Chemical weapons confirmed in Iraq
 

According to this article sarin&mustard gas were confirmed to have been found in Iraq.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html


Does this change your opinion on the Iraq war?

One shell? And no amount mustard gas listed? And the article said it hasn't been independantly confirmed yet.

"However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed. If confirmed, it would be the first finding of a banned weapon upon which the United States based its case for war. "


This has happen before shortly after the war and after the independant non field test came back it turned out not to be.

If it does come back that it is sarin then Bush has something to stand on when it comes to WMD's.

I myself would have to see them find alot more than a few shells filled with chemical weapons before I would say Bush's reason for war was justifed .

A) Why is this just a Bush thing?

B) First you say that it stands if they determine it is sarin, but then you say that it won't stand no matter what because it has to be "more than a few shells filled with chemical weapons". The two seem to conflict.

-Rudey

Well even one shell of sarin would help the Bush administration pr wise because one is better than nothing.

The needing more than one shell is my personal belief.

Where would the Iraqis get mustard gas and sarin? Maybe from what we gave them back in the early 80s when they were fighting Iran? Or not. They definitely need to find where this stuff came from.

Do you honestly believe that there is only one shell, and that this only shell with sarin would be used in a road side bombing? Zero shells is far more believable than one shell. Now that one has been found (and a NYT reporter on the Newshour on PBS just confirmed that it is real,) the question should be, "where is the rest?"

Oh there probably are some more. I doubt they will ever find the stock piles they claimed to have when Powell went to the UN before the war.

Colin Powell: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent."

edited to add quote from UN speach.

Well I never had a real problem with going into IRaq. If the administration wants to kill arabs and take over the country, thats ok with me.

I have problems with using things like WMD as an excuse to do it. Especially if we don't find any :p .

It insults our intellegence. Just tell us we are doing it because we can, and I am on board.

Its not right against wrong here, its us against them, and that should be simple enough for everyone to grasp.

James comment above regarding WMD's (not the comment about killing Arabs) is pretty much how I think on this issue.

Regarding the gas shell, the US Spokesgeneral (Kimmit, I beleive) said early on that the Army feels that this was a shell somehow left over from before the first Gulf War, and that the people who planted it probably had no idea that there was gas in it.

Nobody disputes that Saddam had WMD's back then. That does not mean that there are any in usable quantities now.

Proof needs to be a lot stronger than that. Sorry.

One shell does not a stockpile make....

More than likely it was detrius of a previous war (Iran or Gulf I), which of its self is not that damning, afterall more chemical shells have been turned up this year in France left over from WWI.

Which is what the General said -- even FOX reported it that way. Sort of.

How does one go about hiding 100-500 tons of chemical weapons? Furthermore, how is it that we haven't found them? We've bombed the hell out of Iraq and been pretty much everywhere, yet we still haven't found them. Doesn't sound like a conservative estimate to me.

One moves them to Syria and buries them where US troops aren't able to look.

What's not generally reported is that the contents of the mustard gas shell had already crystallized, rendering it useless. Mustard gas has a limited 'shelf life' if stored improperly.

hijack...


Mustard "gas" will not crystalize. Mustard is a thick, syrupy substance that will break down into hydrocholoric acid and thiodiglycol when sodium hydroxide and water are added. This process is called hydroloysis. Mustard is dependant on pH and moisture and can remain active up to three years in soil. Mustard will not decompose until reaching the temperature of 300-351 degrees F.

and others concluded the mustard gas was "stored improperly," which made the gas "ineffective." ~ very misleading statement. Optimal conditions might not have existed, however, mustard doesn't 'deactivate' itself. For instance, if the mustard is stored in cold conditions, it will remain a solid substance, thus decreasing exposure to anyone. If mustard is stored in hot conditions, it will liquify (think runny syrup) yet remain stable.

Sorry, I deal with the Chemical Warfare Agents on a daily basis and I wanted to correct what the article had implied.

end hijack

If they were there before and we and the UN have that documented and they are not there now, with no explanation that means Saddam got rid of them?

Saddam, a bloody dictator who would do anything to stay in power, wasn't willing to show UN inspectors for years where he got rid of these weapons?

