Why Don’t We Use Chemical Weapons Anymore?

Ah, here's the part of the article you are referring to:

> Now, I want to leave aside, for the purpose of this essay, the use of lethal chemical agents in genocide, the use of non-lethal chemical agents entirely, as well as the use of things like defoliants that were not intended to cause casualties (even if they did). Those things are all important, but if we get into talking about them, we will never get anywhere.

I read up to that part, where he asserted that chemical weapons don't work well militarily (which I understand). But afterwards he appeared to explain this in great detail, and I tailed off, switched to skimming (seemed to already make sense to me, and it was a long article). I did miss the part above, where he left police use out of scope for his article.

But isn't it worth a thread or two here? Maybe from a couple different angles, now that I think more about it - effectiveness, harm, correlation with other things, alternatives, are there countries that don't do this, etc. I didn't see anything yet when I posted my comment above. Maybe too off topic?

EDIT: fixed grammar typos

Perhaps you are being downmodded for the off-the-cuff sounding statistic? But, your general point stands. Control of messaging is extremely powerful. One could argue that Casey achieved success decades ago E.g., the majority of Americans believed ?still do? that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and that the US war in Iraq wasn't just an opportunistic war of aggression to serve American oligarchs. And, the majority of those misled Americans are not horrible people.

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false."

- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

I think the media issue can be resolved by media that is not affiliated with corporations, rich benefactors or government. E.g., MI5 used to vet BBC employees to ensure no one on the left would have any editorial influence (MI5 had veto power over hires). And, the CIA had/has journalists on their payroll at major US publications to ensure "proper" messaging. Advertisers can strongly influence what is reported e.g., an oil company threatens to cancel ad campaign if media outlet reports on their suppression of climate research. A single rich man can set the direction of a media organization-- including having their organizations spread known falsehoods in support of their personal ideologies e.g., Murdoch or Hearst.

A model that mostly[1] works is that of listener support (not the PBS model with government and corporate funding and also begging listeners for money, but rather the Pacifica model which accepts no funds from anyone but listeners.

Pacifica has a few programs that are usually quite good, like "Letters and Politics" (also available as podcasts linked from kpfa.org). They do have their share of dreck, though. And, being a bunch of lefties (the network was founded by pacifists who met while in US prison for protesting a war) they are equally critical of lefties like themselves, the mainly center-right to right "liberals"/Democrats and the far-right to extreme far-right Republicans (left right spectrum here is based on where the policies, of these groups, fit within the spectrum of world politics).

[1]Pacifica's New York station self destructed after the board was taken over by a group of listeners into all manner of woo, so Pacifica's model still has some issues.

GP isn't wrong though. Tear gas of the type used by civilian police forces against the general population is illegal to use in war. It is a war crime to use it.

Tear gas was developed by France and used on the battle field in WWI before being used for "crowd control".

https://www.kumc.edu/school-of-medicine/academics/department....

"Riot control agents, including tear gas and other gases which have debilitating but non-permanent effects as a means of warfare, is prohibited in armed conflict under the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention."

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v2_rul...

And, if a government's leaders feel they need to gas, assault with sound cannons / water cannons / pepper spray, use flash bang grenades, beat with clubs, and/or fire rubber coated steel bullets at their population, it might be taken as a hint that the government involved has lost the consent of the governed.

Scientists and chemists around the world are going to be stunned to hear that phosphorus isn't a chemical.

>White phosphorus munitions are weapons that use one of the common allotropes of the chemical element phosphorus.

>In munitions, white phosphorus burns readily with flames of 800 °C (1,472 °F).[74][75] Incandescent particles from weapons using powdered white phosphorus as their payload produce extensive partial- and full-thickness burns, as will any attempt to handle burning submunitions without protective equipment. Phosphorus burns carry an increased risk of mortality due to the absorption of phosphorus into the body through the burned area with prolonged contact, which can result in liver, heart and kidney damage, and in some cases multiple organ failure.[76] White phosphorus particles continue to burn until completely consumed or starved of oxygen. In the case of weapons using felt-impregnated submunitions, incomplete combustion may occur resulting in up to 15% of the WP content remaining unburned. Such submunitions can prove hazardous as they are capable of spontaneous re-ignition if crushed by personnel or vehicles.[77] In some cases, injury is limited to areas of exposed skin because the smaller WP particles do not burn completely through personal clothing before being consumed.

>Due to the pyrophoric nature of WP, penetrating injuries are immediately treated by smothering the wound using water, damp cloth or mud, isolating it from oxygen until fragments can be removed: military forces will typically do so using a bayonet or knife where able. Bicarbonate solution is applied to the wound to neutralise any build-up of phosphoric acid, followed by removal of any remaining visible fragments: these are easily observed as they are luminescent in dark surroundings. Surgical debridement around the wound is used to avoid fragments too small to detect causing later systemic failure, with further treatment proceeding as with a thermal burn.[77]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_munitions#Bur...

I called out the euphemism that hid an atrocity - not clear where you think I am doing that here?