What about Iran's WMDs besides nukes?

Doesn't Iran have a chemical and biological weapons program?

What about The United States' WMDs besides nukes?

Doesn't USA have a chemical and biological weapons program?

Of course Iran has biological and chemical weapons capacity. As do countless nations on the planet. If you are implying that this is another reason to either attack Iran, send Iran to the unsc or deny a sovereign nation nucleur power, your clutching at straws.

Any country, no matter how backwards by our standards, can and probably will have a Petro-chemical industry of some sort.

Once you have that infrastructure, the road to cheap but effective weapons is not all that long. You do need, however, an affordable agent/weapon delivery system.

Remember, that was why Gerald Bull was terminated. the Iraqi Supergun, had it been completed, would have destabilised the whole of the Middle East and would have targetted Israel in particular.

As to Iran, Iraq whatever, having a nuclear weapons programme - no chance. Israel simply would not tolerate the existence of any such facility. Let's remember what happened to Syria and Iraq in the early 70's (?) when israel sent Phantoms to knock them out.

When I first looked at this thread the word sovereign came to mind. No one has the right to dictate what kind of political system a country should have. That is up to the leader of the country itself. The invasion of sovereign nations without due cause is illegal and immoral. There are no justifications for creating wars, other then the expansion of power. And we all know that power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Can you guarantee me that Iran will never strike Israel with chemical or biological weapons?

I can't guarantee you that the sun will rise tomorrow, let alone that Iran will never attack Israel with chemical weapons, which they do have.

I will say that Israel's hundreds of nuclear weapons represent a pretty solid deterrent against any such attack.

So if I were a betting man, I'd be willing to bet a substantial chunk of cash that, despite whatever rhetoric we may hear, Iran wont be directly attacking Israel any time soon with anything.

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
What about The United States' WMDs besides nukes?

Doesn't USA have a chemical and biological weapons program?

Now now, everyone knows that the U.S. has nuclear and chemical weapons coming out of it's ears. That's not really the issue here is it? Rickey Gerard Perez asked about Iran's WMDs. I believe that the interest here is that if Iran's nuclear program is halted by another country, can Iran retaliate with devastating destruction, or will they use conventional means of retaliation?

According to the Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Iran has both chemical and biological weapon systems that are active and ready to go if needed. If it makes you feel better the U.S.A. has more biological weapons research than most countries ever thought of.

[edit on 13-12-2005 by dbates]

Originally posted by Rickey Gerard Perez
Can you guarantee me that Iran will never strike Israel with chemical or biological weapons?

Hmm am I wrong or is it Israel who is preparing troops for an attack on Iran and not the other way around? Who is the aggressor here?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
What about The United States' WMDs besides nukes?

Doesn't USA have a chemical and biological weapons program?

So if I started a thread and, for example, asked about iran's oil reserves, I could expect you to come back with a one line post asking "what about the USA oil reserves"? And that's all you'd have to offer to the discussion?

You sure sound defensive (of iran in this case). What's in it for you and what's it to you sitting up there in "Sask, Canada"?

Nevermind, just saw your last post. Simply another Israel basher come to the party.

[edit on 12/13/2005 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
Who is the aggressor here?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Hmm, might want to tweak your thinking a bit on what you ask?
NEWS: Iran: "Crush America" and "wipe Israel off the map"



seekerof

Originally posted by centurion1211

You sure sound defensive (of iran in this case). What's in it for you and what's it to you sitting up there in "Sask, Canada"?

Nevermind, just saw your last post. Simply another Israel basher come to the party.

My original post was rather childish, I admit that. I oppose any kind of war. Nothing is in it for me. And no I am not another Israel basher. I seek the same thing as you, and that is truth.

Regarding the original question, Iran has had in its possession, a fair amount of chemical and biological weapons for a couple of decades now. The WMD programs were initiated by Iran in order to counter its use by the Iraqis in the 1980-88 Persian Gulf War. The Iranians were able to rapidly make these weapons as a result of the dual use equipment supplied prior to the 1979 revolution. The Iraqi WMDs were at the time supplied by western (West Germany) governments.

Does Iran have a right to keep WMDs now that their neighbor, Iraq, no longer has WMDs?

Originally posted by Rickey Gerard Perez
Does Iran have a right to keep WMDs now that their neighbor, Iraq, no longer has WMDs?

In the perfect world no country would have WMDs, however, Iran has more adversaries than Iraq in the region with WMDs. To its eastern boarders for example Pakistan (a Sunni country) has nuclear weapons. To its north Russia (aided Saddam, only recently helps Iran for money), and to its west Israel also have nuclear weapons. This of course not counting most of the surrounding nations that host the US military, who has WMDs and India a little further to the south.

Originally posted by Rickey Gerard Perez
Does Iran have a right to keep WMDs now that their neighbor, Iraq, no longer has WMDs?

For a realistic answer to your question, i believe, one must first answer what gives any country a right to have w.m.d?

For example, what gives the u.s.a the right to have w.m.d?

Originally posted by CPYKOmega
What about The United States' WMDs besides nukes?

They're very dangerous.

The difference between America having nukes and iran having nukes is that America invented Nukes and built them up. Iran made an agreement with the international community to be given nuke technology and expertise in exchange for never, ever making nuke weapons.

Doesn't USA have a chemical and biological weapons program?

No. Not an offensive one.

Iran doesn't have a chem-bio warfare program either.

No one has the right to dictate what kind of political system a country should have

Since when?