-Rudey

In fairness, there's a lot of desert over there in which to hide even that amount of stuff. And, there are other countries who would probably help -- although I would hope that CIA or someone would have some information if it had been moved to another country. That kind of secret is pretty hard to keep. Not impossible, though.

I stand corrected... :)

They could very easily be buried in the dessert, like they were found after the 1991 Gulf War. Sattelites can't scan below sand.

That's true, but the movement that much stuff could probably have been noticed by satellites.

If we knew what to look for. That's a big if.

There a saying that if more than one person knows a secret, it isn't safe. It's hard to believe that these quantities could be moved in secret. But, again, not impossible.

We forgget that pretty girls can be bright and knowledgeable to, thanks fot reminding us Jadey28. ;)

I think Saddam was in a wierd postion, in order to stay in power he couildn't afford to look weak in front of his people. A weak dictator is a dead one.

So he postured himself into destruction.

We couldn't determine India and Pakistan's nuclear capabilities until they were tested. More than one person knew.

We still can't determine where North Korea maintains its nuclear weapons.

Information, little by little, trickles out about Iran's nuclear capabilities, but we still know nothing really about where it is kept and to what extent it has developed.

When Libya removed the veil of secrecy on its weapons program, we were taken by surprise on what was in there.

-Rudey
--Some secrets are very difficult to discover

All of your points are correct, but I would think that moving that much material would be easier to detect than static installations -- even nuke facilities.

Hey, speak for yourself. I married one!

Most of the rogue countries moved items around constantly. We can't determine where weapons are just by satellite.

-Rudey

Just because we can't see them or find them doesn't mean that there not out there.

Of course the reverse is true too....

Just because we can't see them or find any doesn't mean that they exist but are hidden.

The difference is that we knew they were there before. There is some context to this let's not forget.

-Rudey

True... most of the chemicals were supplied to Saddam in the 80's. But the storage life of many of the chemical weapons is around 15-20 years; after this period most of the weapons would be either inert or unstable... most.

Read up a few posts by Jadey who is a chemist that has prior work experience with these materials. She seems to indicate no.

-Rudey

Well yes Mustard gas can remain viable for a long time (it's why French are still so careful cleaning up stuff from WWI), as well as other weapons.... however some (such as Sarin) or biological weapons have higher storage requirements to maintain the "optimal" viability of the weapon... for example a lot of nerve agents are finicky, if stored improperly they can become very unpredicatable.... I'm not saying that the weapons become safe after a set period of time... what I am saying is that they lose their military effectiveness after this time period becuase of the unpredicatablity of the results and quality of the chemical materials (ie. you gotta open the thing up to see if it's still effective) or that the storage/delivery vector is no longer viable (ie. the shells rusted through, or seals have been comprimised).

I suggest people that are interested should look up articles on the problems that the US Army Corp of Engineers is having storing/disposing some of the Cold War stockpiles in the south and mid-west. I'll see if I can find some links or some of my old material from NCBW training...

Tests Confirm Sarin in Iraqi Artillery Shell
 

NEW YORK — Tests on an artillery shell that blew up in Iraq on Saturday confirm that it did contain an estimated three or four liters of the deadly nerve agent sarin (search), Defense Department officials told Fox News Tuesday.

"A little drop on your skin will kill you" in the binary form, said Ret. Air Force Col. Randall Larsen, founder of Homeland Security Associates. "So for those in immediate proximity, three liters is a lot," but he added that from a military standpoint, a barrage of shells with that much sarin in them would more likely be used as a weapon than one single shell.

The soldiers displayed "classic" symptoms of sarin exposure, most notably dilated pupils and nausea, officials said. The symptoms ran their course fairly quickly, however, and as of Tuesday the two had returned to duty.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120268,00.html

RACooper is correct. I am a bit more knowledgable about mustard, but I did some research at work on GB (sarin). Sarin is stable when pure ~ as RACooper mentioned, you have to open up the "container" in order to determine it's purity. Sarin stabilized with another chemical can be stored in steel containers for long periods of time at temperatures up to 70 degrees C, but unstablized materials tend to build-up pressure within a few weeks. Sarin will begin to attack tin, magnesium, cadmium-plated steel and some aluminum. Slightly attack copper, brass, and lead; practically no attack on 1020 steels, Inconel, and K-monel. (All information courtesy of Edgewood Chemical Biological Center Department of the Army, MSDS).

