Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'chemical weapons'.
Found 5 results
There are news channel and social network pages claiming chemical weapons being used in Syria by Iran. What is the reality behind these news? According my knowledge use of chemical weapon is forbidden by Iran. If some one has knowledge about these circumstance please share.
Buried Soldiers May Be Victims of Ancient Chemical Weapon by Stephanie Pappas, Live Science Contributor | March 08, 2011 09:24am ET Soldier, Battle of Dura The skeleton of a Persian soldier found in the siege tunnels of Dura. The man may have choked on toxic fumes from a fire he himself started. The man's armor is pulled up around his chest; archaeologists suspect he was trying to pull it off as he died. Credit: Courtesy of Yale University Art Gallery, Dura-Europos Collection Almost 2,000 years ago, 19 Roman soldiers rushed into a cramped underground tunnel, prepared to defend the Roman-held Syrian city of Dura-Europos from an army of Persians digging to undermine the city's mudbrick walls. But instead of Persian soldiers, the Romans met with a wall of noxious black smoke that turned to acid in their lungs. Their crystal-pommeled swords were no match for this weapon; the Romans choked and died in moments, many with their last pay of coins still slung in purses on their belts. Nearby, a Persian soldier — perhaps the one who started the toxic underground fire — suffered his own death throes, grasping desperately at his chain mail shirt as he choked. [Image of skeleton of Persian soldier] These 20 men, who died in A.D. 256, may be the first victims of chemical warfare to leave any archeological evidence of their passing, according to a new investigation. The case is a cold one, with little physical evidence left behind beyond drawings and archaeological excavation notes from the 1930s. But a new analysis of those materials published in January in the American Journal of Archaeology finds that the soldiers likely did not die by the sword as the original excavator believed. Instead, they were gassed. Where there's smoke In the 250s, the Persian Sasanian Empire set its sights on taking the Syrian city of Dura from Rome. The city, which backs up against the Euphrates River, was by this time a Roman military base, well-fortified with meters-thick walls. The Persians set about tunneling underneath those walls in an effort to bring them down so troops could rush into the city. They likely started their excavations 130 feet (40 meters) away from the city, in a tomb in Dura's underground necropolis. Meanwhile, the Roman defenders dug their own countermines in hopes of intercepting the tunneling Persians. The outlines of this underground cat-and-mouse game was first sketched out by French archaeologist Robert du Mesnil du Buisson, who first excavated these siege tunnels in the 1920s and 30s. Du Mesnil also found the piled bodies of at least 19 Roman soldiers and one lone Persian in the tunnels beneath the city walls. He envisioned fierce hand-to-hand combat underground, during which the Persians drove back the Romans and then set fire to the Roman tunnel. Crystals of sulfur and bitumen, a naturally occurring, tar-like petrochemical, were found in the tunnel, suggesting that the Persians made the fire fast and hot. Something about that scenario didn't make sense to Simon James, an archaeologist and historian from the University of Leicester in England. For one thing, it would have been difficult to engage in hand-to-hand combat in the tunnels, which could barely accommodate a man standing upright. For another, the position of the bodies on du Mesnil's sketches didn't match a scenario in which the Romans were run through or burned to death. "This wasn't a pile of people who had been crowded into a small space and collapsed where they stood," James told LiveScience. "This was a deliberate pile of bodies." Using old reports and sketches, James reconstructed the events in the tunnel on that deadly day. At first, he said, he thought the Romans had trampled each other while trying to escape the tunnel. But when he suggested that idea to his colleagues, one suggested an alternative: What about smoke? Fumes of hell Chemical warfare was well established by the time the Persians besieged Dura, said Adrienne Mayor, a historian at Stanford University and author of "Greek Fire, Poison Arrows & Scorpion Bombs: Biological and Chemical Warfare in the Ancient World" (Overlook Press, 2003). "There was a lot of chemical warfare [in the ancient world]," Mayor, who was not involved in the study, told LiveScience. "Few people are aware of how much there is documented in the ancient historians about this." One of the earliest examples, Mayor said, was a battle in 189 B.C., when Greeks burnt chicken feathers and used bellows to blow the smoke into Roman invaders' siege tunnels. Petrochemical fires were a common tool in the Middle East, where flammable naphtha and oily bitumen were easy to find. Ancient militaries were endlessly creative: When Alexander the Great attacked the Phoenician city of Tyre in the fourth century B.C., Phoenician defenders had a surprise waiting for him. "They heated fine grains of sand in shields, heated it until it was red-hot, and then catapulted it down onto Alexander's army," Mayor said. "These tiny pieces of red-hot sand went right under their armor and a couple inches into their skin, burning them." So the idea that the Persians had learned how to make toxic smoke is, "totally plausible," Mayor said. "I think [James] really figured out what happened," she said. In the new interpretation of the clash in the tunnels of Dura, the Romans heard the Persians working beneath the ground and steered their tunnel to intercept their enemies. The Roman tunnel was shallower than the Persian one, so the Romans planned to break in on the Persians from above. But there was no element of surprise for either side: The Persians could also hear the Romans coming. So the Persians set a trap. Just as the Romans broke through, James said, they lit a fire in their own tunnel. Perhaps they had a bellows to direct the smoke, or perhaps they relied on the natural chimney effect of the shaft between the two tunnels. Either way, they threw sulfur and bitumen on the flames. One of the Persian soldiers was overcome and died, a victim of his own side's weapon. The Romans met with the choking gas, which turned to sulfuric acid in their lungs. "It would have almost been literally the fumes of hell coming out of the Roman tunnel," James said. Any Roman soldiers waiting to enter the tunnels would have hesitated, seeing the smoke and hearing their fellow soldiers dying, James said. Meanwhile, the Persians waited for the tunnel to clear, and then hurried to collapse the Roman tunnel. They dragged the bodies into the stacked position in which du Mesnil would later find them. With no time to ransack the corpses, they left coins, armor and weapons untouched. Horrors of war After du Mesnil finished excavations, he had the tunnels filled in. Presumably, the skeletons of the soldiers remain where he found them. That makes proving the chemical warfare theory difficult, if not impossible, James said. "It's a circumstantial case," he said. "But what it does do is it doesn't invent anything. We've got the actual stuff [the sulfur and bitumen] on the ground. It's an established technique." If the Persians were using chemical warfare at this time, it shows that their military operations were extremely sophisticated, James said. "They were as smart and clever as the Romans and were doing the same things they were," he said. The story also brings home the reality of ancient warfare, James said. "It's easy to regard this very clinically and look at this as artifacts … Here at Dura you really have got this incredibly vivid evidence of the horrors of ancient warfare," he said. "It was horrendously dangerous, brutal, and one hardly has words for it, really." Link/source: http://www.livescience.com/13113-ancient-chemical-warfare-romans-persians.html Other articles providing an interesting perspective: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4240365/Ancient-Persians-who-gassed-Romans-were-the-first-to-use-chemical-weapons.html http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7837826.stm
Salam, The situation in Syria has been continuously in turmoil. First the major threat were the rebels, then Turkey, then Israel and so on, until the US finally prepared to strike. I am creating this thread so we can predict the next course of action which will be taken by: the axis of arrogance and its minions and the activities of the axis of resistance. Please try to backup your posts with facts and news articles from only 'resistance media' sources, if required.
