We don't know these are Iraqi shells do we? could have been brought in from anywhere as theres been plenty of time. Russia for one has huge stockpiles with poor security out in the middle of nowhere. On the radio this morning a few guys arrested in the Ukraine trying to sell radioactive stuff. Easy to jump to conclusions on this one.
Well, they are starting to find WMD in Iraq.
- Thread starter TooManyWheels
- Start date
- Status
WMDs have already been used in the US; the anthrax during 9/11 which was apparently some right wing nut as it was identified as a government strain and primarily Democrats were targeted. They caught the right wing nut in Texas with the cyanide bomb material before he could use it.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=522408
Still, it could be the tip of the iceberg that justified the requests of the U.N. weapons inspectors for more time to look.
Sounds to me to be similar to the findings of WMD in the USA over the last couple of years.....Stuff that fell through the cracks during the round-up and clean-up.
Still, it could be the tip of the iceberg that justified the requests of the U.N. weapons inspectors for more time to look.
Mystic - No, I don't have expertise in chemicals or weapons. But you might appreciate the following from weapons inspector Ron Manley, at link http://www.opendemocracy.net/articles/ViewPopUpArticle.jsp?id=9&articleId=1529
At this moment I would like – as a professional weapons inspector and someone deeply concerned with the complete eradication of chemical and biological weapons from the world stage, someone in short with no stake in the political battles that are raging around this issue – to examine the ISG report from a dispassionate, objective position. What new information does it actually provide us about Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons and their associated research and development programmes?
Needle in the haystack or elephant in the fridge?
In 1991, following the first Gulf war, I was in charge of the technical United Nations Special Commission (Unscom) team sent to Iraq to destroy Saddam’s chemical weapons arsenal. Between 1991 and 1994 we in Unscom undertook the tough task of scouring the country for chemical weapons, and also faced daunting piles of official documents, and the difficulties with interviewing reluctant personnel. Although we were ultimately very successful at eliminating Saddam’s chemical stockpile – as the ISG report shows – it was, nevertheless, a difficult and time-consuming task.
Iraq is a large country and the ISG has been operating there for only about three months. The ISG, with approximately 1,400 personnel, is much larger than either Unscom or the later United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (Unmovic) operations were, but like its predecessors it has to carry out its task under very difficult conditions. Even after his regime has fallen, establishing the extent and details of Saddam’s chemical and biological weapon programmes continues to be a complex and painstakingly slow project.
Some have made political capital out of the fact that ISG team leader David Kay stresses the interim nature of this report. Such a claim, it is said, favours the pro-war lobby’s political agenda by suggesting that there is more to find than has been found. Nevertheless, in my professional judgement, Kay is right to emphasise this point, and we should bear the provisional nature of these findings in mind in what follows.
Saddam had intention but no actual chemical weapons
The most important and definitive finding in the report is that if there were any significant stocks of chemical weapons in Iraq prior to the 2003 campaign they would have been manufactured before 1991 and, therefore, almost certainly, ineffective because of decomposition.
The report says:
“Information found to date suggests that Iraq’s large-scale capability to develop, produce, and fill new CW [chemical weapons] munitions was reduced – if not entirely destroyed – during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of UN sanctions and UN inspections.”
Iraq’s approach to the production of chemical weapons has historically been to produce and fill the chemical agent into munitions shortly before they were required for use. While Iraq is known to have carried out research into the development of stabilisers for its chemical agents, no evidence has been uncovered that they produced stabilised agent on a large scale and none of the many chemical weapons sampled by Unscom between 1991 and 1998 were found to contain stabilised agent.
It therefore follows that with the exception of those containing mustard gas (which has a much longer shelf-life), the chemical agent in any Iraqi chemical weapons, filled before 1991, will have decomposed and ceased to be effective long before 2003.
Iraqi mustard gas was of very high quality and, therefore, even unstabilised, it could still have a relatively long shelf-life. Analysis undertaken by Unscom, however, showed that Iraqi mustard gas was prone to undergo polymerisation over time, thus reducing its effectiveness. Even pre-1991 Iraqi chemical munitions that were filled with mustard gas, if used against an armoured and protected force, therefore, were likely to have proved relatively ineffective.
