Buried in this story is the bombshell that US forces have found more shells filled with sarin and mustard gas according to Iraqi Survey Group leader Charles Duelfer.
He also told Fox News that about 10 or 12 sarin and mustard gas shells have been found in various locations in Iraq.
The shells are all from the first Gulf War era and thus weakened, though intelligence sources say they’re still dangerous.
Mustard gas degrades rather quickly, and any shells containing that chemical are unlikely to pose a significant threat. However, binary sarin can last for years and could very well kill thousands if used in an enclosed space like an airport terminal or a subway station.
This shows that the Iraqis had not destroyed all their WMDs as they claimed, the claim that the previous discovery of a shell containing sarin is not a fluke, and Duelfer also points out that al-Qaeda is trying to recruit Iraqi weapons scientists.
So much for the theory that Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction were an illusion and he couldn’t threaten the United States or the region.
I agree Sauron. The facts are pretty telling. Even if the weapons had been properly stored, 10 or 12 gas shells hardly justifies the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
Try reading the article. The shells were still dangerous. They were not “rusted”.
Regular sarin degrades quickly. These were BINARY explosives – meaning that two stable compounds need to be mixed to create the final agent. Binary sarin can last for decades without degrading.
If you have to make things up to prove your point you’re best bet is to simply remain silent.
I tried reading the link, but it seems broken.
Question to Sauron and Bubbahotep: From your opposition to the war, I take it that you would prefer that Saddam still be in power…because, of course, without the war, then that would still be the status…
What bollocks. Start a war and then try and find the reason for starting it, that’s the Bush/Blair policy.
I thought WMDs were supposed to be a global threat – if that’s the case he must have had some mighty powerful howitzers to threaten the UK at 45 mins notice and the US mainland. Get a grip on reality and the real threats to regional stability – Israel in the mid East and N Korea in the Far East. Oh, sorry I forgot – both countries have nukes, so they’re not so much of a threat as a bankrupt dictator with aged battlefield shells.
Paul: obviously, you can’t imagine terrorists getting a hold of a small amount of a chemical or biological weapon and wreaking havoc with it here…just as people probably couldn’t have imagined terrorists hijacking airliners and ramming them into buildings…
The fact that you regard Israel, the one stable democracy in the Middle East and our truest friend over there, as a threat to regional stability says alot about your politics.
Are you guys for real?
Who the F_CK was Sadaam bothering? His own people, right? And now that the almighty Amerikkkan Military led by Der Fuhrer Dubya have invaded, no more Iraqis are being killed on a DAILY basis, right? And remember that if it’s posted on the Internet it’s TRUE, right?
HELLLLOOOO!!! WAKE UP JAY!!!
The Amerikkkan war machine has killed OVER TEN THOUSAND Iraqi civilians and OVER EIGHT HUNDRED FORTY AMERICANS for OIL, MONEY, OIL, MONEY, and of course, OIL!
Dubya will either be re-defeated or impeached. I’d rather see impeached WITH JAIL TIME, though I’ll happily settle for re-defeated.
John
After Thought: Without the war, Al Qaeda would not be as strong as it is today, and America would not as vulnerable as it is now. This is much bigger than a petty, murderous thug like Saddam. It would behoof you to see past that, and look at the big picture. You do realize it’s possible to be both against the war and Saddam Hussien, right?
Sorry, meant to spell “behoove.” 🙂
Well After-thought there’s a lot in common between Israel and the US/UK policy in Iraq – around a 10 to 1 kill ratio in Iraq and a 4 to 1 kill ratio (mostly innocent civilians) in Palestine. Stir the hornets nest and expect to be stung. I’m not pro-Saddam, anti-semitic, or even anti-US but there comes a point where common sense says “we made a mistake in invading Iraq for spurious reasons”.
BTW – was the Anthrax mailer an Iraqi?
Afghanistan didn’t have any tanks (at least not ones made since 1920), no air force, no organized military of any kind. Yet they managed to aid terrorists that killed 3,000 just fine.
The fact that you have to reach for patently ridiculous statements like the idea that you couldn’t extract the binary agents from a binary shell and combine them however the hell you want shows how desperate you are to prove an unsupportable argument.
At the very least 24,000 Iraqis are alive now because of this war, and that’s the lowest estimate. 25 million now have a chance at freedom that they never would have had before.
The most moral case is, and always has been, the case for removing Saddam Hussein.
Jay, you miss the whole point. We were told that we had to go in NOW because there was an IMMEDIATE TREAT and that Sadaam could have WMD in the UK in 45 minutes!!! Taking out Sadaam just because he was a bad guy was NOT the reason for the invasion — it was the cover-my-ass version…
Where did you get the 24,000 are alive today? Is that all that’s left, or did you mean that Sadaam killed 35,000+ every single year and we’ve only killed 10,000+ so we’re better???
Read http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0623-04.htm reprinted from an award-winning respected newspaper NOT owned by Rupert Murdock — The Miami Herald. Then perhaps you’ll understand a bit better.
Oh, sorry, I forgot to mention that you need to read it with an open mind, so see if you can find one first 😀
John
Never mind that Iraq repeatedly violated 16 different UN resolutions… Was shooting at our planes in the no-fly-zones… played games with the Weapons inspectors… couldn’t account for his missing WMD… was continually trying to get it’s WMD programs up and running… Out of nowhere invaded Kuwait… Launched scuds into Israel… Gassed, Tortured, and Murdered thousands of his own people (paper schredders, meat grinders, acid baths, rape rooms, etc)… Paid suicide bomber’s families $25,000 each to go into Israel and blow themselves up… Harbored and funded terrorists.
No. You guys are right…we should have just let poor Saddam be.
And never mind that every intelligence agency in the world believed Saddam possessed those WMD. And that Tenet told the President it was a SLAM DUNK that they’d be there. I’m sure you still think Bush lied?
Oh…and by the way…All those reasons above were the reasons Bush gave to go into Iraq. Not JUST wmd.
And let’s not forget about Hussein’s plan to assassinate former President Bush during a ceremonial visit to Kuwait in April ’93
Regarding “John” (June 26th post):
There’s an old saying that suggests that, before one pulls a splinter out of a friend’s eye, one ought to remove the plank from his own…
Read with open mind? Not a problem, unless of course that which is being read is fanciful fiction, rather than the truth, stated fact, or historical fact.
I’m not going to sit here and go point by point, (if anyone would like to, i’m timothyhirota@sbcglobal.net. I have rules about debating: base your argument on fact. no personal attacks. be able to back up claims), but i think it can be summed up by John’s very repetition of the “immediate threat” notion. I would be curious as to whether John can produce the speech, memo, etc that shows that President Bush EVER stated such a thing. In fact, as has now been OVERLY demonstrated, what the president actually said was that it was necessary to eliminate Hussein BEFORE HE BECOMES AN IMMINENT THREAT, thus defining his policy on pre-emptive action.
Tim (real name)
In response to Johns rediculous June 25th comment of ;
“The Amerikkkan war machine has killed OVER TEN THOUSAND Iraqi civilians and OVER EIGHT HUNDRED FORTY AMERICANS for OIL, MONEY, OIL, MONEY, and of course, OIL!”
Is’nt it just great how low gas prices are now since we won and used our magic pipeline to suck Iraq dry? You are an idiot! Plain and simple. If after the war is said and done, the government of Iraq decides to “SELL” us oil that is their decision. We will not be taking oil out of the country the people of Iraq own it and if they opt to sell it to us which is what was happening anyway then so be it. We do not own Iraq, we do not own the oil fields. How could you or any other fool possibly claim we went to war for oil. It is nothing more than Hippie propaganda.