German intelligence: Syria chemical attack may have been an overdose

[brooklynite]

Source: The Guardian

In the high-stakes drama over chemical weapons use in Syria, the US, France and Britain have all made clear that they hold the Assad regime responsible for the Ghouta attack on August 21st. Syria rejects the charge, and like its close ally Russia, blames the rebels. Neither have yet produced any evidence to support their position. Germany's intelligence assessment adds some intriguing new detail.

According to Der Spiegel, Gerhard Schindler, the head of the BND external intelligence service, told MPs in Berlin on Monday that while there was still no "incontestable proof," analysis of the evidence has led his service to believe that Assad's regime is to blame. Schindler also emphasized that the rebels were unable to carry out such a concerted attack.

In line with the three other western assessments, the German spy chief stressed the size of Syria's CW arsenal and its ability to use it. Schindler also believes CW had been used on a smaller scale before August 21. Britain's Joint Intelligence Committee assessment counted 14 separate incidents — though it has not publicized its evidence. Schindler said that in the earlier attacks the poison gas mixture was diluted, explaining the much lower death tolls in those assaults.

...snip...

There is a twist: "It could also be the case that errors were made in mixing the gas and it was much more potent than anticipated," Schindler said. Estimates of fatalities range from the US figure of 1429 to the French one of 281.



Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/world/on-the-middle-east/2013/sep/04/syria-assad-obama-germany

[Sand Wind]

1. He said that Assad lost his nerve...and make an overdose, that's priceless, if not so tragic.

The Hezbollah functionary, Schindler reported, seems to have admitted that poison gas was used. He said that Assad lost his nerve and made a big mistake by ordering the chemical weapons attack.

[leveymg]

7. There still is no evidence linking the top echelons of Syria's govt to this attack

The Defense Minister appears to have not had prior knowledge and immediately put an end to the attack. That fact undermines the cause for war, significantly.

Until that case for command responsibility is made convincingly, there is no basis for reprisals against the gov't.

[Cryptoad]

8. at the least

Assad is guilty of not exercising due diligence to make sure the WDM were not used... that is more than enough to justify the delivery of his retribution to come!

[leveymg]

13. Have you ever seen Dr. Strangelove? Should we go to war because a crazy unit commander exceeds

his authorization? Then, there's Fail-Safe, is war justified if a technical mistake caused a strike? That would change things, significantly.

In the real world, Due Diligence is fallible. Sane people don't go to war unless command responsibility for an attack is certain. It isn't in this case.

[Cryptoad]

20. Sane People

do not allow insane people to use WND's on people....... no matter what it takes.!

[carla]

22. Nonsense.

War mongers do allow insane war mongers to use WMD's on people.

[Myrina]

31. Does that include all the WMD's the US has, and had used, in the last 50 years?

I'm waiting ...

[Cryptoad]

39. What WMD have we used in the last 50 years?

[LanternWaste]

23. Is there a pattern or a history of Syrian officers responding to tactical threats...

Is there a pattern or a history of Syrian officers responding to tactical threats via the use of over-kill methods?

If we can point to Syrian usage of chemical weapons against the Free Syrian Army over the course of the conflict, it seems to me that the burden of proof would indeed be on the Assad regime rather than a rogue officer; and the safe presumption predicated on given evidence does not currently allow us the ability to point towards either an accidental discharge or a rogue officer unless or until we are provided with evidence to the contrary.

[leveymg]

24. The Defense Minister's words that night lend credance to the possibility of an unauthorized launch

So the burden shifts to the US to establish command responsibility before any reprisal attack.

[cstanleytech]

29. No but we could ask them to secure such weapons better say by turning them over to Russia

to be destroyed so that they are not used again by "accident".

[Yo_Mama]

30. Source for this claim?

It's an important point.

[leveymg]

33. Panicked phone call by Syrian Defense Minister reported here:

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/27/exclusive_us_spies_say_intercepted_calls_prove_syrias_army_used_nerve_gas

Last Wednesday, in the hours after a horrific chemical attack east of Damascus, an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense exchanged panicked phone calls with a leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people. Those conversations were overheard by U.S. intelligence services, The Cable has learned. And that is the major reason why American officials now say they're certain that the attacks were the work of the Bashar al-Assad regime -- and why the U.S. military is likely to attack that regime in a matter of days.