While the possibility remains that some chemical munitions may eventually be found in Iraq, the ISG interim report leads to the inevitable conclusion that there were no military significant stocks of chemical weapons in Iraq by 2003.
[ May 17, 2004, 10:32 PM: Message edited by: TooManyWheels ]
At this moment I would like – as a professional weapons inspector and someone deeply concerned with the complete eradication of chemical and biological weapons from the world stage, someone in short with no stake in the political battles that are raging around this issue – to examine the ISG report from a dispassionate, objective position. What new information does it actually provide us about Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons and their associated research and development programmes?
Needle in the haystack or elephant in the fridge?
In 1991, following the first Gulf war, I was in charge of the technical United Nations Special Commission (Unscom) team sent to Iraq to destroy Saddam’s chemical weapons arsenal. Between 1991 and 1994 we in Unscom undertook the tough task of scouring the country for chemical weapons, and also faced daunting piles of official documents, and the difficulties with interviewing reluctant personnel. Although we were ultimately very successful at eliminating Saddam’s chemical stockpile – as the ISG report shows – it was, nevertheless, a difficult and time-consuming task.
Iraq is a large country and the ISG has been operating there for only about three months. The ISG, with approximately 1,400 personnel, is much larger than either Unscom or the later United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (Unmovic) operations were, but like its predecessors it has to carry out its task under very difficult conditions. Even after his regime has fallen, establishing the extent and details of Saddam’s chemical and biological weapon programmes continues to be a complex and painstakingly slow project.
Some have made political capital out of the fact that ISG team leader David Kay stresses the interim nature of this report. Such a claim, it is said, favours the pro-war lobby’s political agenda by suggesting that there is more to find than has been found. Nevertheless, in my professional judgement, Kay is right to emphasise this point, and we should bear the provisional nature of these findings in mind in what follows.
Saddam had intention but no actual chemical weapons
The most important and definitive finding in the report is that if there were any significant stocks of chemical weapons in Iraq prior to the 2003 campaign they would have been manufactured before 1991 and, therefore, almost certainly, ineffective because of decomposition.
The report says:
“Information found to date suggests that Iraq’s large-scale capability to develop, produce, and fill new CW [chemical weapons] munitions was reduced – if not entirely destroyed – during Operations Desert Storm and Desert Fox, 13 years of UN sanctions and UN inspections.”
Iraq’s approach to the production of chemical weapons has historically been to produce and fill the chemical agent into munitions shortly before they were required for use. While Iraq is known to have carried out research into the development of stabilisers for its chemical agents, no evidence has been uncovered that they produced stabilised agent on a large scale and none of the many chemical weapons sampled by Unscom between 1991 and 1998 were found to contain stabilised agent.
It therefore follows that with the exception of those containing mustard gas (which has a much longer shelf-life), the chemical agent in any Iraqi chemical weapons, filled before 1991, will have decomposed and ceased to be effective long before 2003.
Iraqi mustard gas was of very high quality and, therefore, even unstabilised, it could still have a relatively long shelf-life. Analysis undertaken by Unscom, however, showed that Iraqi mustard gas was prone to undergo polymerisation over time, thus reducing its effectiveness. Even pre-1991 Iraqi chemical munitions that were filled with mustard gas, if used against an armoured and protected force, therefore, were likely to have proved relatively ineffective.
While the possibility remains that some chemical munitions may eventually be found in Iraq, the ISG interim report leads to the inevitable conclusion that there were no military significant stocks of chemical weapons in Iraq by 2003.
[ May 17, 2004, 10:32 PM: Message edited by: TooManyWheels ]
I KNOW that the weapons stored at the PDA a few miles from where I live are still dangerous. There is a lot of security surrounding those weapons and lots of detection equipment for detecting leaks. There are procedures in case there is a leak. Some of the mustard rounds there are very old but they can and will kill. Anybody who tells me that those rounds are not still dangerous is not worth listening to. Everybody agrees that the rounds stored there are still dangerous-they are arguing over the best and safest method of disposal.
