Goose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 16 Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1353 times:
More than likely, this article will be buried to never see the light of day; Like the story of the Marine winning the Navy Cross, or the story about how troops who crossed the Euphrates river during the "combat operations phase" of the war found traces of nerve and chemical agents diluted in the water, meaning that they were being dumped into the water upstream..... it just won't get entered into the public conciousness.
David b. From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 3148 posts, RR: 6 Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1349 times:
A old shell? Give me a break. There could be the same thing the US sold Iraq during the Iraq-Iran conflict. BTW: Nerve agents do not last for 12 years or more.It was most likely from some old storage locker back in the days.
Zak From Greenland, joined Sep 2003, 1993 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1348 times:
noone doubted that saddams regime did posses old wmd. be it a fridge of tubes with whatever stuff or a bunch of rusty warheads.
the point has always been that there is no imminent threat from iraq and the situation that would evolve, as correctly stated by the "anti war pussies", would be far worse then saddams not ready to use and old wanna be wmd that were buried somewhere.
nerve agents etc "max not safe to drink after a few years, but hardly a weapon anymore" to quote those unmovic bastards who were against the war anyway.
so yeah saddam didnt have WMD, only leftovers of WMD that were a) not usable anymore b) not a threat
i have yet to see proof that this is not the case. this shell changes nothing in regard to the validity of aboves train of thought. it must be hard to realize that the stupid tree huggers were right about the war
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1346 times:
So now, Goose, L-188 and Mr. NeoNut are going to justify the entire war, billions of dollars and 800 American dead, on 1 shell?
How the mighty have fallen into desperation. If one shell is the best we can do, in over a year of searching, I can see where that one shell that has a limited dispersal range, was a clear and present danger, that triggered a war like this.
Cambrian From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2003, 619 posts, RR: 5 Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1342 times:
Any of the no WMD people wish to comment?
Yes, thanks for the kind offer.
We went to war in the UK on the pretense that we could have been attacked within 45 minutes.
The coalition have had the run of Iraq for more than a year. Nothing has been found- we were sold a pup.
This does not represent the finding of the stockpiles of WMD that we were promised. It could even originate from outside Iraq, or more likely, be a remnant from the Iran/ Iraq war- remind yourselves who sold these chemicals to Iraq in the first place.
Goose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 16 Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 1251 times:
FoxNews is reporting that now a 2nd Sarin bomb has been found in Iraq
Hrm, I'd take that with a grain of salt, considering the source.....
I've heard that its relatively easy to make Ricin or Sarin if you know how, is that correct?
No, it's not easy.
Is sarin easy to make?
No. It’s complicated and dangerous to produce. Although sarin can be made with publicly available chemicals, a sophisticated lab is needed to make sarin that is pure and long lasting. Sarin can also be made by mixing together relatively harmless chemicals before use—but it’s an extremely dangerous process with unpredictable results.
Goose From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 1840 posts, RR: 16 Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1205 times:
Actually, now the 2nd device is said to be Mustard Gas
I'd still be a little wary until someone else reports it, again, considering the source.... but I have a feeling that it might not be, considering the implication to folks perpetuating the anti-war sentiment.
Apparently there are now more WMD in Iraq then before the war...
True, based on the UN's inability to find any - despite having a very narrow field of view and being hindered by the then-Iraqi government in its efforts to find evidence of WMD. The Iraqis were less than forthcoming in trying to disprove that they had any.... *shrug*
A roadside bomb containing deadly sarin nerve agent exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday. It was believed to be the first confirmed discovery of any of the banned weapons that the United States cited in making its case for the Iraq war.
PU151 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1168 times:
ConcordeBoy, I was about to make the same remark. I've checked most (not all) American media, and my feeling, based on what I read, is that basically the test that came positive was a field test, and therefore not 100% fullproof, so they want to cover themselves in case this comes up negative.