On 4/10/2017 4:50 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:24:31 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

How many countries have used chemical weapons in warfare since WW1?

Germany in the camps (maybe Crimea) and Japan in China during WWII.
The Soviets in Afghanistan.
There have also been other sporadic reports of use of chemical
weapons.



Ah ... I didn't think of the German concentration camps. It's sad that
gas was used to kill Jews yet the German military honored the ban on
it's use on the battlefields.

I also forgot about Japan. They were ruthless in WWII.

Didn't know about the Soviets in Afghanistan. Interestingly, the latest
news is that the Pentagon announced they have concrete evidence that
Russia (Putin) knew in advance that Assad was going to use sarin on the
civilian city last Tuesday.

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:24:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

There were studies and reports available during the time Agent Orange
was used that indicated it was a severe health hazard to humans, but
since it was the US military that was using it, the reports were ignored.

Bull****. The government let farmers use the bad component of Agent
Orange (Dioxin) until 1986 and the other, 2,4-D is still in use today,
probably by you if you put weed killer on your lawn.

On 4/10/2017 4:57 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:48:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The main reason LeMay started using napalm on Japan was because he was
running out of conventional bombs.

I have never heard that one. If anything he was running out of
targets. When you are dealing with cities made from paper and wood,
fire is a better weapon than explosives.



Read about the use of napalm in WWII on Wiki.

"Then, when the U.S. Army Air Forces on the Marianas Islands ran out of
conventional thermite incendiary bombs for their B-29 Superfortresses to
drop on Japanese cities, its top commanders, such as General Curtis
LeMay, turned to napalm bombs to continue fire raids on the large
Japanese cities.[15]"

On 4/10/17 5:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:24:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

There were studies and reports available during the time Agent Orange
was used that indicated it was a severe health hazard to humans, but
since it was the US military that was using it, the reports were ignored.

Bull****. The government let farmers use the bad component of Agent
Orange (Dioxin) until 1986 and the other, 2,4-D is still in use today,
probably by you if you put weed killer on your lawn.



In 1967, the Federation of American Scientists submitted a petition to
the White House with more than 5000 signatures of renowned scientists,
including 17 Nobel laureates and 129 members of the National Academy of
Sciences to end the herbicide program. Concerns about the ecological
impacts of the herbicides in Vietnam were also raised by the American
scientific community, the Association of American Association for the
Advancement of Science called for field investigations in Vietnam.

In 1969, it became widely known that the 2,4,5-T component of Agent
Orange was contaminated with dioxin, a toxic chemical (chemical
structure illustrated above) found to cause adverse health effects and
birth outcomes in laboratory studies. In April 1970, the US government
restricted use of 2,4,5-T, and therefore Agent Orange, in both Vietnam
and the US.
http://tinyurl.com/mqgfgsk

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 16:48:56 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 4/10/2017 4:28 PM, Poco Deplorevole wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 00:01:03 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 09 Apr 2017 16:16:10 -0400, Poco Deplorevole
wrote:

I've already stated it was used as a weapon, but not as a 'chemical weapon'. As stated above, it was
an incendiary weapon. Napalm is not windborn as is mustard gas and sarin and most other 'chemical'
weapons. It's the windborn trait that makes chemical weapons so effective against large numbers of
people at a very small cost.

Actually, as a military weapon, the experience in WWI proved gas
wasn't really that effective. There were a number of cases where the
wind shifted a little and they ended up gassing themselves.
It is, at best, a terror weapon and that is why it was easy to get it
banned in 1925.

WW1 saw a lot of trench warfare where the trenches were pretty close. As the gasses were windborn,
you're correct - a shift in the wind can cause havoc. According to Wiki, gas in WW1 did not cause a
great number of fatalities, but...

"The killing capacity of gas was limited, with only about 90 thousand fatalities from a total of
some 1.2 million casualties caused by gas attacks."

Casualties take more soldiers out of action than fatalities.

Gas is especially effective against large masses of soldiers (or civilians) or in cities where it's
windborn properties take it into, over and around buildings. One chemical artillery round or bomb
can cover a lot of area and cause a lot of casualties.



For the life of me, though, I can't understand Assad's reason for using it, unless it's simply to
scare the rebels into inaction.

It could be that he is simply low on conventional bombs and the Russians
can't supply them fast enough. It would explain his use of cheap
"barrel" bombs also.

The main reason LeMay started using napalm on Japan was because he was
running out of conventional bombs.


Cost could definitely be a big factor. One 155mm chemical munition could cover a lot more area than
a conventional 155 round, that's for damn sure.

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 17:18:29 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 4/10/17 5:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:24:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

There were studies and reports available during the time Agent Orange
was used that indicated it was a severe health hazard to humans, but
since it was the US military that was using it, the reports were ignored.

Bull****. The government let farmers use the bad component of Agent
Orange (Dioxin) until 1986 and the other, 2,4-D is still in use today,
probably by you if you put weed killer on your lawn.



In 1967, the Federation of American Scientists submitted a petition to
the White House with more than 5000 signatures of renowned scientists,
including 17 Nobel laureates and 129 members of the National Academy of
Sciences to end the herbicide program. Concerns about the ecological
impacts of the herbicides in Vietnam were also raised by the American
scientific community, the Association of American Association for the
Advancement of Science called for field investigations in Vietnam.

