|WikiProject Chemicals||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
Iraqi binary weapons?
Under the heading "Binary weapons" the article says:
- Iraq developed a system in which GF (cyclosarin) is formed upon delivery, most likely mixing together methyphosphonyldifluoride with either cyclohexanol or a mixture of cyclohexylamine and cyclohexanol.
This is, at best, poorly written. At worst, flat out wrong.
I did a fair bit of research last spring, when US spokesman General Kimmitz claimed the GIs in a bomb disposal squad had been exposed to Sarin. An IED had been built around an old Iraqi chemical munition. The round was not marked, to indicate it was anything other than a conventional munition. Kimmitz either said, or implied, the munition had been a modern binary munition.
Well, I did that research, and learned that the Iraqi chemical weapons specialists had never been able to manufacture binary weapons. The chemical munitions Iraq fielded were not binary weapons. Their chemical munitions contained a single capsule that was shipped and stored half full of a single precursor to the nerve agent. Just prior to firing a chemical warfare specialist would don their chemical protection suit, and charge the munition with the other precursor.
Anyhow there is no reason why a section of this article, on binary weapons, should mention Iraq at all. So, I rewrote that section.-- Geo Swan 05:11, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)
- I agree - it's completely unnecessary, and most certainly wrong. However, according to the Riegle Report, Iraq did have some binary capabilities (we all know how reliable that report is now, however. 20/20 hindsight, eh?) – ClockworkSoul 07:14, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This article says, "Next came sarin, soman and finally the most toxic, cyclosarin", which contrasts with the Sarin article: "Sarin was discovered in 1938 in Wuppertal-Elberfeld in Germany by scientists at IG Farben attempting to create stronger pesticides; it is the most toxic of the four G-Series nerve agents made by Germany." So which is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Would they be better re-written as opposed to remaining a quote from another source? cyclosarin 05:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
One of the most obscure?
I don't want to get into an edit war over this but is cyclosarin the most obscure G agent or one of? For instance GV's status is ambiguous but I believe that it is still in the same group. cyclosarin 00:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)