Besides, who said anythign about that? If the Iranians build nukes, they're breaking an international agreement. And they are signed on to the laws bannign chemical weapons no?

The invasion of sovereign nations without due cause is illegal and immoral

War is not illegal.

There are no justifications for creating wars, other then the expansion of power.

Preposterous. Any nation is fully justified in invading and destroying another country if it feels threatened.

Who is the aggressor here?

Whats it matter? We know who the winner's gonna be.

Sep
The Iranians were able to rapidly make these weapons as a result of the dual use equipment supplied prior to the 1979 revolution. The Iraqi WMDs were at the time supplied by western (West Germany) governments.

Interesting. I wasn't aware.

Rickey Gerard Perez
Does Iran have a right to keep WMDs

Any nation does, so long as they aren't legally commited not too. Iran isn't permited to have nuke weapons, ever. If they have chem weapons now, they might not be part of the convention to make them illegal, so yes, they have a right. The US also has a right to invade if it feels threatened.

kojac
For example, what gives the u.s.a the right to have w.m.d?

I don't understand, why doesn't it have the right? Any nation can have any weapon it wants too. Excluding of course nations that agreed to have nuke tech in exchange for never making nuke weapons, or that signed on to the 'no chemical or biological weapons' treaties.

Originally posted by Nygdan
They're very dangerous.

The difference between America having nukes and iran having nukes is that America invented Nukes and built them up. Iran made an agreement with the international community to be given nuke technology and expertise in exchange for never, ever making nuke weapons.

I agree with you that the existance of nuclear weapons is "very dangrous". Its a threat to all formas of life.

Now regarding Iran siging the NPT, it was singed prior to the revolution. At the time the Shah wanted nuclear weapons and wanted to be the fourth country (other than Pakistan, Israel and India... or was it fifth? when did South Africa sign it?) not to sign the NPT. However he was persuaded by the promise of massive military and economic aid by the US. He recieved military equipment that were banned to other countries (tomcat) and he recieved them in very large amounts (Iran had the largest F-4 and F-5 fleet after the US and was planning one of the largest F-16 fleets, and wanted to by a fair amound of F-14s). This kept the Shah and Iranians satisfied. However after the revolution the United States and the Iranians split ways and the US no longer supplied Iran with weapons of any sort (with the exception of Iran-Contra). So Iran is now left in the difficult position of having to remain committed to something that they didnt sign, and not gain the rewards that were given to the Shah for signing it.

Since when?

Besides, who said anythign about that? If the Iranians build nukes, they're breaking an international agreement. And they are signed on to the laws bannign chemical weapons no?

Well first about the dictating political system. The US does not have the right to interfere with Iranian internal politics since they signed the Algiers Accords, stating that they wouldnt.

Regarding nuclear weapons, it is true that if they build them, it is against the law because they havent left NPT yet. But since no one can prove that they have built them, there is nothing that they are doing which is against international law.

Regarding chemical weapons, most of the nations signed aan agreement to reduce their chemical weapons capabilities, but since no nation publicly shows it chemical weapons there is no way of verifying whether they have complied with the agreement.

War is not illegal.

War is illegal if it is done without the bleesing and instructions of the United Nations.

Preposterous. Any nation is fully justified in invading and destroying another country if it feels threatened.

So you are saying that if any country feels any sort of threat they have a right to attack? That pretty much destroys the principles which have helped us survive till now. So North Korea is justified in attacking the United States mainland because it feels threatened? Are they justified in bombing civilian as well as military targets in the US? I mean what you are proposing here is in my humble opinion, suicidal for our planet.

OK, back to the thread question.

IRANIAN CHEMICAL WEAPONS

Iran is currently able to employ chemical weapons, and Iran is progressing in its development of a large self-supporting CW infrastructure. Iran continues to upgrade and expand its chemical warfare production infrastructure and munitions arsenal. The magnitude of this effort suggests that the Iranian leadership intends to maintain a robust CW capability...

...Iran manufactures weapons for blister, blood, and choking agents; it is also believed to be conducting research on nerve agents. Iran's stockpile of chemical weapons is believed to include nerve and blister agents. Iran is estimated to have an inventory of several thousand tons of various agents, including sulfur mustard, phosgene, and cyanide agents. Iran is working on developing a self-sufficient CW production capacity that includes more effective nerve agents. Along with shell and bomb delivery systems, Iran may also be producing CW warheads for its Scud missile systems...

...Its production capacity is estimated at as much as 1000 tons a year, with major production facilities located at Damghan, 300 kms east of Tehran. Other facilities are located at Esfahan, Parchin and Qazvin. The Iranian chemical weapons infrastructure is very poorly characterized in the open literature, and given the reported scope of this program it must be assumed that as many as a dozen other facilities have significant chemical weapons development, production, storage or training activities.

IRANIAN CHEMICAL WEAPONS


BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS

Iran’s biological warfare program is now believed to generally be in the advanced research and development phase. Iran has qualified, highly trained scientists and considerable expertise with pharmaceuticals. It also possesses the commercial and military infrastructure needed to produce basic biological warfare agents and may have produced pilot quantities of usable agent. Iran is judged to be able to support an independent BW program with little foreign assistance (although some foreign BW expertise, especially from Russia, is flowing to Iran). It is reported that the country has collocated a BW lab near its CW production facilities at Damghan...

...Iran has most likely investigated both toxins and live organisms as BW agents, produced some agents, and probably weaponized a small quantity of its production. It is possible that Iran has developed a small BW arsenal that could be delivered by a variety of systems

[url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/bw.htm]BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS[/ur]