But the intercept raises questions about culpability for the chemical massacre, even as it answers others: Was the attack on Aug. 21 the work of a Syrian officer overstepping his bounds? Or was the strike explicitly directed by senior members of the Assad regime? "It's unclear where control lies," one U.S. intelligence official told The Cable. "Is there just some sort of general blessing to use these things? Or are there explicit orders for each attack?"

Nor are U.S. analysts sure of the Syrian military's rationale for launching the strike -- if it had a rationale at all. Perhaps it was a lone general putting a long-standing battle plan in motion; perhaps it was a miscalculation by the Assad government. Whatever the reason, the attack has triggered worldwide outrage, and put the Obama administration on the brink of launching a strike of its own in Syria. "We don't know exactly why it happened," the intelligence official added. "We just know it was pretty fucking stupid."

[Agschmid]

32. Source? Link? Please.

[leveymg]

34. Here:

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2013/08/27/exclusive_us_spies_say_intercepted_calls_prove_syrias_army_used_nerve_gas

Last Wednesday, in the hours after a horrific chemical attack east of Damascus, an official at the Syrian Ministry of Defense exchanged panicked phone calls with a leader of a chemical weapons unit, demanding answers for a nerve agent strike that killed more than 1,000 people. Those conversations were overheard by U.S. intelligence services, The Cable has learned. And that is the major reason why American officials now say they're certain that the attacks were the work of the Bashar al-Assad regime -- and why the U.S. military is likely to attack that regime in a matter of days.

But the intercept raises questions about culpability for the chemical massacre, even as it answers others: Was the attack on Aug. 21 the work of a Syrian officer overstepping his bounds? Or was the strike explicitly directed by senior members of the Assad regime? "It's unclear where control lies," one U.S. intelligence official told The Cable. "Is there just some sort of general blessing to use these things? Or are there explicit orders for each attack?"

Nor are U.S. analysts sure of the Syrian military's rationale for launching the strike -- if it had a rationale at all. Perhaps it was a lone general putting a long-standing battle plan in motion; perhaps it was a miscalculation by the Assad government. Whatever the reason, the attack has triggered worldwide outrage, and put the Obama administration on the brink of launching a strike of its own in Syria. "We don't know exactly why it happened," the intelligence official added. "We just know it was pretty fucking stupid."

[Agschmid]

35. Thx.

[leveymg]

36. UR welcome

[alcibiades_mystery]

2. This was Juan Cole's assessment earlier, inferred from the cable/comm intercepts

It continues to be plausible, and accounts for the panicked reaction of some higher-ups. It would also account for the local artillery officer's initial refusal to deploy, if he suspected a mixing error (if that account is to be believed at all).

The upshot here is rather startling: the Syrian military has been routinely using low levels of nerve agent in its military campaign.

[Pleidianfriend723]

3. even if it were a mistake, and they just wanted a "light" CW attack

it still doesn't make sense with UN inspectors coming in.

Also- is it possible both sides used CW?

[brooklynite]

5. No evidence that the opposition had either stockpiles or delivery systems...

...unless you put your trust in Iranian news services.

[Pleidianfriend723]

6. what about MintPress?

http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-saudis-supplied-rebels-with-chemical-weapons/168135/

[KittyWampus]

10. That is garbage and not written by the journalist it is accredited to.

[Cryptoad]

11. we know

from where the rocket were deployed and who controlled that location...and it was not the rebels.

Reckon there will be any outcry for retribution if he were to deploy a nuclear missile test on his own people as a favor for Iran.

I am so glad there are no people in the world who wish us any harm!

[leveymg]

12. A UN Inspector concluded earlier this year that the opposition had used Sarin

That was a minority opinion that was deleted from the final Report. The opposition manufactures rockets similar to those allegedly used in the 8/21 attack.

There was also an earlier rebel Sarin attack and use of Chlorine gas back in March, April.