I am beginning to think that there might be a stockpile of WMDs somewhere underground in the Middle East. As we learned while hunting for Sadaam, there are several passage-ways to travel 'below' the surface of the land. It isn't difficult to create a mobile lab/storage area that can be moved from place to place. I'm sure we have searched high and low to find such things, but there are always places that people don't know about. I just hope we discover everything before it's too late.

Some "stockpiles" might be the ammo-dumps from the Iran/Iraq War... numerous chemical related stockpiles have been found in Iraq that relate to this period.... gas-masks, chemical suits, badly rusted mortars or shells. It would be interesting to see if a manufacture date would be released after examining the shells used recently by insurgents... i'm of the opinion that they dug up one of the dumps from the war.

Cavuto reported this last night. He said Bush KNOWS where they are-has known where they are. They are hoping once the Iraqi
govt is in place, they will demand their return.

Yes, these people probably stumbled upon a stock pile. Sadam had all the war heads painted so there wouldn't be a distinction between one filled with chemicals or your ordinary, everyday bomb.:rolleyes:

Does it REALLY matter WHEN the bombs were created? What matters is they were to be destroyed. They weren't. They are still deadly and pose a risk. The one that detonated was said to have enough to kill over a 1000 people. From what I UNDERSTAND (limited) it needed the spin of the launch to break the cylanders inside to mix prior to explosion. JADEY???

Yes, your right about the spinning... actually all (or most, don't know about copperheads) artillery shells need to spin a certain number of times to arm...its a built in safety feature to protect the gunners.

It DOES matter when they were created though... if they are relics of the Iran-Iraq War then they could be "lost" weapons... the front was mostly stable, but it was fluid enough at times that positions were overrun, it's why Saddam used the weapons in the first place (much like the Germans in WWI). The problem is this: sometimes positions were overrun and the shells were lost to the enemy, other times issurgents attacked and captured weapons and ammo from Iraq too (Saddam had problems too). So the weapon could have been under Saddam's control, or it could have been one stolen by insurgents, or it could have been one stolen by a terror-group.

These insurgents (whether Kurdish sepratists or Islamic fundamentalists/fanatics - think of Al Queda like groups) caused enough problems the Saddam attacked them in force too... this is when he used chemical weapons on the Kurds... in an effort to counter the guerrila war along the northern border region; but a guerrila war is very fluid, and the guerrilas had some successes that could acount for their capture of chemical weapons (Janes reported that guerrilas even captured a Hind at one point).

That is why determining the manufacture date is importnant.. you then have a better chance of determining the history of the weapon and where/whom it came from.

Cavuto is on FOX.

Sorry, but this report flies in the face of what the US Spokesgeneral on the scene reported. You would think that the Army, if anyone, would want to make a big deal of this if it were true.

I know this will bring screams of Liberal Press bias, but I looked at the websites for NBC, CBS, ABC, The NY Times, LA Times, Chicago Trib, Washington Post and a couple others, and no mention. (Granted, it was a cursory look at each).

You simply have to believe that if this story was any kind of big deal, they would be all over it. None of these are going to sit around and let FOX scoop them on this kind of thing -- even if they were owned by John Kerry. Just wouldn't happen.

Until someone proves otherwise, I'm going to believe what the Army says -- that this is probably an old, overlooked shell that was found by terrorists who didn't realize what it was and decided to use it as a roadside bomb.

If the next few roadside bombs contain serin, mustard, etc., then I'll consider changing my mind.

Sounds rather convincing to me, but I guess it's one of those situations where, "We shall see, what we shall see."
:confused:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=13282

Iraqi WMDs, Now in Syria

By Larry Elder
Townhall.com | May 6, 2004

"ELDER...So, I interviewed terrorism expert John Loftus, who once held some of the highest security clearances in the world. Loftus, a former Army officer, served as a Justice Department prosecutor. He investigated CIA cases of Nazi war criminals for the U.S. attorney general. Author of several books, Loftus once received a Pulitzer Prize nomination"


Make Comment View Comments Printable Article Email Article


Iraqi WMDs, Now in Syria

By Larry Elder
Townhall.com | May 6, 2004

"Week after week after week after week," said Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., about President Bush's rationale for going to war with Iraq, "we were told lie after lie after lie after lie." Were we?

Jordan recently seized 20 tons of chemicals trucked in by confessed al-Qaeda members who brought the stuff in from Syria. The chemicals included VX, Sarin and 70 others. But the media seems curiously incurious about whether one could reasonably trace this stuff back to Iraq. Had the terrorists released a "toxic cloud," Jordanian officials say 80,000 would have died!

So, I interviewed terrorism expert John Loftus, who once held some of the highest security clearances in the world. Loftus, a former Army officer, served as a Justice Department prosecutor. He investigated CIA cases of Nazi war criminals for the U.S. attorney general. Author of several books, Loftus once received a Pulitzer Prize nomination.


Excerpt-
John Loftus: There's a lot of reason to think (the source of the chemicals) might be Iraq. We captured Iraqi members of al-Qaeda, who've been trained in Iraq, planned for the mission in Iraq, and now they're in Jordan with nerve gas. That's not the kind of thing you buy in a grocery store. You have to have obtained it from someplace.

Larry Elder: They couldn't have obtained it from Syria?

Loftus: Syria does have the ability to produce certain kinds of nerve gasses, but in small quantities. The large stockpiles were known to be in Iraq. The best U.S. and allied intelligence say that in the 10 weeks before the Iraq war, Saddam's Russian adviser told him to get rid of all the nerve gas. It would be useless against U.S. troops; the rubber suits were immune to it. So they shipped it across the border to Syria and Lebanon and buried it. Now, in the last few weeks, there's a controversy that Syria has been trying to get rid of this stuff.

They're selling it to al-Qaeda is one supposition. We know the Sudanese government demanded that the Syrian government empty its warehouse in Khartoum where they've been hiding illegal missiles along with components of Weapons of Mass Destruction. But there's no doubt these guys confessed on Jordanian television that they received the training for this mission in Iraq. . . And from the description it appears this is the form of nerve gas known as VX. It's very rare, and very tough to manufacture . . . one of the most destructive chemical mass-production weapons that you can use. . . They wanted to build three clouds, a mile across, of toxic gas. A whole witch's brew of nasty chemicals that were going to go into this poison cloud, and this would have gone over shopping malls, hospitals . . . .

Elder: You said that the Russians told Saddam, "There is going to be an invasion. Get rid of your chemical and biological weapons."

Loftus: Sure. It would only bring the United Nations down on their heads if they were shown to really have Weapons of Mass Destruction. It's not generally known, but the CIA has found 41 different material breaches where Saddam did have a weapons of mass destruction program of various types. It was completely illegal. But no one could find the stockpiles. And the liberal press seems to be focusing on that.

Elder: It seems to me that this is a huge, huge story.

Loftus: It's embarrassing to the (press). They've staked their reputations that this stuff wasn't there. And now all of a sudden we have al Qaeda agents from Iraq showing up with Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Elder: David Kay said, in an interim report, that there was a possibility that WMD components were shipped to Syria.

Loftus: A possibility? We had a Syrian journalist who defected to Paris in January. The guy is dying of cancer, and he said, "Look, my friends in Syrian intelligence told me exactly where the stuff is buried." He named three sites in Syria, and the Israelis have confirmed the three sites. They know where the stuff is, but the problem is that the United States can't just go around invading Arab countries. . . We know from Israeli and defectors' intelligence that the son of the Syrian defense minister was paid 50 million bucks to bring the stuff across the border and bury it.

Exactly. There may be WMD's somewhere, but I just haven't seen and really convincing proof yet. So far, everything has been from someone with an obvious agenda.

Believe me, if quantities of nerve gas are ever found, ALL of the media will be all over it like stink on...well you know.