BX Nerve Gas Used in Theatre Storming.

[General Geiger]

I'm sure I don't need to write a long introduction to this. The Russians, in storming the theatre in Moscow to rescue the civilians held captive there, released a nerve agent called "BX" into the ventilation systems. They rescued virtually everyone from the theatre, but huge numbers of fatalities from gas poisoning are resulting.

Let me first set out a few key reasons why the Russians used the gas.

1) They didn't have any other choice - without using it casualties would have been vastly higher.

2) Notice that none of the soldiers who went in had gas masks or biochemical warfare suits on. They must all have been innoculated against BX beforehand. BX is a poison gas there is an innoculation for; if they had used something less deadly then there would have been no innoculation, and the soldiers would have been affected by it. They could have worn suits, but fighting in them against armed terrorits would have been nigh-on impossible.

3) As an experiment? Could it be said that this was a test of this gas in a civilian situation?

Bear in mind that, from what I saw on the news earlier, BX is meant to incapacitate a fit, trained, adult male soldier in the open. It showed black and white video footage in which a British soldier exposed to a controlled amount of it was doing hurdles - he suddenly started reeling around, managed three more, barely, then collapsed. The stuff is not intended to be used in a confined space, where hundreds of women, children, and elderly and infirm people are crowded together.

But, if they hadn't used the stuff, maybe a thousand people would have died, rather than two hundred. Did Putin have a choice? Dicuss.

[Sandsnake]

attempting to sway the russians with terrorist threats has always been a mistake. They're firm believers in losing a few to save the many.

[Gario]

Just like the Vulcans

Edit: I don't know why i said that

"1) They didn't have any other choice - without using it casualties would have been vastly higher."

U don´t know this (nor do I btw). But maybe without the gas or with a real sleeping gas things could have gone "better". I don´t know how big those explosives were and how many ppl would die if one woman blew herself up. but if it would be around 20 ppl a shooting might have ended better.

-H-

p.s. interesting fact I saw on tv was that only 1 (!) person was killed by a bullet. (most of u prolly know this allready but for the ppl that didn´t it shows again how bad this gas was)

I know this is a total wrong look at things. But wouldn´t it be better if the terrorist actually killed the ppl instead of the russians themselfs?

-H-

I dont agree with what they did because civilians ended up dying for no good reason, but I do understand the predicament they were in, and indeed they were in one! Id have loved it if they could have organised a neutralisation of these scum without killing them, put them on a show trial and then executed them publicly. Ok so the Russians are going through Chechnya murdering thousands of civilians without any press coverage, but does that justify acts of terrorism? What defines terrorism? Before responding, think carefully about these concepts.

This is a brutal conflict involving thousands of people from both sides. Right, wrong, good, bad, the fact remains that it IS, and all is fair in love and war so a great man wrote. What do you think?

I don´t believe that all is fair in love and war. WW II was a war, do u think killing all the innocent jews was fair.
And iniluku more than a 100 ppl can´t be really called a few. But then again I guess ur right that the terrorist would have killed all (I believe it were) 800.

-H-

p.s. anyone knows any other gas that would also put the ppl inside asleep or knockout immediately but less deadly?

Originally posted by Rick


But using whatever gas was the only choice they had. It killed like 11 hostages, but blowing the building would have killed all 700 so it really saved 600 lives. Why does everyone have to run around saying it killed 11 people instead of it killed negative 600.

Only 1 person was killed by a gunshot so with about 140 dead ppl with 50 af them being terrorists this would leave 90 hostages not 11 sorry to have to say it´s true.

-H-

[at0mic.c0w]

they had 2 quite huge bombs in the theatre (among other smaller ones) - using only one of these would have caused the death of at least 100 ppl.
altho for these cases they could have developed somehting less deadly...

Originally posted by Iniluki
I really do think that using that gas was probably the best idea. The really blunt answer is, what are 100 lives worth compared to 700? :/

Imagine you were one of the 100 people. Now is it worth it?

[Gario]

Originally posted by Vince McMahon
Imagine you were one of the 100 people. Now is it worth it?

Wouldnt you choose yourself and 99 others to die rather than yourself and 699 others?

Simple answer? No.

Hell is for heroes boy. If you were in the same position yourself you would be thinking rather differently. Dont give me the supreme sacrifice rubbish. This was a decision made completely arbitrarily.

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by Vince McMahon
Imagine you were one of the 100 people. Now is it worth it?

No offense, but dumb argument.

If 1 had died and 799 had been saved you could use the same argument.

If all had been saved and one dog had died, the 'but what if you were that dog, would that be fair?' argument is the same.

I was referring to the 'casual' manner in which he talked about the 100 dead. If they were 100 people he knew and cared about, he wouldn't be so blunt about it. But as I learnt a long time ago, I can't force people to care...

