In Syria, Deadliest Chemical Weapons Possibly Used
Observed symptoms in Syria in line with nerve agent, say experts
By Kate Seamons, Newser Staff
Posted Aug 22, 2013 8:48 AM CDT
This citizen journalism image provided by the Local Committee of Arbeen which has been authenticated based on its contents and other AP reporting, shows Syrian citizens trying to identify dead bodies,...   (AP Photo/Local Committee of Arbeen)

(Newser) – Experts are inferring what they can from the reports and videos leaking out of Syria in the wake of a possible chemical weapons attack, and what they're saying isn't good. The Washington Post explains that there are seven types of chemical weapons, the deadliest of which are nerve agents—and that's the type that may have been used, per a senior fellow with the Federation of American Scientists. He describes their effects: "There's muscle twitching. Then, as the muscle twitching gets more and more spasmodic, mucus comes out of the nose and mouth and you basically go into convulsions on the ground. People don’t survive this."

  • Speaking to der Spiegel, two experts point to those very symptoms. One says visible "nasal secretions" are in line with what one would expect from exposure to "potent organophosphates." Another cited "the way their muscles cramp up, first in various parts of the body, then eventually the entire body starts twitching," saying it would be a tough symptom to convincingly fake. Another thing that would be tough to convincingly fake: child victims.
  • Meanwhile, the international community is taking these reports seriously, with 37 countries—including the US, UK, France, and Turkey—calling for the UN team that's already on the ground to be dispatched to the site in question (their hotel is reportedly just a 15-minute drive away). But the BBC isn't holding its breath: The UN team had been authorized to investigate just three locations in the country, and security correspondent Frank Gardner describes the chance that they'll be granted access—in time—as "slim." The "in time" part matters, because, as Gardner explains, the traces of the gas will within days likely dissipate to the point where the UN team wouldn't be able to make a conclusive determination.
  • France has been quite outspoken on the subject, and Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius today asserted "there would have to be reaction with force in Syria from the international community" if chemical weapons were indeed used. However, he specifically said ground troops wouldn't be used, and didn't offer any further thoughts, reports the New York Times.

More From Newser
My Take on This Story
To report an error on this story,
notify our editors.
In Syria, Deadliest Chemical Weapons Possibly Used is...
Show results without voting
You Might Like
Showing 3 of 24 comments
Aug 23, 2013 5:45 AM CDT
I hope we have erased our "red line" in the sand. We still have no dam business involving our money, and our citizens in a civil war where either side will use chemicals and there is no real solution.... Just look at it as a way of eliminating muslim vermin. and whats the difference from killing by gas or killing by getting blown to pieces.
Aug 23, 2013 4:58 AM CDT
" This, after all, is the area controlled by the opposition. So a further problem arises with the demands Syrian government permit experts to visit the scene. Syrian government does not control the scene of the crime, if this crime is being committed. It is up to the rebels. Yet we see no attempt to press the rebels to cooperate. So in fact, it seems to be primarily to embarrass the Syrian government, to say, “Why don’t you let the experts go to the scene?” where the fact is they don’t control the scene and therefore could not guarantee their security or even possibly enable them to enter the area where these attacks are supposed to have taken place.” Does the Haig/Hollande/Obama Cerberus dog consider that this rebel use of chemical weapons, and the dramatisation of its effects, will succeed where the previous ones failed?
Aug 23, 2013 4:05 AM CDT
it'll be interesting to see what Obama does now. remember that "red line" he spoke of? the time is now for him to make a decision. or will he back-pedal??