http://rt.com/news/chemical-aleppo-findings-russia-417/ Adding to this, it was reported in May that Turkish authorities arrest suspected Syrian Islamists linked to the Al Nusra front in Turkey and that a 2k cylinder of Sarin gas. http://www.globalresearch.ca/turkey-finds-sarin-gas-in-homes-of-suspected-syrian-islamists-may-report/5347523 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vet0PV-XPlw However, during this time, the Turkish governor of the area in which the suspects had been apprehended commented that while "chemical materials" had been seized in the arrest, their exact use had yet to be confirmed by investigators, denying reports in Turkish and international media that the materials found had been confirmed to be "sarin gas." http://www.globalresearch.ca/turkey-finds-sarin-gas-in-homes-of-suspected-syrian-islamists-may-report/5347523 Syrian state media and testimonies of Syrians however have implicated the rebels of storing chemical weapons, Syrian authorities reporting having seized chemical materials used in the production of biological weapons. While the United States' push for military hangs on the idea that the Syrian rebels are incapable of producing and using chemical weapons and thus any reports of chemical weapons use must therefore, logically, be of Assad's loyalists', UN investigators have also reported their own "strong, concrete suspicions" based on the testimonies of witnesses that Syrian rebels were indeed behind recent cases of chemical weapons usage in Syria although the investigation is still ongoing. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22424188 http://www.policymic.com/articles/61295/media-tells-us-that-syria-used-chemical-weapons-but-look-what-the-un-says Other reports also point to the possibility that some chemical agents that may be used in the production of chemical weapons could have been seized by the rebels themselves from the Syrian regime, from Libya or foreign aid. http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/09/yes-the-syrian-rebels-do-have-access-to-chemical-weapons.html American news networks have also been addressing certain problems with the American intelligence reports presented to Congress, such as the now confirmed to be false accusation against the Syrian regime that authorities intentionally held up investigation by the UN into the Ghouta incident because they were afraid of evidence against them being uncovered and the sheer lack of conclusive evidence against the Syrian regime. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57600624/syria-chemical-weapons-attack-blamed-on-assad-but-wheres-the-evidence/ http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57600357/how-would-a-u.s-strike-on-syria-play-out/
' The British government has launched a misleading campaign, claiming to destroy stockpiles of chemical weapons while itself had sold chemical components required for their production. During the four decades that Muammar Gaddafi was in power, the Western powers have filled their pockets with money gained from selling arms to the oil-rich country. Despite the UN Security Council's Resolution 748, which had imposed an arms embargo on Libya in 1992, Muammar Gaddafi spent nearly USD 30bn on weapons, making a rich stockpile of weapons of mass destruction. The British government that claims to be a signatory to the international Chemical Weapons Convention -- according to which the production, stockpiling, and use of chemical weapons is illegal -- has sold chemical components to brutal regimes, including the Gaddafi's, in order to produce weapons of mass destruction. In a scathing article published in the Sunday Herald in 2002, Neil Mackay -- the newspaper's multi-award winning home affairs and investigations editor -- revealed the UK government's involvement in chemical weapons sales. Driven by greed and a profound lack of morality, the British government violated the Chemical Weapons Convention by selling chemicals to brutal regimes that would produce weapons of war. Gaddafi, who was not a signatory to the convention, was supplied with chemical components by the British government. Moreover, Mackay explicitly revealed the British government's greed by disclosing the name of the most brutal regimes to which the UK had sold chemicals. Among the countries were Yemen, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. Other countries to which Britain had sold chemical components were Cyprus, India, Kenya, Kuwait, Malaysia, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Singapore, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Turkey and Uganda. The report stated that Britain's Department of Trade and Industry has clearly admitted that the British government had sold toxic chemical precursors, essential chemicals for creating weapons of mass destruction, to 26 countries. Nevertheless, in a pose to present itself as a pro-democracy government, the British government has announced plans to send experts to Libya in order to destroy Gaddafi's newly disclosed stockpiles of chemical weapons which have been reportedly unknown to British officials who claim “Gaddafi has totally misled Tony Blair when he promised to destroy weapons of mass destruction.”
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.