Bomb containing deadly sarin explodes in Iraq

[Newbie 0]

Quote

So what qualifies as a WMD in your opinion. Do Chemical weapons including one of the nastiest nerve agents known not qualify as WMDs to you?

This was obviously a NBC weapon. It was fully capable of killing thousands. That is equivalent to WMD as far as I'm concerned. Tell me why I'm wrong, and don't say because some unnamed "coalition source" says so.

this is just my opinion, but i would say a WMD is just that - a weapon of mass destruction. What exploded contained sarin, sure, but the 2 soldiers involved in the "fallout" were back to work several hours after it went off. That to me is not considered something that poses a threat to entire nations/countries and would warrant an invasion.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[Skyrad 0]

It would have to have been fired from a 155 gun for a start, making it a battlefield weapon. If it was capable of killing thousands then why was there only two casualtys? I guess an unnamed coalition source is a better source of information than repeated viewing of 'The Rock'

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"So what qualifies as a WMD in your opinion. Do Chemical weapons including one of the nastiest nerve agents known not qualify as WMDs to you?"

My interpretation of a WMD?
One that is capable of delivering additional, normally delayed, casualties outside its immediate damage field. By this I mean air born, water born, or physical transfer of contaminants via clothing, vehicle wheels, etc, that persist after initial weapon activation.
The weapon itself must also be capable of being effectively delivered to its target.

So a single shell may not be a WMD unless it has an associated delivery system, if its a 155mm howitzer shell, or motarr round, the presence of the launch system is a given, they are pretty common. If its a warhead, its not much use without a delivery mechanism such as a suitable aircraft, vehicle, or a missile capable of carrying it, and controlling its detonation at a prespecified target.

A briefcase containing contaminants, and a dispersal system (small amount of exposives for example)could by definition be classified as a WMD.

In this instance I believe we have the ingredients of a WMD, but its deployment in this situation gives rise to the suspicion that the weapon was not correctly identified as such by its users.

It obviously wasn't deployed by anyone who actually knew what they were doing, fortunately.

I think its a piece of legacy munition, similar to the mortar shells that were found that had the capacity to disperse similar agents, and also stuff like phosphorous.

I'm not sure we would have accepted the invasion of a country based on this type of threat, artillery shells with chemical weapon capacity hardly constitute a threat to world peace.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[Ron 10]

Quote

according to this report:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3722255.stm

it doesn't qualify for a WMD - it's from decades ago.

Ah read below.

Quote

Sarin is a toxic nerve gas 20 times as deadly as cyanide.

A drop the size of a pin-head can kill a person by effectively crippling their nervous system.

It is a WMD...Just cause its old, and they didn't use it correctly does not mean its not an WMD.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Newbie 0]

Quote

Quote

according to this report:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3722255.stm

it doesn't qualify for a WMD - it's from decades ago.

Ah read below.

Quote

Sarin is a toxic nerve gas 20 times as deadly as cyanide.

A drop the size of a pin-head can kill a person by effectively crippling their nervous system.

It is a WMD...Just cause its old, and they didn't use it correctly does not mean its not an WMD.

yeah, true.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts

[Ron 10]

Quote

it's not a WMD anymore if it goes off in the middle of a group of people and doesn't incapacitate any of them.

One drop of it will kill you, and that amount was enough to kill a few thousand.

They were just to stupid to know how to use it. If you take a good old nuc and blow it up wrong its just a dirty bomb.

The shell was an WMD, the contents were WMD, the two chemicals that needed to combine were both outlawed in Iraq.

You lefties need to get over the "I't's not a WMD" thing.

It was, and so was the Mustard gas found a few week ago.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Just cause its old, and they didn't use it correctly does not mean its not an WMD."

And because it doesn't have sufficient range to pose a real threat to Iraq's neighbours, let alone the UK, or the USA, is it really worth the loss of all those people to remove them from circulation.

Putting things in perspective, hydrogen sulphide will kill you at 500 parts per million, thats a teaspoon in 25 oil barrells, the oil in that part of the world is loaded with the stuff. Should we destroy the petrochemical plants that separate this gas out of the oil?

Or to cut to the chase Ron, is this and similar previously discovered legacy munitions what we went to war for?

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[Ron 10]

Quote

And because it doesn't have sufficient range to pose a real threat to Iraq's neighbours, let alone the UK, or the USA, is it really worth the loss of all those people to remove them from circulation.

Iraq was not allowed to have them,or the chemicals need to make them.

If you give me a shell like this, I bet I could make it work without an artillery gun.

We were just lucky that they were two stupid to know what they had....I bet they are kicking themselves right now.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[chuckbrown 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

As I mentioned before the USA, despite a most sophisticated inventory system, has misplaced tons of weapons grade plutonium (Source, US DoE).