[Caesar2]

the building was for the russians more important then the ppl, thats why they just didnt give a damn about the type of gas they used

[Rids]

Of course there were choices, dont give me that crap, there are always choices, its just that maybe to the guys in charge those choices were not as appealing.

As I have stated before, I'd have blown the building up from the air, condeming 1000 people to death, but is there a better way to say that you categorically will not negotiate with terrorists? I'd then have had the red army unleash its full fury on Grozny for a week, make them realise that by considering such an act in the future they would simply be causing even more heartache to the 'people' they were fighting for.

It may have the tact of a sledgehammer, it may earn them widespread condemnation, but it would be a sure sign to terrorists that russian is not to be fked with.

any terrorist who is dumb enough to not use a gas mask during a long'ish hostaging deserves to die

[nickhall]

Originally posted by Rids
As I have stated before, I'd have blown the building up from the air, condeming 1000 people to death, but is there a better way to say that you categorically will not negotiate with terrorists? I'd then have had the red army unleash its full fury on Grozny for a week, make them realise that by considering such an act in the future they would simply be causing even more heartache to the 'people' they were fighting for.

It may have the tact of a sledgehammer, it may earn them widespread condemnation, but it would be a sure sign to terrorists that russian is not to be fked with.

Been watchin Swordfish have we??

Although this may be an effective method for dealing with the situation would any political leader/group ever go through with it as would cause great unpopularity!!

[Vermillion]

As I posted in the other thread, the chemical agent was Blue-X, and it is not a nerve agent. It has been in the Soviet/ Russian chemical arsenal for at least 15 years.

Tch, knowing the russian way of doing things, they probably used Sarin gas.

What is it with the russians anyway? They naver ask, nay accept any outside help. The Koursk was one fine example of Russian "pride".

Originally posted by Ginyard
I dont agree with what they did because civilians ended up dying for no good reason, but I do understand the predicament they were in, and indeed they were in one! Id have loved it if they could have organised a neutralisation of these scum without killing them, put them on a show trial and then executed them publicly. Ok so the Russians are going through Chechnya murdering thousands of civilians without any press coverage, but does that justify acts of terrorism? What defines terrorism? Before responding, think carefully about these concepts.

This is a brutal conflict involving thousands of people from both sides. Right, wrong, good, bad, the fact remains that it IS, and all is fair in love and war so a great man wrote. What do you think?

This has added nothing to the discussion. Troll.





I believe that the Russkis should have agreed to the demands, pulled out of Chechnya, and let the terrorists go back there. Then, when they think they are safe, send in double the soldiers originally there, and burn the place to the ground. Genghis Khan-style

[LHC]

I'm not too sure meself. First, they said between 10 and 20 hostages were dead. Now it is above 150.

I aint sure how much or little this number has been inflated, but assuming its true, and at least 150 died, I'm sure these special force members could have got in, shot all the terrorists to death, and lost less than 150 hostages in the process.

[Sandsnake]

On a side note, there is a incapacitant called BZ, and there is a conspiracy theory involving BX, a experimental combat drug, existing.

I do beleive you're thinking of Vx Nerve Agent, which is rather nasty stuff.

Originally posted by Sandsnake
On a side note, there is a incapacitant called BZ, and there is a conspiracy theory involving BX, a experimental combat drug, existing.

I do beleive you're thinking of Vx Nerve Agent, which is rather nasty stuff.

BZ is the stuff the CIA manufactured in the 60s after LSD. LSD wears off after about 8 hrs, BZ takes about 3 days

[Sandsnake]

Originally posted by Ghosteh


BZ is the stuff the CIA manufactured in the 60s after LSD. LSD wears off after about 8 hrs, BZ takes about 3 days

both are listed in chemical warfare books as incapacitants. Nice to know that people purposefully expose themselves to chem weapons for fun, huh? :P

Originally posted by Sandsnake
both are listed in chemical warfare books as incapacitants. Nice to know that people purposefully expose themselves to chem weapons for fun, huh? :P

Yep

They were both originally developed for people to have no inhibitions on giving away information in a CIA run brothel.

Nice.....

[Sandsnake]

Originally posted by Ghosteh


Yep

They were both originally developed for people to have no inhibitions on giving away information in a CIA run brothel.

Nice.....

Actually it was the US Army, but people like to use the word "CIA" because it sounds cooler and inspires spy stories, which make for better conspiracy theories.

Originally posted by Sandsnake
Actually it was the US Army, but people like to use the word "CIA" because it sounds cooler and inspires spy stories, which make for better conspiracy theories.

They also had one crazy general who wanted to use it on a whole town.

The guy in charge of the brothel was <insert name here> White

[Sandsnake]

Originally posted by Ghosteh



They also had one crazy general who wanted to use it on a whole town.