Didn't get a lot of play in the MSM because the casualties were relatively limited.

U.N. has testimony that Syrian rebels used sarin gas: investigator
GENEVA | Sun May 5, 2013 6:13pm EDT http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/05/us-syria-crisis-un-idUSBRE94409Z20130505

(Reuters) - U.N. human rights investigators have gathered testimony from casualties of Syria's civil war and medical staff indicating that rebel forces have used the nerve agent sarin, one of the lead investigators said on Sunday.

Syria’s Civil War: The Mystery Behind a Deadly Chemical Attack (Chlorine)
By Aryn Baker @arynebakerApril 01, 2013
Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/04/01/syrias-civil-war-the-mystery-behind-a-deadly-chemical-attack/#ixzz2dIWUIAV1

[KittyWampus]

9. Yes, it makes sense Assad used it on civilians and no it isn't likely rebels used it in Damascus

Please check my Journal for articles from a wide variety of sources on this subject.

[Iliyah]

4. Assad - OOPS my bad

sorry y'all . .

[Maedhros]

14. Chemical weapons experts question the "diluted sarin" explanation.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/18559-how-intelligence-was-twisted-to-support-an-attack-on-syria

Indeed, they question whether it was sarin at all:

The symptoms of a nerve agent attack are clear-cut: Soon after initial symptoms of tightness of chest, pinpoint pupils and running nose, the victim begins to vomit and to defecate and urinate uncontrollably, followed by twitching and jerking. Ultimately, the victim becomes comatose and suffocates in a series of convulsive spasms. The symptoms shown in dozens of videos of victims being treated in medical centers in Ghouta, however, are quite different. In an interview with Truthout, Dan Kaszeta, a specialist on chemical, biological and radiological weapons who has advised the White House on those issues, pointed out that a nerve gas attack would have been accompanied by a pattern of symptoms that are not shown in the videos posted online. "There should be more or less universal vomiting," Kaszeta said. But he did not see any vomiting or evidence of such vomiting on the clothing or on the floor in any of the videos he saw. Stephen G. Johnson, a chemical weapons forensics expert at Cranfield University in the United Kingdom, noticed the same thing. "Why aren't more people vomiting?" he asked Truthout in an interview.

Experts noticed yet another anomaly: The number of those treated who survived far outnumbered the dead, contrary to what would be expected in a nerve gas attack. Dr. Ghazwan Bwidany told CBS news August 24 that his mobile medical unit had treated 900 people after the attack and that 70 had died. Medecins Sans Frontieres reported that 3,600 patients had been treated at hospitals in the area of the attack and that 355 had died. Such ratios of survivors to dead were the opposite of what chemical weapons specialists would have expected from a nerve gas attack. Kaszeta told Truthout that the "most nagging doubt" he had about the assumption that a nerve gas attack had taken place is the roughly 10-to-1 ratio of total number treated to the dead. "The proportions are all wrong," he said. "There should be more dead people." Johnson agreed. In an actual nerve gas attack, he said, "You'd get some survivors, but it would be very low. This [is] a very low level of lethality."

Some attribute these anomalies to a low dose/diluted agent.

But Kaszeta cast doubt on the idea of a "low dose" nerve agent being used. In an interview with blogger Eliot Higgins, who specializes in weapons associated with the Syrian conflict under the name Brown Moses, he said, "There's not much leeway between the incapacitating doses and lethal doses with Sarin." The concentration causing any symptoms at all, he said, "would quickly lead to absorption of a lethal dose."

Given that none of the aid workers treating the victims were wearing protective clothing/gloves, and none of them were contaminated by residual agent on the victims, it's possible that this incident was something other than a sarin attack.

[idwiyo]

27. +1

[happyslug]

15. Several Problems with this report

First, is any shell, including Chemical Shells, are shipped to the Cannons intact. You do NOT mix up the Chemicals at that point, you just load the rounds. Mixing is done at the plant where the Chemicals are made and the shells are made NOT when the shells reaches the guns.

Thus any mixing, light or heavy was done at the factory, and given Sarin has been known since WWII, they know how much Sarin is needed in each shell to be effective. Again makes no sense for a Light load.

Now, mixing Chemicals shells with High Explosive Shells would produce a lower level of toxicity. Less Chemical shells fired, less gas on target. The problem with such a mixture, is not only the chemical shells disbursed over a larger area, the high explosive shells will have the effect of dispersing the chemicals even further. Thus the Chemical Shells weaken the effect of the High Explosive attack for Chemical Shells have very little high Explosive in them. At the same time the blasting of the High Explosive Shells will disperse the chemicals further then is normal, thus defeating the needed concentration of chemicals for the Chemicals to be effective.

For one of the facts known about Chemicals Shells is the need to concentrate them more then regular High Explosive shells. I was taught if a shelling occurred and it the shells fell closer to each other then normal, that was a sign of a chemical strike. The reason was the need to concentrate the chemicals into a tighter area then was normal for High Explosive shells.

Now, it is possible that Syrian Artillerymen treated the Chemical Shells like Conventional High Explosive shells, with the result of a lack of the needed concentration (The shells were 20 feet apart, as in a conventional artillery fire, not the 5 -10 feet apart needed to concentrate the chemicals). The Artillerymen complained that they needed to bring the shells closer together and in the most recent incident they did so (Or the opposite, the guns were told to fire closer then they had been and the Artillerymen asked why, for it is something they may never have done before).

Now, I suspect the problem was in this battle it reached the area of an unreported (for it was Top Secret) chemical weapons factory. A shell hit the factory, releasing a huge amount of gas that flowed and killed a lot of people. Both sides blame each other, but the calls being reported were requests for why the chemicals were used and who ordered the use of Chemicals, when they were not authorized to be used (and it is not being reported that the release maybe an accident).

Thus I can NOT see how chemical strikes could be "Light" or "heavy" due to the nature of the mixture. On the other hand, the number of Shells and how tight the shells fall in relation to each other can determine the level of Chemical Concentration. It may be a problem with translation (we are talking of an English translation of the German report based on intercepts of communications done in Arabic, by Arabs trained by Russians, who used Russian terms when it came to how to use these Chemical Weapons).

Translation can be bad, the classic example is the first attempt for a English-Russian Computer Translator in the 1950s. They took a paper ran it through the computer from English into Russian, and then from Russian back into English. The resulting report was about "Water Sheep". It took the Scientists who read the resulting translated report two or three pages of the translation that the paper was about "Hydraulic Rams".

I suspect a similar error in this report, The report may not be about "Light" or "Heavy" mixtures, but "Light" or "Heavy" firing of shells into a small (or Large) area. Such a report would make more sense, i.e. report is how tight one fire the shells, not how well the gas in each shell is mixed.

[Pleidianfriend723]

16. good points, although

I'm not sure that explains how Assad's forces could have done this by accident.

[happyslug]

18. I suspect someone hit a production plant for Sarin

Remember this is in a Suburb of Damacus, a place where a Chemical Factory could be build and secured. One mortar shell into a holding tank of Sarin in such a plant, would release a LOT of Sarin. The Sarin would go from its liquid form to an aerial form and then flow with the wind.

The people who worked in the plant would have masks. Syrian troops, like most troops, tend to have masks, thus the Sarin would have minimal affect on them once the alarm was sounded (and anyone in the Military are trained if you suspect gas, you mask, i.e. if you see someone in a mask, you mask, you stay in your mask till an all clear signal is given).

Given the training most soldiers receive, Sarin would have minimal affect on them (They are trained to quickly mask), but against anyone without a mask, Sarin would be extremely deadly. Thus an round into a holding tank of Sarin would explain the huge loss of life, and either side could have fired the Mortar round (or other piece of explosive from an Artillery piece or a Rocket launcher).

[Pleidianfriend723]

21. so it seems like this would a valuable target for the rebels to hit

and claim Assad did it.

[LanternWaste]

25. What would be the effective dispersal radius of the chemical should that have happened?

What would be the effective dispersal radius of the chemical should that have happened?

[happyslug]

28. I have no idea, it is a super concentration.

When I was in the field Artillery and trained in regards to Chemical Warfare, we concentrated on Artillery or Aerial dispersal of Chemicals, not dispersal from a huge vat (and out training was how to SURVIVE such an attack NOT to carry it out).

Sarin is a non-persistent gas, it lasts as regularly applied about 15 minutes, then it spreads to far to be effective (and also seems to break down under normal circumstances to its base chemicals). To make it more persistent, it could be mixed with oil. Oil both preserved Sarin and helped prevent it spread (and thus reduce its ability to disperse). I read that Soviet Doctrine as to the use of Sarin was to use it only in its non-persistent form, so Sarin could be used on a target and then 10-15 minutes later Soviet Forces could fight through that area with minimal Chemical warfare protection.

Mustard, the old WWI standard, is the "best" persistent gas to this day. The US has developed some persistent nerve gases, and the Soviets mixed oil with Sarin to make it more persistent, but Mustard beats both out hands down. Mustard can last for days, in fact around 2000 an old WWI concrete bunker was found by some children in France, and they became sick. It was found that they had played around the Bunker and the concrete for the Bunker was poured just before a Mustard Gas attack, thus the Mustard penetrated the Concrete, and was still active 80 year later to get those children sick.

I mention the above for if you want a Chemical that lasts a long time, Mustard is what you want to use (and the reason so many countries keep it is their stockpiles, the only WWI era gas still kept in National Stock piles). The nerve gases (including Sarin) disperse quickly, but if you dropped enough, you could wipe out an entire city and then entered it 15 minutes later and the gas be gone (I would wait a little longer to be safe or go in with Protective Masks on). Everybody be dead, but that is the whole purpose of such a gas attack.

The worse part, it appears the Sarin was dropped while Assad's forces were on the defensive, thus the gas would have drifted from their positions to where the Civilians were, and since the Civilians had no protective masks, quickly killed by the gas. Nerve Gas (like Sarin) kills quickly if it gets into your lungs. When I was being trained, if we suspected gas, we were to MASK first, and then give a warning. The reason for this was simple, if we tried to give the warning first, that required taking in air, and if the Nerve gas was in the area, that breath would kill us before we could give a warning. Thus the only way to make sure a Warning was given, was for people to mask first AND THEN WARN OTHERS. That is how quickly Nerve gas works and why its fast dispersal is an advantage to an attacker. On the other hand, if the other side has Masks, it is less effective for the Mask will prevent the gas from getting into the lungs, and the other ways Gas can enter your body is NOT as efficient at killing the persons the chemical attack is aimed at.

Nerve gas can kill you through the skin, for it can be absorb by your body through the skin, but it is a very lengthy time period to be absorb compared to if the Chemical hits your lungs. Furthermore your clothing can keep most such gas off your skin (a protective suit would be better, and we were trained to use them and wear them). The biggest problem with Chemicals is that studies comparing the use of Chemicals and conventional High Explosives tend to show that where troops had masks, but not wearing them, when hit by Nerve Gas they suffered less causalities then if they were hit by the same number of high explosives shells.

Chemicals are most effective against troops without any form of protective mask (Or civilians without such masks). It appears the rebels have no protective masks and thus easily killed by Chemical weapons. Most of the victims I have seen pictures of appear to be civilians, another group Chemicals are extremely effective on.

I hope the above answered your question, for the actual dispersal radius I have no idea, and I suspect no one has for it varies to much for dispersal depends on humidity and wind speed. High humidity, no wind speed, the Chemicals will last a long time, low humidity and high wind speed no one may notice the Chemical attack (That is what happened when the Germans first used Chemicals. That first use was in Poland against the Russians during WWI). Remember the chemical when in the shell is a liquid. The shell explodes and releases the chemical (or in my propose accident the liquid tank is hit and that releases the liquid into the atmosphere). The chemical droplets goes into someone lungs and kills that person. If the wind is to fast, the droplets will spread to far. If the humidity is to low, the water will break from the chemicals and drop off the chemicals onto the ground instead of collecting as a vapor on your body (and in your lung). Thus wind speed and humidity work together as to any dispersal rate.

