Biological Warfare Defense
The following section, describing the
types, dissemination, and defensive measures
against biological agents, is quoted verbatim
from a United States Marine Corps Institute
document, Nuclear and Chemical Operations, MCI
7711B, used in the Command and
Staff College's nonresident program. It is
clear from this document that the Department
of Defense recognizes both the threat and U.S.
vulnerability to biological weapons. This
document also outlines the Department's
understanding of what actions should be taken
in the event that a biological weapon has been
or is suspected to have been employed.
"Biological agents cannot be detected by the human senses. A person could become a casualty before he is aware he has been exposed to a biological agent. An aerosol or mist of biological agent is borne in the air. These agents can silently and effectively attack man, animals, plants, and in some cases, material. Agents can be tailored for a specific type of target.
Methods of using antipersonnel agents undoubtedly vary so that no uniform pattern of employment or operation is evident. It is likely that agents will be used in combinations so that the disease symptoms will confuse diagnosis and interfere with proper treatment. It is also probable that biological agents would be used in heavy concentrations to insure a high percentage of infection in the target area. The use of such concentrations could result in the breakdown of individual immunity because the large number of micro-organisms entering the body could overwhelm the natural body defenses.
Types of Biological Agents
Different antipersonnel agents require
varying periods of time before they take
effect,
and the periods of time for which they will
incapacitate a person also vary. Most of
these
diseases having antipersonnel employment
potential are found among a group of diseases
that
are naturally transmitted between animals and
man. Mankind is highly vulnerable to them
since he has little contact with animals in
today's urban society. The micro-organisms of
possible use in warfare are found in four
naturally occurring groups -- the fungi,
bacteria,
rickettsiae, and viruses.
Dissemination of Biological Agents
Defensive Measures
The United States carries out research
aimed at improved means of detection of
biological agents and treatment and
immunization of personnel. Both of these are
essential
to biological defense.
Iraq's Experience in the Use of Chemical Warfare Agents
The fears and the precautions taken prior
to the Gulf War were not the product
of excessive hysteria. Five United Nations
reports have confirmed the use of chemical
warfare agents in the Iran-Iraq War. Use of
chemical weapons against both the Kurds
and Shiite Moslems within Iraq is well
documented. Press reports also document Iraqi
readiness to use these weapons against
Coalition forces during the Persian Gulf War.
In April 1993, two U.S. based human rights organizations confirmed that they had found residues of chemical weapons used by the Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein against Kurdish village in northern Iraq in 1988. These groups, Physicians for Human Rights and Human Rights Watch, said they had used advanced analytical techniques to discover the presence of mustard gas and the nerve gas Sarin. Those chemical weapons reportedly were dropped by aircraft on August 25, 1988 and killed four people in the Kurdish village of Birjinni. Testimony from survivors of the Birjinni bombing, who said victims of the raids died writhing and coughing blood, led to accusations that Iraq had gassed its own citizens as part of a campaign against rebellious Kurds that killed tens of thousands. This was the first time that scientists had been able to prove the use of chemical weapons, and especially a nerve gas, through the analysis of environmental residue acquired years after such an attack occurred.
Soil samples were gathered from the 1988 bombing sites and then delivered to a British laboratory. Chemists at Porton Down found traces of mustard gas and Sarin. Dr. Graham Pearson, director of the British Chemical and Biological Defense Establishment, verified these results and confirmed the samples were taken from bomb craters near the northern Iraqi village of Birjinni in June 1992. The byproducts of the breakdown of these poisons are so specific that they provide a "unique fingerprint" in chemical analysis that points directly to a poison gas attack.
An earlier attack had been reported on March 17, 1988 on the village of Halabja. Amnesty International reported that chemical weapons were used in an attack by Iraq, in which "some 5,000 Kurds were killed within an hour." A U.N. team sent to investigate the attack found evidence of chemical weapons, although they did not rule on who carried out the attack on the town, which had been occupied by Iran since mid-March.
