An artillery round used as an IED does not mean it cannot be used as intended. This is your problem, you're discussing a subject you don't remotely understand.So in other words, you made up what I said, can't prove I said it, refused to admit it, and instead of apologizing you tried to hide it behind ad hominin attacks, vagueness, and bringing in threads that have NOTHING to do with the topic at hand. You also unjustly dismiss the source presented to you in a way that disregards what the source actually said. The source, written by an US veteran of the Iraq war, specializing in chemical warfare, said very specifically that the weapons mentioned by Chivers were a smattering of rusted chemical munitions had been unearthed or even used — ineffectively, probably mistakenly — in IEDs [IMPROVISED explosive device].
So yes, these WERE chemical weapons, built prior to the 1991 and now very much degraded. I never denied this, so you shouldn't shove that into my mouth. They were too degraded to be used as intended, so they were used as IMPROVISED explosive devices. Airplanes and cars could also be used as improvised explosive devices too, was Iraq not allowed to have airplanes and cars?
Nor did I ever claim that I was a chemical weapons expert (and don't thinkI haven't caught how your attack is used to distract attention away from your strawman), but I don't need to be. I'm quoting from Chris Miller, so he's the one who needs to be a chemical weapons expert:
He [Chris Miller] is a nine year veteran of the U.S. Army where he served in chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear defense (CBRN). He is a two-tour veteran of the Iraq War where he helped to screen Iraqi police candidates, served as a Military Transition Team (MiTT) advisor to an Iraqi infantry battalion, and planned and led patrols and logistical operations. He received the Purple Heart, Combat Action Badge, 4 Army Commendation Medals, and 3 Army Achievement Medals, among other awards. After leaving the military, he served two years as a contractor for the U.S. Army at Camp Buehring, Kuwait.
Let's make it simple and start with the first strawman you made in post 104. You claimed I said that Iraq had no chemical weapons. Which post did I say that? Quote it, don't brush it off like what you are doing.
Your debating tactic is sliding more and more into the line of inflammatory, and less and less for the purpose of informing. If you're trying to get a rise out of me it's not going to work.
A 152mm Soviet chemical artillery round has the steel shell, chemical filler, either aerosol dispersants or explosives. That's it. That's how its stored.
To use as artillery, a separate fuse, numerous different tyoes for different roles is screwed into the tip. The round is loaded. Bags of propellant are placed behind. The breach is closed and its fired.
You tracking so far?
To use as an IED, you connect an electric blasting cap to some copper wire, you stick that inside the tip where the fuze is normally screwed on. Then you connect an intiating device to wire, for instance a garage door opener, a cell phone, etc, that on a signal will trasmit an electric pulse through the wire to blasting cap, which causes the artillery round to either belch smoke or explode, whatever it was designed to do.
Take the wires out of the IED, put a fuze on it, load it with propellant bag, it gets fired as arty.
All those arty rounds loaded with nerve, blood, or blistering agents were live, and could have been fired.