Please remember in the first use of a Chemicals attack that the victims of the attack reported was on the Western Front during WWII, after the attempt on the Eastern Front that no one reported for no one notice the chemicals. In the attack on the western front the Germans made sure the humidity and wind speed was perfect for the attack and the amount of Gas used was concentrated enough to cause injuries. For that is what was needed and I do NOT know what was the weather in Damascus on the day of the attack. Remember Damascus is in the "Fertile Crescent". The "Fertile Crescent" is that part of the Middle East that gets enough water for agriculture, so it has some humidity. Unlike further inland where you have less rain thus less humidity, and thus more herding then farming (Iraq is also part of the "Fertile Crescent" but it gets its water from the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, Damascus and the area between it and the Mediterranean sea gets their water from rain that falls in the area).

I bring up the above for humidity is a factor, even through we think of Syria as being a desert like country. The eastern part is, but the part along the Mediterranean Coast is not. Wind speed is also driven by the Mediterranean, for the local wind are driven by the difference in temperature between the desert areas and the Mediterranean sea itself. In the afternoon the wind flows Eastward, for the Desert is hotter then the Mediterranean, as the night nears morning, the wind flows Westward, for the Mediterranean is warmer then the desert (remember land loses and gain heat faster then water, thus in the Afternoon the Desert is hotter, but then the desert loses its heat at night so the next morning the sea is hotter, cold goes in the direction of heat, thus the polar areas drive the trade winds to the Equator, the Antarctic drives the monsoons to Africa, India, Australia, South East Asia and Indonesia).

[KurtNYC]

37. There have been incidents of "spiked ammo" in Syria

Perhaps it is possible that chemical shells were inserted into piles of high explosive shells? Or that booby trapped ammo exploded in the launchers ?

*** GRAPHIC ***

[happyslug]

40. I have problems with that report

First is where did the rebels get an FN FAL??? Turkey did buy some in the 1950s, but then replaced them AND their preexisting Model 98 Mauser bolt action rifles with German G3 starting in the 1960s. Iran used G3s under the Shah, since the revolution Iran seems to be have a AK-47 country.

Saudia Arabia and Jordan were G3 users. Iraq, Syria and Egypt used AKs. Lebanon being a source for the FN FAL is a problem for Assad Forces are between Lebanon and the Rebels, so it can can be a source but the location makes Lebanon unlikely. Jordan used M1 rifles as late as the 1967 six day war, but then adopted the M16 (Jordan does use the FN MAG machine gun, but that is NOT the FN FAL rifle).

The only country in the region that used the FN FAL is Israel, but Israel's Israeli Defense Force is based on the Swiss Army. You turn 18, you are in the army (unless exempt), you are issued a rifle, serve your mandatory service period and put into the reserves. YOU TAKE YOU RIFLE WITH YOU BACK HOME. Thus veterans of the 1948 war still have their Model 98 Mauser bolt action rifles, veterans of the Six day war still have their FN FAL and Uzi sub machine guns. Later veterans took home their M16 or Galil rifles. I bring this up for it does NOT sound like the Israel gave these rebels these weapons, they still have a role back in Israel among the reservists.

I bring this up for it is clear that the FN FAL came from some where, but the real question is where? It can not come from a local source, thus someone brought it in from somewhere.

As to the AK-47 lets remember the AK started out as a Sub-machine gun design during WWII (was rejected) but then was the basis (with a major rework) for the Russian PK machine gun (The Russian's first and still used General Purpose Machine Gun). That basic design was reworked again in 1947 into the AK-47, then reworked in the late 1940s to be machine made as opposed to being stamped (Russia did not have the Metal Stamping capacity in the 1940s to stamp out AKs, thus they had to be machines made). In 1959, the AK was re-designed again, this time to be made with stamping machines (this is the AKM, M stands for Modified). In 1974 modified again to use 5.45x39 ammunition instead of 7.62x39 ammunition. The Ak-47 was re-designed again for more control in automatic fire in the early 1990s (Ak-100 Series).