The guy in charge of the brothel was <insert name here> White

Woulda been interesting (;

Maybe Russia should just stop agressing on Checyna and they wouldnt have to Gas another innocent russian civilian ever again....

Originally posted by bell
Maybe Russia should just stop agressing on Checyna and they wouldnt have to Gas another innocent russian civilian ever again....

Or Chechnya can fkoffanddie.

So when a place like Kosovo wants to become and independent state in the face of an agressive regime we are more than happy to set NATO precedents by interefering in a countries soverignty.

When its Chechnya wanting to break away from Russia we turned a blind-eye and let the Russians flatten whole capital cities...

..ever stop to think about the reasons behind the Chechan rebels actions...

Originally posted by bell
So when a place like Kosovo wants to become and independent state in the face of an agressive regime we are more than happy to set NATO precedents by interefering in a countries soverignty.

When its Checyna wanting to break away from Russia we turned a blind-eye and let the Russians flatten whole capital cities...

..ever stop to think about the reasons behind the Chechan rebels actions...

Chechnya, Kosovo, the Middle Eastern sand-monkeys, Libya, they can all be flattened. Send them all to burn in hell.

how do you know that they used BX nerve gas?
on BBC's pages it says BZ, anyone know wich one they used?

[Sandsnake]

Originally posted by bell
So when a place like Kosovo wants to become and independent state in the face of an agressive regime we are more than happy to set NATO precedents by interefering in a countries soverignty.

When its Checyna wanting to break away from Russia we turned a blind-eye and let the Russians flatten whole capital cities...

..ever stop to think about the reasons behind the Chechan rebels actions...

2 issues there.

1> Active "Ethnic Cleansing" in Kosovo and spreading conflict that was threatening to destabilize the entire region led NATO forces to get involved.

2> Getting involved in Chechnya would only serve to create a much larger war...practicality dictates that this would lead to FAR more deaths, and could very well lead to an old "Soviet Union vs NATO" scenario, which would not be pleasant.

Basically, it boils down to this: It was within NATO's power to deal with the Kosovo conflict effectively, it is NOT within our power to deal with the Chechnya situation effectively. That is, unless you want T-72's pouring through the mountains into western Europe.

T80's are far more efficient...

[Ditcher]

Originally posted by LHC

I aint sure how much or little this number has been inflated, but assuming its true, and at least 150 died, I'm sure these special force members could have got in, shot all the terrorists to death, and lost less than 150 hostages in the process.

Remember that they had mined and set explosives in the theater which were now left unusued because gas brought them down so quickly.

Also 50 terrorist is quite much to handle without "surprise".

[Sandsnake]

Originally posted by ReZpawner
T80's are far more efficient...

T-90's are even better. However, the russian army can barely afford what it has now, and the t-72 is still cheap,easily upgradable, and available in quantity...even if you CAN kill it with light weapons.

A-10 Warthog

[Sandsnake]

Originally posted by Ghosteh
A-10 Warthog

Thats not what anyone in their right mind would call a "light weapon."

Originally posted by Sandsnake
Thats not what anyone in their right mind would call a "light weapon."

Now that you mention it, although I was referring to them being used instead of tanks.
20mm high velocity machine gun + "Warthog Stomp"
=
BOOM!

[Miserableman]

Originally posted by General Geiger
Did Putin have a choice? Dicuss.

I think I read that Putin didn't know about the raid until after it had started. Correct me if I'm wrong.

What is it with the russians anyway? They naver ask, nay accept any outside help.

And why the **** would they? They can do it themselves, why ask for outside help?

[-=Zyth=-]

Where can i get some of this BZ?

It may go down well at parties...

Originally posted by H-gangsta


p.s. anyone knows any other gas that would also put the ppl inside asleep or knockout immediately but less deadly?

my brother's fart, but it's no odourless, it takes about 5 secs to knock you out... enough time to self-destroy

Wasnt really advocating us intervening in Chechnya, i was more repsonding to the flippancy people have when it comes to one of the biggest outrages of Human Rights today going on in Chechnya.

Advocating Putin to "go flatten" Grozny etc. is ridiculous seeing as Yeltsin flattened the place years ago... IMO it just shows a lack of understanding of the situation. Then again we arent capable of serious debate are we

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by ReZpawner
how do you know that they used BX nerve gas?
on BBC's pages it says BZ, anyone know wich one they used?

As I have said several times, the Russians used an incapacitant called Blue-X, which is not a nerve agent. Blue-X has been in the Russian/Soviet Arsenal for years, and was liberally used in afganistan. In and of itself it is pretty harmless, side effects in only 0.1% of cases. However in this case the concentrations used were obviously too high and in an enclosed space, and the effect was very similar to giving someone too much regular anesthetic.

I am willing to bet money that the dead are all elderly, children and people with small stature and low BMI indecies.

Trust me on this one.