riddle@ut-sally.UUCP (Prentiss Riddle) (12/20/83)
A couple of years back, when the Reagan administration first started
publicizing its evidence of the Soviet use of yellow rain in Southeast Asia,
I heard a fascinating interview on NPR with the chemist on whose work their
findings were based. The link between yellow rain and the Soviets was an
intriguing one -- the particular poison involved was discovered in the 19th
century by Russian scientists; it was originally a by-product of (I believe)
fungi which grew on wheat buried under snow. When a premature snowfall
ruined a wheat harvest, Russian peasants who dug up the frozen wheat in
midwinter would occasionally die a mysterious death. Russian chemists had
long been the main scientists concerned with the substance, and there was no
more tell-tale poison the Soviets could have chosen to turn into a chemical
weapon.
However, after the chemist had explained all of this and countered allegations
being made at the time that the Soviet link was a phony one, the interviewer
brought up the subject of napalm. The chemist calmly described its effects,
just as he had done for yellow rain. When asked whether he saw a resemblance
between the two, he said, oh yes -- in fact, he considered the use of napalm to
be a more repugnant crime than the use of yellow rain, since its victims die
much more horribly.
No, it wouldn't surprise me if the Soviets are using yellow rain in
Afghanistan. I wouldn't trust CIA reports alone, since by all accounts the
truth-to-lie ratio in the CIA's public statements is absurdly small, but if
there is corroborating evidence I'm quite prepared to believe it. But since
we have routinely used chemical weapons which are as bad or worse, I see
nothing but hypocrisy in an administration which condemns yellow rain but is
unapologetic about our similar actions in Viet Nam.
----
Prentiss Riddle
{ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!riddle