Device found in Iraq with sarin gas

nycflasher

Active Member
Apr 15, 2004
3,078
13
36
CT
Eke...


BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- A U.S.-led coalition convoy in Iraq found sarin gas in an artillery round rigged as an improvised explosive device, Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said Monday.

Sarin is a nerve agent used for chemical weapons. A doomsday cult in Japan used the gas in terrorist attacks in 1994 and 1995.

The detonation of the device in Iraq resulted in a small dispersal of the nerve agent, Kimmitt said. Two members of an explosives ordnance team were treated for minor exposure, he added.

U.S intelligence officials in Washington said the shell was discovered Saturday near the Baghdad International Airport.

"The area that was affected was very minor," Kimmitt said. "There's no need for any further decontamination. The [ordnance team] people who went up there showed some minor traces of exposure, but it was so minor the doctors already have these people released."

Kimmitt said the artillery round was of an old style that Saddam Hussein's regime had declared it no longer possessed after the Persian Gulf War.

Kimmitt said device was designed to mix two relatively passive chemicals after being fired from an artillery piece, creating the potent nerve gas, and that it was ineffective as an improvised explosive device.

Kimmitt said it appeared that whoever set up the roadside bomb was unaware that it contained the chemicals....




source-CNN
 
C'mon, everyone KNOWS there are no WMD, this must be a mistake.
 
Originally posted by Patriot
So why you listening to CNN?

I listen to all... lest I become someone who simply regurgitates what they hear from any ONE source.
 
Ten days ago the soldiers in Iraq found artillary with mustard gas. Why haven't we heard about that on the news?
 
Originally posted by dilloduck
The political ping pong regarding this "discovery" wil be just like getting hit with a WMD.

lol, yeah, that term IS a political hot potato right now... isnt it?
 
Last time I checked, sarin is a weapon of mass destruction. That means, OMG, Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Guess Ted Kennedy and John Kerry were wrong. Thats a first:eek2:
 
A few decaying artillery shells hardly constitute a threat to American shores, which is what Dubbyuh originally stated as the reason for invading a third rate third world dictatorship.

Show me weapons capable of reaching beyond Iraq's borders with something more noxious than Sarin, which is really quite limited as a WMD. Then I might believe Dubbyuh's claims.
 
Originally posted by Bullypulpit
A few decaying artillery shells hardly constitute a threat to American shores, which is what Dubbyuh originally stated as the reason for invading a third rate third world dictatorship.

Show me weapons capable of reaching beyond Iraq's borders with something more noxious than Sarin, which is really quite limited as a WMD. Then I might believe Dubbyuh's claims.

Before you get an appropriate reply, show us when Bush claimed a threat to American shores was the reason for invading Iraq.
 
Originally posted by jimnyc
Before you get an appropriate reply, show us when Bush claimed a threat to American shores was the reason for invading Iraq.

He cant. Bush was clear that if we waited for a threat to materialize it would be too late and inaction now and a thread of WMDs later would be worse than action to take him out. Its common sense. I mean how many people nowadays would opt to take hitler out early rather than risk what he did?
 
Originally posted by Bullypulpit
A few decaying artillery shells hardly constitute a threat to American shores, which is what Dubbyuh originally stated as the reason for invading a third rate third world dictatorship.

Show me weapons capable of reaching beyond Iraq's borders with something more noxious than Sarin, which is really quite limited as a WMD. Then I might believe Dubbyuh's claims.

Bully,

First, as Jim said, WMD's were only one of the justifications for the war. Second, chemical weapons are part of the trifecta, if you will, of WMDs - the others being nukes and biological weapons. To say that "it's not really that big of a WMD" is really a stretch.
 
Originally posted by Bullypulpit
. . . . something more noxious than Sarin, which is really quite limited as a WMD.

Tell that to the Kurds he used sarin on.

I hope your girlfriend never comes to you and says, "I am pregnant". Will your reply be, "well, it is okay, you are just a little bit pregnant."?

A WMD is a WMD. Just like being pregnant is, well, being pregnant.
 
Originally posted by Palestinian Jew
Has anyone seen reports of where the sarin came from? I've heard that it may have come from the al Qaeda guy, Zaquiri, but that isn't concrete.

Nobody knows (well, they aren't saying - at least).

Zarqawi was making Sarin before we invaded. But this was in an artillery shell, which tends to indicate it was from the Iraqi military stockpiles. We know that Saddam used Sarin against the Kurds in 1988 and we know he had it in the mid 90's. The UN said he destroyed it all. Then they said, well, some "small" quantities might be left over, but that does not indicate a conspiracy on the Iraqi's part to "hide" any from the UN.

They (the UN and the left) try to have it both ways.....
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
Tell that to the Kurds he used sarin on.

I hope your girlfriend never comes to you and says, "I am pregnant". Will your reply be, "well, it is okay, you are just a little bit pregnant."?

A WMD is a WMD. Just like being pregnant is, well, being pregnant.

lol :p:
Kind of like stalking wild game with M-16's and grenades and calling it hunting...
 
Originally posted by Bullypulpit
A few decaying artillery shells hardly constitute a threat to American shores, which is what Dubbyuh originally stated as the reason for invading a third rate third world dictatorship.

Show me weapons capable of reaching beyond Iraq's borders with something more noxious than Sarin, which is really quite limited as a WMD. Then I might believe Dubbyuh's claims.

*Sigh*

Regardless if this sarin is a serious enough threat to conclude "we found WMD in Iraq," you must understand something: these are not "Dubbyah's claims." When will your little socialist brain understand that?

Every intelligence agency from every nation thought he had WMD. Every politician from every side of politics, thought he had WMD. When will your liberal self understand this? Maybe the question isn't when, but "can" you understand this? Are you capable?

For you to think Iraq isn't part of the Web of Terror is Howard Dean-like.
 

Forum List

Back
Top