View Single Post
Old 12-06-2012, 09:01 AM   #21
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda View Post
my point was you don't develop chemical weapons these days to fight opposing armies, there are much more efficient ways to spend military dollars. the only reason to create them in the first place is to subdue a civilian population

Assad would probably not hesitate to use them if Syria was invaded, but i don't believe for a second that was his original intention when he started the production
Depends on the foreign army, when the chemical weapons program was started it was specifically built to deal with foreign armies invading Syria, for the most part the armies in that region aren't really built to deal with chemical weapons use. When Iran and Iraq were gassing each other in their long war, their idea of contravening the effects of chemical weapons was to give their troops rain coats and run them through the area hoping to play the percentages.

Turkey who is the 8000 pound gorilla in the room does not have a lot of chemical warfare suits and atropine kits readily available.

There are very few armies in that area that are well suited to fight in that environment, surprisingly Syria is one of the armies that is.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;

Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote