Chemical Weapons found in Iraq

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Mordoch

Actually that's extremely questionable. I'll have to check what's the deal with mustard gas, but for many chemical munitions, they are no longer usable after they have been mixed inside shells for too long. I'm curious if there is even enough intact chemical agents for the weapons to even be that dangerous. It certainly sounds highly questionable if they at all usable. If they have been burried over 10 years, there is a legitimate question of whether Saddam even knew about them or if they had been burried and forgotten. In the second case, the discovery is rather meaningless.

Of course the fact that the Iraqi's were known as the most meticulous record keepers since the Nazi's would sure lead credence to the fact they they didn't know they were there or had "forgotten" about them.

[VJ]

36 mortar rounds with mustard gas? I have no experience from the army, but my guess is that some officer just forgot them into somewhere and they were buried during a sandstorm.

Some details and pictures from the shells would help.

[Colon™]

I posted a link above, with pictures.

[Patroklos]

Perhaps normal mortar rouns, but something with chemical warheads, even int he Iraqi military, would have had close accountability.

Why is that people that have something to hide alwasy do the best job of recording it?

[VJ]

I posted a link above, with pictures.

Thank you.

Check out the quality. Is someone claiming that they're still in an condition where operating them could be possible?

[Verto]

Excerpts from the news articles:

Four different types of instrument were used on three of the mortar rounds, the army said in its statement, adding that 100 more rounds could be buried at the site.

Blister gas, an illegal weapon which ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein said he had destroyed, was extensively used against the Iranians during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.

[Patroklos]

Just becasue the Iraqis have bad storage doesn't mean they forgot them. They may have thought they would be okay. I don't think that is the case though, obviously bloched hidding attempt. Well maybe not, as the 90's inspectors did miss them.

[Chemical Ollie]

Save gas - fart in a jar!

Swedish fishermen get ancient objects like these in their nets once in a while, and land them just kilometers away from where I sit now. We don't invade Germany or UK just because of it. US shouldn't get to horny either.

[rev]

Actually, the very shells in question were declared to UN inspectors.

Following the imposition of anti-WMD rules on Iraq by the UN and international community, Hussein's dictatorship was able to provide documentation on the destruction of most of these Mustard Gas shells. But because it had poor documentation on how many shells it used against Iran and where remaining caches were, Iraq had to declare the weapons as missing.

So, Iraq had told the world the weapons existed. Not exactly secret. The weapons were merely lost, though I'm sure some review of millions of documents gave the Danes reason to suspect the weapons might be where they were. UN Inspectors probably would have stumbled over it eventually, too.

And why did the Danes find it? Because the Bush administration has pulled most of its analysts and workers from Kay's weapons-searching team (which is the reason Kay is giving for resigning from his position, even though his final report to the Senate has not yet been finished). Clearly this administration has reason to believe its past claims have more or less been proven wrong.

[VJ]

Okay, another question: The prime reason for the attack was originally the presented 'fact' that Iraq could launch a significant WMD-attack against the 'free world'. How on earth would Iraq be able to do that with three dozens of obsolote (sp) mortar shells, originally ideal for defending against human wave -attacks? Launch shells against United States with a thirty-kilometer long mortar funded by UK?

Actually, the very shells in question were declared to UN inspectors.

Following the imposition of anti-WMD rules on Iraq by the UN and international community, Hussein's dictatorship was able to provide documentation on the destruction of most of these Mustard Gas shells. But because it had poor documentation on how many shells it used against Iran and where remaining caches were, Iraq had to declare the weapons as missing.

So, Iraq had told the world the weapons existed. Not exactly secret. The weapons were merely lost, though I'm sure some review of millions of documents gave the Danes reason to suspect the weapons might be where they were. UN Inspectors probably would have stumbled over it eventually, too.

And why did the Danes find it? Because the Bush administration has pulled most of its analysts and workers from Kay's weapons-searching team (which is the reason Kay is giving for resigning from his position, even though his final report to the Senate has not yet been finished). Clearly this administration has reason to believe its past claims have more or less been proven wrong.

Could you find a link quickly for use too lazy to search for it ourselves?

[PLATO]

Originally posted by VJ

Check out the quality. Is someone claiming that they're still in an condition where operating them could be possible?

Not that I've seen.

So the liberal line changes from "See! He didn't have them!" to "So what that he had them! He couldn't use them!"

People are ridiculous.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by VJ
Okay, another question: The prime reason for the attack was originally the presented 'fact' that Iraq could launch a significant WMD-attack against the 'free world'. How on earth would Iraq be able to do that with three dozens of obsolote (sp) mortar shells, originally ideal for defending against human wave -attacks? Launch shells against United States with a thirty-kilometer long mortar funded by UK?

