How effective would Chemical weapons be against US troops?

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #91,299 by bluke 3/25/03 3:41:17 AM Reply	How effective would Chemical weapons be against US troops? Again it all comes down to cost/benefit ratio. Chemical weapons are very effective against unprotected civilians or poorly protected troops like the Iranians in the 1980's. Using them against well protected US troops is a different story. On the other hand if they are used, Saddam loses world opinion.
Post #91,302 by Ashton 3/25/03 4:59:01 AM 3/25/03 5:09:40 AM Reply	Desert heat is coming Imagine your mobility at a suit-temp of 135\ufffd F. (57 C) For just one little detail. Fix typo Edited by Ashton March 25, 2003, 05:09:40 AM EST Expand All History
Post #91,303 by bluke 3/25/03 5:53:15 AM Reply	Not for at least a few weeks If the threat of chemical weapons is not dealt with in the next week or 2 the US has bigger problems. In fact, in Israel today it might snow in Jerusalem

Why havn't they used them yet? - (JayMehaffey) - (27) - March 23, 2003, 11:22:31 PM EST

whatever works :-) -NT - (boxley) - March 23, 2003, 11:24:00 PM EST

*boggle* - (Brandioch) - (1) - March 23, 2003, 11:28:54 PM EST

So you say...over and over and over -NT - (bepatient) - March 23, 2003, 11:53:01 PM EST

You guys are using the wrong criteria - (bluke) - (23) - March 24, 2003, 03:05:26 AM EST

Wanna place a bet of this ??? - my $US100 - (dmarker) - (22) - March 24, 2003, 03:42:20 AM EST

No deal for a simple reason - (bluke) - (21) - March 24, 2003, 04:00:11 AM EST

So Saddam will not use "WMD's"..... - (Brandioch) - (20) - March 24, 2003, 09:26:33 AM EST

What don't you understand ... - (bluke) - (19) - March 24, 2003, 09:50:22 AM EST

backtracking like all getout - (rcareaga) - (2) - March 24, 2003, 10:31:30 AM EST

Re: backtracking like all getout - (cybermace5) - (1) - March 24, 2003, 10:33:50 AM EST

Not sure what that has to do with offer odf bet ??? - (dmarker) - March 24, 2003, 06:05:25 PM EST

That was the whole point. - (Brandioch) - (15) - March 24, 2003, 10:33:08 AM EST

Aint it amazing - call these cats bluff & they meow loudly - (dmarker) - (7) - March 24, 2003, 06:47:51 PM EST

Re: Aint it amazing - call these cats bluff & they meow loud - (cybermace5) - (6) - March 24, 2003, 07:02:38 PM EST

So is that a take up of the bet or another meow ? -NT - (dmarker) - (5) - March 25, 2003, 07:17:51 AM EST

Re: So is that a take up of the bet or another meow ? - (cybermace5) - (4) - March 25, 2003, 10:11:17 AM EST

Easy money - (rcareaga) - (3) - March 25, 2003, 12:22:46 PM EST

Re: Easy money - (cybermace5) - (2) - March 25, 2003, 02:09:01 PM EST

The diff between those who analyse & those who swallow - (dmarker) - (1) - March 25, 2003, 09:16:53 PM EST

gawd can't resist - (deSitter) - March 25, 2003, 09:22:31 PM EST

How effective would Chemical weapons be against US troops? - (bluke) - (2) - March 25, 2003, 03:41:17 AM EST

Desert heat is coming - (Ashton) - (1) - March 25, 2003, 05:09:40 AM EST

Not for at least a few weeks - (bluke) - March 25, 2003, 05:53:15 AM EST

Tossing nukes left and right - (orion) - (3) - March 25, 2003, 06:27:26 AM EST

No comparison between nukes and chemical weapons - (bluke) - March 25, 2003, 07:57:37 AM EST

The only proof is prediction. - (Brandioch) - March 25, 2003, 09:32:33 AM EST

Re: Tossing nukes left and right - (rcareaga) - March 25, 2003, 03:12:03 PM EST

None shall pass!
50 ms