I would be interested in a specific citation supporting this conclusion. DOE acknowledges that 2 GRAMS of weapons grade plutonium is missing from Los Alamos Lab, but DOE doesn't acknowledge "misplacing tons" of WGP. DOE has stated that different methods of calculating WGP production have resulted in production figures which differ by several tons. This does not mean that several tons of WGP are missing. It means that DOE miscalculated how much WGP was actually produced. DOE specifically denies that "tons" of WGP are missing. http://www.osti.gov/html/osti/opennet/document/press/pc11.html

Edited cuz I'm a tard.

It makes the point either way.

Either they lost it despite the most stringent security precautions, or they lost track of it despite the most sophistocated inventory control.

I find your reasoning suspect to say the least. Miscalculations with regard to production totals does not mean anything was lost. It means there was an error with respect to how much was produced in the first place. I'm still curious as to why you refuse to provide your source to support your conclusion that tons of WGP was "misplaced."

[chuckbrown 0]

Quote

Quote

It would be helpful if you could at least point in the direction of DoE's web-site where someone could read about that themselves.

I found it using Google. So can you. It's not exactly a secret.

They blame it on inventory control. This in the country and the organization with the most sophisticated inventory control that exists anywhere.

I found it using Google, and it doesn't support your assertion. They didn't "blame it on inventory control." DOE said it was based on differing methods of calculating actual production.

[kiltboy 0]

What should be more worrying is the fact that a decent university undergrad chemist should be able to make this stuff. The information is out there and was widely available pre 9/11.

A left over munition that was unnacounted for is not the threat to the US that people should be worried about. Just a thought but Chechnya was probably a better market for WMD material pre the Iraq invasion. The break up of the soviet union left stuff all over the place (I believe the US is paying for the security to keep track of it now) and there is a bit or a radical terrorist problem in that country that would make it easy to acquire some.

David

David

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Quote

Very bad logic, Michele. You make an assumption and then treat it as fact. You have NO IDEA where this shell originated, all you know is where it ended up.

I can't believe I just read that. So, even if we find a stockpile, you'll call "BS"?? WTF is that?

Just the facts. It's too late to find a smoking gun now. That shell could have been around the world a dozen times since Bush's invasion.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It would be helpful if you could at least point in the direction of DoE's web-site where someone could read about that themselves.

I found it using Google. So can you. It's not exactly a secret.

They blame it on inventory control. This in the country and the organization with the most sophisticated inventory control that exists anywhere.

I found it using Google, and it doesn't support your assertion. They didn't "blame it on inventory control." DOE said it was based on differing methods of calculating actual production.

So they have no idea of what the inventory is within a margin of error of several tons.. QED.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Iraq was not allowed to have them,or the chemicals need to make them. "
No argument here, although there is no evidence that this particular piece of ordinance was in Iraq prior to the liberation. Iraq seems to have become some sort of magnet for malcontents, aka insurgents.
Sarin has been used by terorists in Japan, but that doesn't mean that the Japanese govt. has and is prepared to use WMDs.

Its a real shame this shell was destroyed, it could have told us so much.

I still hold that this type of ordinance is not what our leaders meant when they talked about threats to global security. Ergo we are expecting something much worse to surface somewhere, or we, or our leaders, were grossly misled.

I'm not sure whats more alarming, the thought of these devices falling into the hands of terrorists, or an intelligence gathering system we have no faith in.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[chuckbrown 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

It would be helpful if you could at least point in the direction of DoE's web-site where someone could read about that themselves.

I found it using Google. So can you. It's not exactly a secret.

They blame it on inventory control. This in the country and the organization with the most sophisticated inventory control that exists anywhere.

I found it using Google, and it doesn't support your assertion. They didn't "blame it on inventory control." DOE said it was based on differing methods of calculating actual production.

So they have no idea of what the inventory is within a margin of error of several tons.. QED.

That seems to be a well supported conclusion. Thanks.

[pajarito 0]

Has anyone brought this up yet? It just doesn’t make sense to me that insurgents would bring WMD into the country. Their leadership is smart. Politically and in the realm of public opinion, I think it would hurt their cause. WMD found in Iraq will further justify our cause. That was one of the main reasons we went there in the first place (not the only major reason, mind you). Right now, everybody is convinced that there weren’t any and that we were unjustified in the invasion in the first place. That makes Iraq look like the victim and the big bad guy is the United States. The insurgents could potentially make a very big hit with a WMD brought in but, unless they’re able to use it in an appropriate manner, I just can’t see it helping their cause by any of it being there. I think they’d want to use other tactics besides WMD in Iraq. Am I wrong?

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"So they have no idea of what the inventory is within a margin of error of several tons.. QED"

Ah, not exactly John, this is normally known as MUF (material unaccounted for) and a general tolerance is 2% of throughput for a typical plant.

I can only cite missing material for Dounereay on the North coast of Scotland as an example, they lost 10kgs in a single year back in 1990-91 ish.
Its okay though, the stuff keeps showing up on local beaches.

more here
http://www.antenna.nl/wise/377/3703.html
and some googling here
http://www.google.co.uk/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=dounreay+missing+plutonium

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[Ron 10]

Quote

I still hold that this type of ordinance is not what our leaders meant when they talked about threats to global security.