Since the orginal AK-47 was made, it had one reputation, it can take a good bit of abuse, almost to the level of a bolt action rifle (When Automatic replaced bolt action rifles, reliability tests had be to lowered, automatics are NOT as reliable as maunal operated bolt actions rifles). I read stories of people firing 7.62x51 NATO ammunition in an AK, without a problem. The NATO round fires a heavier bullet AND has more powder in its case (Both thus increasing internal pressure) but the AK handled the NATO round with ease (It is NOT recommended, it can be done but you are foolish to do so). Given that the AK and FN FAL was seen together and it looks like magazines for each were being filled at the same time, given the losser fit of the AK, I can see someone putting a NATO round in a magazine for an AK. That is a better explanation then that some "Spiked Ammo" was used.

Remember all guns are test fired, just before their leave the factory, with a "test round" that is about five times the power of a normal round for that weapon. The Weapon must survive that test, if it does not it is rejected. Thus weapons can take "spiked ammo" for their did it at least once, when they were test fired in the Factory. I suspect the misfiring of the AK was some dumb ass put a NATO round into an AK Magazine, and what you see is what you get. You hate it when it happens, but rarely fatal even to the Weapon.

Now, the 60mm mortar shown at the end is interesting. Iraq used Soviet Equipment and the Soviet gave up on anything smaller then an 82mm mortar prior to WWII. So where did these rebels gets this mortar AND its Ammo? Furthermore why did it burst? Artillery have been known to burst, once it is fired enough time. This was a real problems in the days before Steel Cannons (The 3 inch Rifle of the US Civil war was noted for NOT-bursting, only one is even know to have burst, but it had a steel insert into its iron cannon barrel). 60 mm mortars tend to last a very long time, given the very minimal charges used to propel them (can last 50,000 or more rounds, Rifles tend to wear out at about 25,000 rounds). It might be a booby-trap round (set to go off when the charge is fired instead of waiting to go off down rage). On the other hand this weapon looks like something home made. I saw nothing that would permit someone to attach a front bi-pod on the Mortar, such a bi-pod would be needed to hit anything with any accuracy. Thus it may be home made out of scrap steel and finally reached its limit of strength instead of being the effect of booby trap ammunition.

I notice no reports on any injury. The round could have gone off in the tube, but the tube also contain the blast, thus you have a nice film but the effect may be no one was injured (Scared, but not injured).

I watch the film several times, and I notice the Flash is BEHIND the mortar-man NOT where the Mortar is. I thus suspect, what you are seeing is a blast from an in-coming round of ammunition not a blast from the round going into the tube.

Another round could have gone off, but remember since Vietnam the US Army has had Anti-Mortar Radar and could detect where Mortar rounds are coming from by the time three rounds are fired. I was train to fire three times and then MOVE to avoid counter battery fire. With today's GPS you can have a 155 mm Howitzer at the ready, set to fire at a target by the time the third round is fired. Sorry, the more I look at the film, my understanding of Computers, Radar, GPS and their interaction is enough to tell me what we are seeing is NOT a blast of bad ammunition, but a counter battery blast from a US or Allied Mortar to Artillery (maybe even an air attack).

Sorry, they are other, better explanations for what we see on these films as oppose to spiked ammunition.

[mallard]

38. You make more sense that the sales reps for war working overtime here ...

... but I think you're not as well funded.

The gov't side was winning. The inspectors had arrived to check on the reports of CW use six months ago. What's this about panic? People who want action don't care what it takes. They had their 'red line' and pulled off a standard procedure false flag. These people are not interested in the truth that Assad would have no reason to gas that target.

[KamaAina]

17. This tends to bolster my theory

that CW was indeed used by Syrian forces, but by a rogue unit commander, not under orders from the military establishment. The dunce didn't even know how to use them properly!

[lumpy]

19. A theory ,yes.

[jakeXT]

26. The Real Story of 'Curveball': How German Intelligence Helped Justify the US Invasion of Iraq

Five years ago, the US government presented what it said was proof that Iraq harbored biological weapons. The information came from a source developed by German intelligence -- and it turned out to be disastrously wrong. But to this day, Germany denies any responsibility.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-real-story-of-curveball-how-german-intelligence-helped-justify-the-us-invasion-of-iraq-a-542840.html