I know that sarin binary nerve agent can be stored safely in a weapon such as an artillery round. It was designed to be safe to handle by making it into a binary weapon. It is not especially dangerous until the binary components are combined.
Anybody claiming that there were no chemical rounds in Iraq now have to explain a mustard gas round and a sarin nerve gas round. Two apparently unmarked rounds. The terrorists probably were not even aware of what they had when these two rounds were converted into roadside bombs. Or at least hopefully they did not know. I am not a mathematician but the odds of terrorists just happening to pick out the last two chemical rounds in Iraq from among all the thousands upon thousands of rounds is probably enormous. There are surely more such rounds. Perhaps the terrorists even know where to find them although they don't seem to know how to use them.
Dying from chemical weapons is extremely unpleasant. I for one do not want to see thousands of Americans in some city dying such deaths. It matters little if Bush or Kerry is the next president of the United States. We must defend our country from such attacks. We must prevent countries such as Israel from suffering such attacks. What if Israel responded with nuclear weapons?
Go to a library and check out what happened to soldiers affected by chemical weapons in World War I. Examine the photographs of Kurds killed by chemical weapons. Now ask yourself if you want for anybody to die like that. Ask yourself if God would really want for anybody to die like that.
I know that sarin binary nerve agent can be stored safely in a weapon such as an artillery round. It was designed to be safe to handle by making it into a binary weapon. It is not especially dangerous until the binary components are combined.
Anybody claiming that there were no chemical rounds in Iraq now have to explain a mustard gas round and a sarin nerve gas round. Two apparently unmarked rounds. The terrorists probably were not even aware of what they had when these two rounds were converted into roadside bombs. Or at least hopefully they did not know. I am not a mathematician but the odds of terrorists just happening to pick out the last two chemical rounds in Iraq from among all the thousands upon thousands of rounds is probably enormous. There are surely more such rounds. Perhaps the terrorists even know where to find them although they don't seem to know how to use them.
Dying from chemical weapons is extremely unpleasant. I for one do not want to see thousands of Americans in some city dying such deaths. It matters little if Bush or Kerry is the next president of the United States. We must defend our country from such attacks. We must prevent countries such as Israel from suffering such attacks. What if Israel responded with nuclear weapons?
Go to a library and check out what happened to soldiers affected by chemical weapons in World War I. Examine the photographs of Kurds killed by chemical weapons. Now ask yourself if you want for anybody to die like that. Ask yourself if God would really want for anybody to die like that.
I see negligible correlation between the danger of storing chemical weapons near civilians, and the fact that old munitions were discovered on the other side of the world.
We know for a fact that Hussein had chemical munitions at one time, because we either helped or allowed him to procure them. We knew that in the late 80's, the early 90's, the late 90's, and when we declared war. We didn't declare war on the basis of him still having something we ourselves helped him get.
We declared war because we were told that he had nuclear weapons that he could deploy in 45 minutes. But even though that has been disproven, we are now supposed to believe that it is all justified because we found a munition that might have been built by Iraq sometime back when we knew they were building these things?
And don't forget that these shells may well have come from Northern Iraq, which was controlled by Hussein's enemies, not Saddam. For all we know, it could have been left over from his well publicised conflict with the Kurds.
As for Israel, it is playing a reckless game of chicken, knowing it is protected by the U.S. I believe the best way to settle the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is to start dividing our billions of aid dollars equally between the two countries. Somehow I think Israel might find some better methods of conflict resolution than bombing and bulldozing everything in site, and the Palestinians would have some weapons that required less personal investment.
[ May 18, 2004, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: TooManyWheels ]
We know for a fact that Hussein had chemical munitions at one time, because we either helped or allowed him to procure them. We knew that in the late 80's, the early 90's, the late 90's, and when we declared war. We didn't declare war on the basis of him still having something we ourselves helped him get.
We declared war because we were told that he had nuclear weapons that he could deploy in 45 minutes. But even though that has been disproven, we are now supposed to believe that it is all justified because we found a munition that might have been built by Iraq sometime back when we knew they were building these things?