Not the shell itself, but what was in it...Could you imagine the contents of that shell being spread out during the Olympic games?

Quote

Ergo we are expecting something much worse to surface somewhere, or we, or our leaders, were grossly misled.

I think that the leaders were mislead...We had plenty of bad intel fed to us. I also think that there are more of these and other WMD's still in Iraq.

SH had them, he said he had them (Hell, we sold some to him) and he never did really say what he did with them.

Some were stolen from him.

Some were hidden by him.

Some were sold by him..

I think all three happend.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[chuckbrown 0]

Quote

No he didn't. He trotted out the standard DOE excuses which are all speculation.

Kallend, YOU were the one who cited DOE as the source for your assertion that DOE "misplace tons of weapons grade plutonium." I was the one who checked with DOE to determine whether your assertion was accurate. To be charitable and in keeping with forum etiquette, you were pretty fast & loose with DOE's statements, which, by the way, did not support your statement regarding tons missing plutonium. Now you are attempting to discredit the very source you were relying on to support your statements. I'm beginning to see a pattern here. BSBD. Chuck.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Some were stolen from him.

Some were hidden by him.

Some were sold by him.."

Add to that...
Some were used up by him in his struggle against religious fundamentalists as we supported and encouraged him against Iran.

Some were destroyed before and during Gulf War 1.

Some were covertly destroyed in the run up to the liberation.

Some were overtly destroyed during the liberation.

We now have no idea how many remain, or where they are, or even what condition they are in. We can't really hold the new Iraq responsible for this lack of accounting can we?

Long story short, we'll never know for sure now, and the spectre of this threat may be hanging over us for quite some time. I don't think Saddam's trial will give us any better info, it should be interesting though.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

Very bad logic, Michele. You make an assumption and then treat it as fact.

Pot, "Kettle, man, you are BLACK as the day is long!"

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

this is just my opinion, but i would say a WMD is just that - a weapon of mass destruction. What exploded contained sarin, sure, but the 2 soldiers involved in the "fallout" were back to work several hours after it went off. That to me is not considered something that poses a threat to entire nations/countries and would warrant an invasion.

So, I can take a nuke and diminish it's power by not detonating it correctly - and that would make it a simple bomb - not a WMD, because it didn't kill thousands - it only hurt a very few.

Nice Logic.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Ron 10]

Quote

Add to that...
Some were used up by him in his struggle against religious fundamentalists as we supported and encouraged him against Iran.

Some were destroyed before and during Gulf War 1.

Some were covertly destroyed in the run up to the liberation.

Some were overtly destroyed during the liberation

OK...

Quote

We now have no idea how many remain, or where they are, or even what condition they are in. We can't really hold the new Iraq responsible for this lack of accounting can we?

Who is holding New Iraq responsible? I hold OLD Iraq and Saddam in particular as responsible.

Quote

Long story short, we'll never know for sure now, and the spectre of this threat may be hanging over us for quite some time. I don't think Saddam's trial will give us any better info, it should be interesting though.

True....But I think we will know more as things progress...

I think we will find them hidden..Maybe not in 100+ numbers...But ones and twos.. And I think its pretty clear SH hid some. All of this was against the UN resolution.

But the trial should be very interesting.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Gravitymaster 0]

I think the largest WMD in the world is sitting in an Iraqi prison. His name is Saddam Hussein. Getting rid of that WMD was justification enough for the war.

[Newbie 0]

Quote

Quote

this is just my opinion, but i would say a WMD is just that - a weapon of mass destruction. What exploded contained sarin, sure, but the 2 soldiers involved in the "fallout" were back to work several hours after it went off. That to me is not considered something that poses a threat to entire nations/countries and would warrant an invasion.

So, I can take a nuke and diminish it's power by not detonating it correctly - and that would make it a simple bomb - not a WMD, because it didn't kill thousands - it only hurt a very few.

Nice Logic.

the difference is, that shell detonated correctly - it blew up before it could be defused from that report. Outcome = 2 soldiers were decontaminated and sent back to work that day. The result of a nuke detonating as it should have done would have been pretty different, i'm sure.
Yes sarin in the right numbers, spread through the air in high enough concentration could wreck havoc - but i think you are talking about a lot more than a pin head size amount (it has to be airborne), over a wide area, with the right wind conditions, and no access to any sort of antidote (which sarin has) to even be comparable to a nuke going off (and even then, you're still not in the same league IMO)

Sarin was used in the Tokyo subway terrorist attack, and it only killed 12, and injured 6000 - and that was from more than 3 concentrated litres of the stuff, opened by several different people at different stops, in a closed off system (subway). A nuke going off down there would have caused unimaginable devastation by comparison.

"Skydiving is a door"
Happythoughts