I have been wondering what the Russians used against the Chechen rebels. The only thing that would work that fast against that many people in such a HUGE space like a theatre is some sort of neurotoxin or nerve gas. And the fact that the death toll keeps climbing suggests that it was an agent meant to kill, not incapacitate, unless a specific antidote was given quickly. This is further suggested by the doctors who treated the hostages:
Authorities did not tell medical officials what type of gas they pumped into the theater, chief Moscow doctor Andrei Seltsovsky said.
Seltsovsky said doctors were familiar with the general category of the gas, which causes people to lose consciousness and can be used to anesthetize surgical patients, but were not told its name.
And then there's this:
One doctor expressed frustration at the lack of information.
�I saw no gunshot wounds at all. Those who died had swallowed their vomit or their tongue or their hearts had stopped,� he told the Nezavisimaya Gazeta daily.
�If only we had known beforehand! If they had told us that we would be getting large numbers who had lost consciousness or heart failure, it might have been a bit different.�
It has been suggested that this is the gas that was used, which is not specifically banned by the Chemical Warfare Convention.
Amazing how Russia will move to block the US resolution before the UN dealing with Iraq, and then do something like this, killing more of their own people than terrorists. Exactly WHERE does their moral authority come from?
Russia tries to play both sides of the table: the describe the Chechnya situation as an international terrorism problem when they want international support/sympathy. But then it turns into an internal "civil war" problem when they want to act in a unilateral fashion.
Posted by Neal Mauldin at October 28, 2002 10:43 AM | TrackBackI confess that I don't know much about the Russian/Chechen situtation, I didn't really follow the news on it. But the Russian habit of double speak isn't surprising. Maybe I still have a lingering prejudice from the the cold war, in as I don't put any faith in their ability to be forthright. I think you're right about their trying to have it both ways. I yield the moral high ground to no one, if the Russians want it, they need to prove their case, just as we do.
What knowledge I have of chemical agents is way out of date, and then only of the more lethal types. It would appear that the way they handled the use of gas was ill advised at best. It plays into the sterotype of Russians being hamfisted, and clumsy with the use of force.
Posted by: puggs on October 29, 2002 08:05 AMwath is realy the surprise here? that russia is a double-speaker liar? well, whe know another one, the USA, they signed the Chemical Warfare Convention and yet they still have large quantities of smallpox bacteria and loads of GB gas(sarin).
they prey on others for their oil, pretending it's all for peace and to rid the world of chemical weapons and meanwhile they keep on developing new biochem weapons designed to fight the ultimate war.
russia killed more inocents than terrorists? so what? in afganistan there was 5 times more civilians killed than there was taliban wariors, by US bombs.
be serious
as for chechnya, is exactly like the USA, they try to promote international suport in all matters but then they go on saying they reserve them selves the right to do what ever they want
wath is realy the surprise here? that russia is a double-speaker liar? well, whe know another one, the USA, they signed the Chemical Warfare Convention and yet they still have large quantities of smallpox bacteria and loads of GB gas(sarin).
they prey on others for their oil, pretending it's all for peace and to rid the world of chemical weapons and meanwhile they keep on developing new biochem weapons designed to fight the ultimate war.
russia killed more inocents than terrorists? so what? in afganistan there was 5 times more civilians killed than there was taliban wariors, by US bombs.
be serious
as for chechnya, is exactly like the USA, they try to promote international suport in all matters but then they go on saying they reserve them selves the right to do what ever they want
fuck the USA!
Posted by: gdg on January 30, 2003 11:00 AMfuck bush and blair...well, they probably do it to each other all the time!
Posted by: vxzv on January 30, 2003 11:01 AMThe agent used against the Chechen terrorists at the Moscow theatre was carfentanyl, a synthetic opium analog ("opioid") that is effective at low microgram doses. It is a veterenary anaesthetic used against large species such as elephants. From a Western special operations and hostage-rescue point of view it is not a good choice because of the relatively small difference between ED50 and LD50, that is, effective dose and lethan dose for 50% of subjects. That the Russian government did not appreciate this fact, or give a damn, ought not to surprise anyone in or out of the CIS.
No, carfentanyl is not covered by CWC or the Australian Group, because it is not a "chemical weapon". No riot control agents (RCAs) are covered by the CWC. The safer incapacitants available to Western hostage rescue teams are not covered by CWC, with the exception of the obsolete psychotomimetic incapacitant agent BZ, which NATO has abandoned anyway as too unpredictible, and the US has destroyed or is destroying its BZ stockpile.
The preferred agent for rescues like that theatre is a compound which induces orthostatic hypotension, i.e., low blood pressure, so one is obliged to sit or lie down and any exertion will cause blackout. This agent's chemical nature is still classified, but it is also not covered by CWC.
Fentanyls including carfentanyl, are covered by the various narcotics conventions and DEA-type "schedules". Their precursors are highly monitored. Anyone attempting to prepare the more potent forms, would likely fatally self-intoxicate just by being in the same room with this stuff. A little dab WILL do you - as the Brylcream ads used to say.
Posted by: Sauron on August 21, 2003 06:15 AMThe agent used against the Chechen terrorists at the Moscow theatre was carfentanyl, a synthetic opium analog ("opioid") that is effective at low microgram doses. It is a veterenary anaesthetic used against large species such as elephants. From a Western special operations and hostage-rescue point of view it is not a good choice because of the relatively small difference between ED50 and LD50, that is, effective dose and lethan dose for 50% of subjects. That the Russian government did not appreciate this fact, or give a damn, ought not to surprise anyone in or out of the CIS.
No, carfentanyl is not covered by CWC or the Australian Group, because it is not a "chemical weapon". No riot control agents (RCAs) are covered by the CWC. The safer incapacitants available to Western hostage rescue teams are not covered by CWC, with the exception of the obsolete psychotomimetic incapacitant agent BZ, which NATO has abandoned anyway as too unpredictible, and the US has destroyed or is destroying its BZ stockpile.
The preferred agent for rescues like that theatre is a compound which induces orthostatic hypotension, i.e., low blood pressure, so one is obliged to sit or lie down and any exertion will cause blackout. This agent's chemical nature is still classified, but it is also not covered by CWC.
Fentanyls including carfentanyl, are covered by the various narcotics conventions and DEA-type "schedules". Their precursors are highly monitored. Anyone attempting to prepare the more potent forms, would likely fatally self-intoxicate just by being in the same room with this stuff. A little dab WILL do you - as the Brylcream ads used to say.
Posted by: on August 21, 2003 06:19 AM