And don't forget that these shells may well have come from Northern Iraq, which was controlled by Hussein's enemies, not Saddam. For all we know, it could have been left over from his well publicised conflict with the Kurds.
As for Israel, it is playing a reckless game of chicken, knowing it is protected by the U.S. I believe the best way to settle the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is to start dividing our billions of aid dollars equally between the two countries. Somehow I think Israel might find some better methods of conflict resolution than bombing and bulldozing everything in site, and the Palestinians would have some weapons that required less personal investment.
[ May 18, 2004, 12:03 AM: Message edited by: TooManyWheels ]
Two chemical weapons artillery rounds have been found in Iraq. Both apparently were being used as roadside bombs. It is unknown if the terrorists knew what they had or not.
A mustard gas round was found about two weeks ago. The agent inside had become inert because of improper storage.
Recently a much more advanced sarin nerve gas binary round was round near the Bagdad airport. When the round was exploded it did no harm because binary agent must be combined to release nerve agent.
Both of these rounds are being studied. It is believed that the mustard gas round may be one of some 500 or so mustard gas rounds that Saddam Hussein never accounted for. The sarin nerve gas round is much more advanced.
This stuff may be spread about among the tremendous number of artillery rounds and other weapons and explosives that are to be found in Iraq. There is no knowing how many more such chemical weapon rounds may exist. There apparently were no special markings on these WMD rounds. Saddam Hussein was trying to hide his WMD after all and spreading these weapons among conventional weapons was one way to hide them.
So far just two rounds but nobody knows how many more may be laying around. WMD are being found.
A mustard gas round was found about two weeks ago. The agent inside had become inert because of improper storage.
Recently a much more advanced sarin nerve gas binary round was round near the Bagdad airport. When the round was exploded it did no harm because binary agent must be combined to release nerve agent.
Both of these rounds are being studied. It is believed that the mustard gas round may be one of some 500 or so mustard gas rounds that Saddam Hussein never accounted for. The sarin nerve gas round is much more advanced.
This stuff may be spread about among the tremendous number of artillery rounds and other weapons and explosives that are to be found in Iraq. There is no knowing how many more such chemical weapon rounds may exist. There apparently were no special markings on these WMD rounds. Saddam Hussein was trying to hide his WMD after all and spreading these weapons among conventional weapons was one way to hide them.
So far just two rounds but nobody knows how many more may be laying around. WMD are being found.
Lets have a small history lesson here.When the land was set aside to allow Israel to be a nation again,the Palestinians were offered statehood too.Because the Palestinians could not have all of the land,they wanted none of it.The Palestinians could have a homeland today if they had not had so much hate for Israel.They wanted all or nothing and that is what they have.While I may not agree with all that the country of Israel does,it does stand to reason that when a group of people want to destroy you at all costs,you will defend with out prejudice.This same philosophy is what the US is facing.Many Muslims want the US destroyed regardless of cost,we have to react to that and it may lead to defending our country without prejudice,just as Israel.Israel is surrounded by those that want it destroyed and Israel must defend its people.The US is the only true friend Israel has and the US should continue to support Israel.While the US may not agree with all that Israel does,there is also the fact that Israel is as I said surrounded by those that want it destroyed and force is sometimes the only way to survive.
Who said Iraq was able to hit with nuclear weapons in 45 minutes? Nobody even said Saddam had actual nuclear weapons. I think some revisionist history is going on here. As for the Palestinians, they have made their own bed and I hope they enjoy lying in it. They are lucky Israel doesn't go to town in one of their daycares with a piece of rebar and a fork.
A report I saw last night said the shells are nothing more than left over Iran/Iraq munitions. Looked old. There are still some of those lying around all over the country. WMD it ain't.
Iraq under Saddam Hussein never accounted for some 500 mustard gas rounds. And Iraq also did not account for something like 100 metric TONS of sarin gas. Iraq under UN sanctions was supposed to get rid of all of its chemical and biological weapons, and equipment and raw material for creating a nuclear arsenal.
- Status
Similar threads