On September 26, 1993, Shiite rebels living in the southern Iraqi marshlands reported an early morning shelling attack by Iraqi forces. The eyewitnesses, who spoke with a New York Times reporter, mentioned that the shells landed with a thud "and not the usual explosion" sending up white clouds. The artillery attack was followed by a ground assault by Iraqi troops who were equipped with gas masks.
A Shiite rebel claimed that upon entering one of the Iraqi armored personnel carriers they found battle orders calling for a chemical attack. Rebel leaders provided a copy of the captured orders. Written in Arabic on the twenty-sixth of September, the orders, numbered 1-15, instructed the Iraqi soldiers to use chemical weapons to "retake the village" and that "each soldier must be instructed on how to respond during the chemical attack."
After the attack, some villagers returned for their belongings, but there was nothing left. They discovered that trees and plants had withered and yellowed. Furthermore, "the cats, the dogs, the birds and even the water snakes had died. But for some reason the victims had been removed by the troops. We saw no bodies."
In November 1993, a nine member U.N. inspection team arrived to take samples from the area of the alleged chemical attack. The results of the inspection were inconclusive.
It is also suspected that Iraq may have used biological agents (mycotoxins) during the 1984 attack on Majnoon Island, during the Iran-Iraq War, and in 1988 against the Kurds (cholera and typhus). However, no medical verification of Iraqi use of biological warfare agents yet exists.
The above documented instances of chemical weapons use (and suspected use) against Iranians, Kurds, and Shiites undermine Department of Defense assertions that Iraq may not have used these weapons against Coalition forces because they "feared contamination of their own men." Marine Brigadier General Richard Neil said that prisoner debriefings of Persian Gulf War EPWs had "yielded the impression that the Iraqis were not comfortable operating in a chemical environment...and...Iraqi soldiers had poor chemical protection equipment of their own." Lt. General Thomas Kelly stated in a press briefing that "the Iraqi Army was very uncomfortable, we are finding out from the POWs, about the use of chemical weapons because they are not familiar with it." However, as the preceding paragraphs make clear, the Iraqi Army had operational experience with the use of these weapons, unlike their American counterparts.
Gulf War Syndrome: The Case for Chemical/Biological Agent Exposure
As the preceding sections of this report make clear, the
Government of Iraq
possessed a large and sophisticated chemical and biological weapons
production complex.
Iraq's army, organized and equipped along Soviet lines, also
appeared to employ Soviet
chemical warfare doctrine, which advocated the use of mixed agent
warfare. Iraq used
these weapons against its own people in the 1980's, and possibly
again in 1993. It should
not be surprising that Baghdad would also use every weapon in its
arsenal against the
much more serious threat to its own survival posed by the massed
Coalition forces.
Additionally, the release of chemical and biological agents as a
result of Coalition
bombing should have been expected by the Allied forces, based upon
their own doctrine
regarding the dispersal of chemical agents.
Several theories have been put forward to explain the cause(s) of Gulf War Syndrome. Most of them lack credibility because they do not explain transmission of similar symptoms across a broad and dissimilar population whose only commonality was the service of a family member in the Persian Gulf theater of operations or contact with materiel returned from that venue. Meanwhile, the passage of over three years since the appearance of the first symptoms, and the inability of the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs to find a cause, suggests that the illnesses may be caused by something that these institutions have not examined. Further, the absence of credible and verifiable published scientific research on the syndrome by the these agencies, providing specifics of the types of laboratory research that have been conducted, case histories, and methodologies used, leaves each interested scientist in the dark as to what diagnostic processes have been attempted and which have failed.
There is a growing body of evidence, outlined in detail below, which supports the claims of Gulf War veterans that exposure to chemical and/or biological warfare agents may be the cause of the complex of illnesses they currently suffer. There appear to be four primary sources of exposure:
In addition, there appear to be two secondary sources of exposure:
Hundreds of Gulf War veterans have been interviewed by the Committee staff. The events cited below are included because the veterans reporting them could remember approximately when they occurred, or because there were multiple independent confirming sources. A map showing the location of these events appears at the end of this section.
Continue Reading -- go to Chapter 2