Talk:Iraqi chemical weapons program

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Middle East

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion not met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Middle Eastern military history task force

Iraq

	Iraq portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IraqWikipedia:WikiProject IraqTemplate:WikiProject IraqIraq articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Neutraility

I think there are a number of problems with this article. First, I am in two minds whether it actually deserves an article rather than being part of the main article Iran-Iraq war. Beyond that the article seems to be POV-pushing and does not seem encyclopaedic to me. Unfortunately I do not know enough about this subject to do the required maintenance. BlinkingBlimey (talk) 16:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality 2

This article is extremely biased, most obviously in the paragraph 'Use', which is clearly Iranian propaganda. Rather than giving a description of usage and events, it tries to convey the doubtful successes of Iranian troops, with some sentences starting with "Our troops...", or a variation thereof. Furthermore, the article is infested with spelling mistakes.

I recommend deletion and addition of a bias-warning at the top of the page.152.78.157.96 (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)APJT[reply]

After reading the article the first time, I contacted the German 'Bundesamt für Wirtschaft', inquiring about the validity of the claims made in this article concerning the construction of a Iraqi chemical weapons facility in Iraq in early 1980. The answer was negative. The German ‘Aussenhandelsgesetz’ (foreign trade law) outlaws the sale of poison gas factories. As a matter of fact, so I was told, not one such factory exists even in Germany. Talking to the Karl Kolbe GmbH, I was told that Kolbe delivered a pesticide factory to Iraq, the same factory model the firm also produced for other customers; but a poison gas factory was certainly not delivered, so I was told. Maybe this accusation is from the same sources that claimed Iraq has poison gas factories during the years when the UN inspectors where in Iraq. Later the world learned that this claim was untrue. But we know that US companies had anthrax and mustard gas to Saddam Hussein’s delivered during the Iraq-Iranian war, with the agreement of President Reagan. According to the German 'Bundesamt für Wirtschaft' it is also not true, that German firms sent 1,027 tons of precursors of mustard gas, sarin, tabun, and tear gasses. This is outlawed by the German “foreign trade law”. Such deals never took place. If there would be proof, the people responsible would face a criminal charge against them. So please present conclusive evidence for your claim or eliminate this article. All figures and descriptions concerning the engagement of German firms are false. These passages are a hoax. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.159.249.62 (talk) 02:05, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sources added. Deals did take place; 3 people were convicted in Germany in the 1990s. Details, however, need clarifying. Podiaebba (talk) 05:49, 16 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical Weapons Recovered and Remaining in Iraq

Would an expanded version of Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction#Chemical_Weapons_Recovered be an appropriate section of this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhults7791 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

should be mentioned that USA sent Saddam chemical weapon components

https://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq-conflict-the-historical-background-/us-and-british-support-for-huss-regime.html <-- Here is the source from a credible site, see for yourself. It should be mentioned that Saddam got components to build chemical weapons from the CIA. 104.34.250.89 (talk) 03:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. Thank you for that. Now included. ★NealMcB★ (talk) 04:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Iraqi chemical weapons program. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6TaZsIOnB?url=http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/documents/technical_documents/s-2006-701-munitions.pdf to http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/new/documents/technical_documents/s-2006-701-munitions.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]