In 1969, it became widely known that the 2,4,5-T component of Agent
Orange was contaminated with dioxin, a toxic chemical (chemical
structure illustrated above) found to cause adverse health effects and
birth outcomes in laboratory studies. In April 1970, the US government
restricted use of 2,4,5-T, and therefore Agent Orange, in both Vietnam
and the US.
http://tinyurl.com/mqgfgsk


Thank you for proving that the US did not use Agent Orange as a chemical weapon.

You are to be commended for accepting a fact which has been repeatedly stated.

WADS!

Oh, I was there in '69, when the herbicide hadn't yet been restricted. And, the 'Association of
American Association for the Advancement of Science' hadn't gotten the word out to the troops in the
field.

On 4/10/2017 5:18 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/10/17 5:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:24:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

There were studies and reports available during the time Agent Orange
was used that indicated it was a severe health hazard to humans, but
since it was the US military that was using it, the reports were
ignored.

Bull****. The government let farmers use the bad component of Agent
Orange (Dioxin) until 1986 and the other, 2,4-D is still in use today,
probably by you if you put weed killer on your lawn.



In 1967, the Federation of American Scientists submitted a petition to
the White House with more than 5000 signatures of renowned scientists,
including 17 Nobel laureates and 129 members of the National Academy of
Sciences to end the herbicide program. Concerns about the ecological
impacts of the herbicides in Vietnam were also raised by the American
scientific community, the Association of American Association for the
Advancement of Science called for field investigations in Vietnam.

In 1969, it became widely known that the 2,4,5-T component of Agent
Orange was contaminated with dioxin, a toxic chemical (chemical
structure illustrated above) found to cause adverse health effects and
birth outcomes in laboratory studies. In April 1970, the US government
restricted use of 2,4,5-T, and therefore Agent Orange, in both Vietnam
and the US.
http://tinyurl.com/mqgfgsk




Greg said 2,4-D. He didn't say 2,4,5-T.
jug of 2,4,-D.

On 4/10/2017 5:42 PM, Poco Deplorevole wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 17:18:29 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote:

On 4/10/17 5:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:24:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

There were studies and reports available during the time Agent Orange
was used that indicated it was a severe health hazard to humans, but
since it was the US military that was using it, the reports were ignored.

Bull****. The government let farmers use the bad component of Agent
Orange (Dioxin) until 1986 and the other, 2,4-D is still in use today,
probably by you if you put weed killer on your lawn.



In 1967, the Federation of American Scientists submitted a petition to
the White House with more than 5000 signatures of renowned scientists,
including 17 Nobel laureates and 129 members of the National Academy of
Sciences to end the herbicide program. Concerns about the ecological
impacts of the herbicides in Vietnam were also raised by the American
scientific community, the Association of American Association for the
Advancement of Science called for field investigations in Vietnam.

In 1969, it became widely known that the 2,4,5-T component of Agent
Orange was contaminated with dioxin, a toxic chemical (chemical
structure illustrated above) found to cause adverse health effects and
birth outcomes in laboratory studies. In April 1970, the US government
restricted use of 2,4,5-T, and therefore Agent Orange, in both Vietnam
and the US.
http://tinyurl.com/mqgfgsk


Thank you for proving that the US did not use Agent Orange as a chemical weapon.

You are to be commended for accepting a fact which has been repeatedly stated.

WADS!

Oh, I was there in '69, when the herbicide hadn't yet been restricted. And, the 'Association of
American Association for the Advancement of Science' hadn't gotten the word out to the troops in the
field.



What months in 1969 and whereabouts? Wouldn't have included May by any
chance would it?

On 4/10/2017 6:09 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 4/10/2017 5:18 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 4/10/17 5:06 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 13:24:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote:

There were studies and reports available during the time Agent Orange
was used that indicated it was a severe health hazard to humans, but
since it was the US military that was using it, the reports were
ignored.

Bull****. The government let farmers use the bad component of Agent
Orange (Dioxin) until 1986 and the other, 2,4-D is still in use today,
probably by you if you put weed killer on your lawn.



In 1967, the Federation of American Scientists submitted a petition to
the White House with more than 5000 signatures of renowned scientists,
including 17 Nobel laureates and 129 members of the National Academy of
Sciences to end the herbicide program. Concerns about the ecological
impacts of the herbicides in Vietnam were also raised by the American
scientific community, the Association of American Association for the
Advancement of Science called for field investigations in Vietnam.

In 1969, it became widely known that the 2,4,5-T component of Agent
Orange was contaminated with dioxin, a toxic chemical (chemical
structure illustrated above) found to cause adverse health effects and
birth outcomes in laboratory studies. In April 1970, the US government
restricted use of 2,4,5-T, and therefore Agent Orange, in both Vietnam
and the US.
http://tinyurl.com/mqgfgsk




Greg said 2,4-D. He didn't say 2,4,5-T.
jug of 2,4,-D.



WTF? Almost a whole sentence disappeared. Meant to say:

You can truck down to your local hardware store and buy a big jug of 2,4,-D.

On Mon, 10 Apr 2017 17:08:09 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Then, when the U.S. Army Air Forces on the Marianas Islands ran out of
conventional thermite incendiary bombs

That is not exactly what you said before.
They were still fire bombing the place.
Considering what they were trying to set on fire, thermite probably
wasn't that great anyway. That creates a small, very hot fire. Napalm
spreads a wide ranging fireball.