb to get "slimed" by them.

The smaller more lethal bio or chemical IEDs have a max effective range of 2 to 4 meters and disperse too quickly to produce desired casualties. al-Qaida used French and Russian practice grenades to accomplish the job.

Regards, Stan