| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Iran Stockpiling Bio- and Chem Weapons |
| 2005-10-01 |
| Iran's weapons Much public attention has been focused in recent weeks on Iran's continuing efforts to hide its covert nuclear weapons program. The Bush administration recently highlighted another major weapons problem, accusing Tehran of building deadly biological and chemical arms. The State Department's annual report "Adherence to and Compliance With Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments" said Iran has the capability of weaponizing deadly agents in missile warheads and aerial bombs. "The Iranian [biological weapons] program has been embedded within Iran's extensive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries so as to obscure its activities," stated the report, made public last month. "The Iranian military has used medical, education, and scientific research organizations for many aspects of BW-related agent procurement, research, and development. Iran has also failed to submit the data declarations called for in the [Biological Weapons Convention]." Regarding chemical arms, the report said the U.S. government has evidence that "Iran has manufactured and stockpiled blister, blood, and choking chemical agents, and weaponized some of these agents into artillery shells, mortars, rockets, and aerial bombs." "We continue to believe that Iran has not acknowledged the full extent of its chemical weapons program, that it has indigenously produced several first-generation [chemical weapons] agents (blood, blister, and choking agents), and that it has the capability to produce traditional nerve agents," the report said, noting that "the size and composition of any Iranian stockpile is not known." |
| Posted by:lotp |
| #6 I believe that current US doctrine regarding chemical or biological attacks is a nuclear response. The Iranians might want to ponder that. |
| Posted by: Tony (UK) 2005-10-01 15:25 |
| #5 The high number of casualties were because their troops had no protection available to them, putting them on a par with civilians. The modern military with protective equipment reality is that after the surprise of the first attack, casualties drop to a fraction of a percent for each subsequent attack. The only value is to degrade enemy forces by making them stay masked for a long period. The disadvantage is that the kid gloves come off and in this case, the US, would be inclined to use nuclear weapons in retaliation. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-10-01 13:37 |
| #4 where's John Clark with the satellite feed and JDAM? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-10-01 13:27 |
| #3 Crude chem weapons still managed to produce 100,000 Iranian casualties, including over 20,000 dead, during the Iran-Iraq war. of course, those wepaons never existed. |
| Posted by: ed 2005-10-01 11:44 |
| #2 Maybe. But "weaponized" usually means that the country has, for instance, mastered the fine dispersibility matrix for biological agents. And for chem agents there are techniques to have them persist and disperse much more widely than using the crude approach. |
| Posted by: lotp 2005-10-01 11:34 |
| #1 This is a pro forma announcement. Practically speaking, *any* industrialized nation is normally filled with stuff that could be classified as chemical and biological weapons. Chemical weapons are simple to make, just pour the nasty stuff in an empty artillery round. That was the technique used in the Iran-Iraq war. Put into Katusha rockets, same difference. Other than the traditional military agents, there are thousands of other chemicals just as nasty. Any hospitals pathology department has pathogens that can be cultured into militarily significant quantities overnight, again with stupidly simple technology. The downside to all of this is that Iran doesn't have any effective countermeasures itself against chem and bio weapons. It's not too bright to use a weapon that can turn on you and bite your behind. Chemical weapons, after the first attack, produce far fewer casualties than high explosive, and bio weapons are next to impossible to deliver in any way guaranteed to produce casualties at all. The most effective use for either are against unprotected civilians. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2005-10-01 11:30 |