Yeah, it took 8 months to find these. That must be all they "forgot" about right?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Just becasue the Iraqis have bad storage doesn't mean they forgot them. They may have thought they would be okay. I don't think that is the case though, obviously bloched hidding attempt. Well maybe not, as the 90's inspectors did miss them.

Maybe the inspectors "missed them" becuase they were burried before they ever got to Iraq- and no, the inspectors were not going to dig along every road in Iraq looking for burried shells.

There is a reason I brought up those Japanese WW2 chemical shells that when unburried made some Chinese workers sick- becuase in wartime things get lost, or some guy onthe field says: screw it, get rid of these things- dump it on that didtch and burry them. The shells in that picture look heavily corroded and useless as shells again.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by rev
Actually, the very shells in question were declared to UN inspectors.

Following the imposition of anti-WMD rules on Iraq by the UN and international community, Hussein's dictatorship was able to provide documentation on the destruction of most of these Mustard Gas shells. But because it had poor documentation on how many shells it used against Iran and where remaining caches were, Iraq had to declare the weapons as missing.

So, Iraq had told the world the weapons existed. Not exactly secret. The weapons were merely lost, though I'm sure some review of millions of documents gave the Danes reason to suspect the weapons might be where they were. UN Inspectors probably would have stumbled over it eventually, too.

And why did the Danes find it? Because the Bush administration has pulled most of its analysts and workers from Kay's weapons-searching team (which is the reason Kay is giving for resigning from his position, even though his final report to the Senate has not yet been finished). Clearly this administration has reason to believe its past claims have more or less been proven wrong.

"Uh Yeah...those others are uh... MISSING!...Yes, Yes, that's it!"

"The Americans are no where near our Capital!"

Okay, the Iraqi's said that...guess we should trust them.

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO


Not that I've seen.

So the liberal line changes from "See! He didn't have them!" to "So what that he had them! He couldn't use them!"

People are ridiculous.

Is there a difference between shells that con't be used becuase they don;t exist and shells that can;t be used becuase they are left corroding under the sand for a decade? The part that maters is "can;t be used", as opposed to "THEY WILL GIVE THEM TO OSAMA, AND CAN LAUNCH THEM IN 45 MINUTES!!!" Do these look ready to use in 45 minutes?

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


Maybe the inspectors "missed them" becuase they were burried before they ever got to Iraq- and no, the inspectors were not going to dig along every road in Iraq looking for burried shells.

Of course the UN resolution MANDATED that the inspectors were supposed to be told where they were. But the liberal line rings true with your statement.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


Is there a difference between shells that con't be used becuase they don;t exist and shells that can;t be used becuase they are left corroding under the sand for a decade? The part that maters is "can;t be used", as opposed to "THEY WILL GIVE THEM TO OSAMA, AND CAN LAUNCH THEM IN 45 MINUTES!!!" Do these look ready to use in 45 minutes?

Thanks GePap...I rest my case.

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO



"Uh Yeah...those others are uh... MISSING!...Yes, Yes, that's it!"

"The Americans are no where near our Capital!"

Okay, the Iraqi's said that...guess we should trust them.

When it has come to WMD's, the iraqi claims have been far far more accurate than the Admin. claims.

Do you have any EVIDENCE that these were not simply shells disposed of by being burried (oh yeah, look at thosepics, sure taken good care of and ready to launch!..ignore the rust and corroded metal, otherwise still good!) as opposed to shels burried to be used in some future time? After all, this fidning confroms to what the Iraqis said, NOT what the US said.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by PLATO


Not that I've seen.

So the liberal line changes from "See! He didn't have them!" to "So what that he had them! He couldn't use them!"

People are ridiculous.

If the chemicals inside have deteriated to the point where they no longer would be particularly effective, you may be looking at situation where mixing household chemicals could create a more dangerous gas. Clearly as a justification for invading a country, weapons this innefective don't exactly meet what Bush was talking about before the war. Not even addressing whether the chemicals have remained stable enough to be used effectively as a weapon would be what would be ridiculous. Given how long they appear to have been burried, its distincly possible they were burried and lost in the confusion surrounding the Iran Iraq war.

[VJ]

Quote:

Originally posted by VJ: Check out the quality. Is someone claiming that they're still in an condition where operating them could be possible?

Not that I've seen.

So the liberal line changes from "See! He didn't have them!" to "So what that he had them! He couldn't use them!"

People are ridiculous.

So, now I'm a liberal. Funny as hell, I'm for tightened criminal penalties, I'm pro-death penalty, pro-draft, for tax cuts, for tighter drug contol, for increased police forces, for increased army spending, for free-market, think that a four-star general would make a better president than an ex-drug-user and draft-dodger, and now I'm a liberal. Why don't you just lock me up as a dreaded communist hippie scum because I don't agree with George W. Bush in every word which he says?

I think it's very mature from you to group all the persons who disagree with you on any subject to 'liberals', furthermore I think that it's even more mature to think that if one of them says something, you can use it against any other one of them.

Keep up the good work.

Yeah, it took 8 months to find these. That must be all they "forgot" about right?

Wtf? You didn't answer to my question, instead said something senseless gibberish about something which doesn't relate to anything, added a LOL-smiley after it, and now you're probably excepting me to swallow this as an rational explanation and shut up?

EDITED: Added few things before "and now I'm a liberal"...

[GePap]

Originally posted by PLATO
Thanks GePap...I rest my case.

If you had made a case, you might laugh...sady, you forgot the "making a case part"

Of course the UN resolution MANDATED that the inspectors were supposed to be told where they were. But the liberal line rings true with your statement.

First, it's sad that you have begun using lines like "the liberal blah blah blah", makes you sound so much like some typical talk radio listener.

So you are claiming that not telling the inspectors how they dumped them is equal to hiding them for future use? If this is "your case", there are some books on elementary logic you can borrow, becuase let me tell you that that line of though is NOT one you can defend on it's own.

[Patroklos]

As opposed to your words that make you sound like the typical dullusional insane asylum resident.

"Maybe the inspectors "missed them" becuase they were burried before they ever got to Iraq- and no, the inspectors were not going to dig along every road in Iraq looking for burried shells."

Exactly, so the Iraqis plan worked. It was not a critisism of the UN, it was of the Iraqis.

[Winston]

I get the impression that even if the troops were to find massive stocks of fully operational bio-chemical weapons, the Left would still dismiss it along the lines of: "Yeah, but there was no way Bush could have known about this, so he was still lying."

[GePap]

Originally posted by Patroklos
As opposed to your words that make you sound like the typical dullusional insane asylum resident.

"Maybe the inspectors "missed them" becuase they were burried before they ever got to Iraq- and no, the inspectors were not going to dig along every road in Iraq looking for burried shells."

Exactly, so the Iraqis plan worked. It was not a critisism of the UN, it was of the Iraqis.

The job of inspectors was to find continuing programs and weapons being store for future use, NOT to locate each wepaon which the Iraqis might have disposed of incorrectly. Is that too hard for you to get?

All I need to do is say, look at the photos- do those shells look to you like shells being stored for future use? Cause I am sure the Iraqis figured out a way to recover possiby degraded chemicals from useless shells.....

[yaroslav]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...chemicals_dc_5

"Most were wrapped in plastic bags, and some were leaking," Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt told a news conference, adding that it was likely the weapons were left over from the Iran-Iraq war

[yaroslav]

From the same source

Although it can kill if it enters the lungs, it is used mainly to weaken infantry by making the skin break out in excruciatingly painful blisters.

Hardly a WMD.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by GePap


If you had made a case, you might laugh...sady, you forgot the "making a case part"

I believe I predicted your comment a couple of posts before you made it. Reading is such an essential skill.

First, it's sad that you have begun using lines like "the liberal blah blah blah", makes you sound so much like some typical talk radio listener.

Truth hurts?? Sorry, if being called a liberal offends you. It would offend me too.

So you are claiming that not telling the inspectors how they dumped them is equal to hiding them for future use? If this is "your case", there are some books on elementary logic you can borrow, becuase let me tell you that that line of though is NOT one you can defend on it's own.

No I am claiming that the Iraqi's were in violation of UN resolutions ONCE AGAIN. And that the outcome of that violation was openly discussed by all prior to the passage oif 1441. And that the results happened. And that disputing that is just plain silly at this point. Nice try at a twist of the facts though...well on second thought it does look like the logic you used was from elementary school...so maybe it wasn't such a nice try

[GePap]

What none of the articles mention is what the Danes were doing when they found these munitions. Were they following leads to possible WMD sites, or where they trying to secure the munitions left all over Iraq from the previous regime and the wars fought (like for example, they are still clearing munitions form WW1, WW2, Vietnam, you name it).

And if some Iraqis knew these shells were there (which they must have IF the shells were being stored for future use as some claim here), why didn't insurgetnts who are memners of the old regime simply go digging for them after the end of the war? Would it have been that hard?

[VJ]

Yaroslav, look the definition of WMD from a dictionary. Chemical weapons are weapons of mass destruction, mustard gas one of the most widely used of them.

[Patroklos]

Well GePap, since the inspectors I am talking about the Iraqis cheating were the early 90's ones yes those weapons would have been fine.

I don't maintain they intended to use them again. I maintian that " LOOK, UN WEAPONS INSPECTORS!!! Quik, run out back and bury everything as fast as you can!" That would explain the haphazard method of destruction, since Iraq did have the proper means available to do it right.

HAve you ever gone to get something out of the refrigerator intending to eat it but it had gone bad? You thought it would still be useful untill you went to get it.