I wonder how this could have slipped by MikeSC

[Guest Hero to all Children]

Source: CBC News Article (Because the other sites just aren't loading for me)

 

Polish troops foil attempt to buy chemical rockets

Last Updated Fri, 02 Jul 2004 17:58:20

WARSAW - Polish soldiers in Iraq foiled an attempt by militants to buy chemical weapons, said the head of Poland's military intelligence on Friday.

 

The cache of rockets containing nerve agent cyclosarin were found by Polish soldiers last month.

 

U.S. military officials played down the impact such weapons would have in the hands of Iraqi insurgents

 

The rockets dated back to the 1980s, and U.S. officials said the nerve agent was so deteriorated that it would cause little or no harm in an attack.

 

In Warsaw, however, Gen. Marek Dukaczewski told reporters Polish troops had been looking for weapons in their sector of south-central Iraq when they learned that militants were looking to buy the rockets.

 

"We were mortified by the information that terrorists were looking for these warheads and offered $5,000 apiece," Dukaczewski said." An attack with such weapons would be hard to imagine. All of our activity was accelerated at appropriating these warheads."

 

The rockets were bought for an undisclosed sum in late June.

 

A warhead containing sarin nerve gas exploded along a road near Baghdad in May, causing no real damage to any of the U.S. soldiers nearby.

 

 

FROM MAY 25, 2004:U.S. officials confirm sarin in shell

 

Neither incident has been used by coalition officials as proof of a large chemical weapons arsenal in Iraq, or proof that Saddam Hussein's regime had an active program in place to produce them.

 

 

I don't really know whom to believe personally. This is more or less a confirmation that yes, Saddam didn't destroy all WMD but how the US is handling it they're kind of adding "'cause they were kinda broke already."

 

Still, reason enough to worry. If they can find un-destroyed but simply low quality warheads this may mean that some more sophisticated searching may lead to finding something with a usable payload.

 

Combine this with the fact that Iraq most likely TRIED to buy yellow cake and you have yourself a solid justification for the war. If you really, really want to believe, that is.

[Guest MikeSC]

It doesn't matter. Nothing will be proof enough for the critics. Hell, many still think that no links exist between Iraq and Al Qaeda at any level.

-=Mike

[Art Sandusky 0]

Even the President says there's no link between the two.

 

And if the coalition itself isn't presenting this stuff as proof of an existing weapons program, I won't either.

[Guest MikeSC]

Even the President says there's no link between the two.

 

And if the coalition itself isn't presenting this stuff as proof of an existing weapons program, I won't either.

No, Bush said there was no link REGARDING 9/11. Which, by anything I've ever seen, there probably isn't. I wouldn't be shocked if there was a link, but we've never found one.

 

Links between the two are rather well-known.

 

When they found sarin gas, it wasn't proof. When they found warheads a few weeks back, it wasn't proof. They find more warheads, it isn't proof.

 

Why try and make the blind man see?

-=Mike

[Art Sandusky 0]

When they found sarin gas, it wasn't proof. When they found warheads a few weeks back, it wasn't proof. They find more warheads, it isn't proof.

 

Why try and make the blind man see?

-=Mike

But even the people in charge of the searching aren't calling it, or anything found so far, proof of anything. This is like telling the police that something is evidence for a case when they themselves say it isn't.

[Guest MikeSC]

When they found sarin gas, it wasn't proof. When they found warheads a few weeks back, it wasn't proof. They find more warheads, it isn't proof.

 

Why try and make the blind man see?

    -=Mike

But even the people in charge of the searching aren't calling it, or anything found so far, proof of anything. This is like telling the police that something is evidence for a case when they themselves say it isn't.

Why should they HAVE to say this is proof? It's more than a little bloody obvious.

 

Let's say you see a man shot on the street.

 

You see a man wth a smoking gun in his hand that he has aimed at where the guy was standing.

 

Do you NEED the police to inform you that this might be evidence of homicide?

-=Mike

[BX 0]

When they found sarin gas, it wasn't proof. When they found warheads a few weeks back, it wasn't proof. They find more warheads, it isn't proof.

 

Why try and make the blind man see?

     -=Mike

But even the people in charge of the searching aren't calling it, or anything found so far, proof of anything. This is like telling the police that something is evidence for a case when they themselves say it isn't.

Why should they HAVE to say this is proof? It's more than a little bloody obvious.

 

Let's say you see a man shot on the street.

 

You see a man wth a smoking gun in his hand that he has aimed at where the guy was standing.

 

Do you NEED the police to inform you that this might be evidence of homicide?

-=Mike

Okay Mike, this is the part where you draw parallels to the WMD situation in Iraq, and make your comparison make some fucking sense.

[Hogan Made Wrestling 0]

The military is now confirming that these warheads were not chemical weapons. Apparently Poland jumped the gun on this one:

 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...ns_040702184424

[BX 0]

They jumped the gun again?

[Vanhalen 0]

It doesn't matter. Nothing will be proof enough for the critics. Hell, many still think that no links exist between Iraq and Al Qaeda at any level.

-=Mike

What, like that truck which was according to Fox News, "definetly used to transport biological nerve agents", and was found to be delivering milk?

[Guest Brian]

If the sarin was from a single bomb, and there are supposedly people coming from all over, isn't it just as easy to assume it was transported in as it was to assume it was a part of a larger cache?

[Guest Cerebus]

If the sarin was from a single bomb, and there are supposedly people coming from all over, isn't it just as easy to assume it was transported in as it was to assume it was a part of a larger cache?

No.

 

Nearly all experts in the ISG were left over from Iraq's pre-Gulf War BCW arsenal.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I'm trying to figure out why people are all awed and amazed by these mostly ineffective weapons from before the last Gulf War and saying it connects with Bush's remarks that Saddam has been recently buying the materials and the payload to make WMDs that are very real and could be delivered via ICBM to our door very soon.

 

Look at how often the Middle East has been a battleground. The fact that there's some improperly used sarin shell or a rocket that won't go off lying around doesn't suprise me. And the fact that we've managed to find these virtual duds aren't amazing me either.

[Guest MikeSC]

I'm trying to figure out why people are all awed and amazed by these mostly ineffective weapons from before the last Gulf War and saying it connects with Bush's remarks that Saddam has been recently buying the materials and the payload to make WMDs that are very real and could be delivered via ICBM to our door very soon.

 

Look at how often the Middle East has been a battleground. The fact that there's some improperly used sarin shell or a rocket that won't go off lying around doesn't suprise me. And the fact that we've managed to find these virtual duds aren't amazing me either.

If he has them PERIOD --- which you seem quite willing to state that he did --- then all the more reason to go in.

 

These shells were supposed to have been destroyed.

-=Mike

[JangoFett4Hire 0]

It doesn't matter. Nothing will be proof enough for the critics. Hell, many still think that no links exist between Iraq and Al Qaeda at any level.

            -=Mike

What, like that truck which was according to Fox News, "definetly used to transport biological nerve agents", and was found to be delivering milk?

Calcium can be harmful to those with family histories of kidney stones and osteoperosis...

 

OMG call Bill O'Reilly, we need to bomb Wisconsin!

[Guest Cerebus]

I'm trying to figure out why people are all awed and amazed by these mostly ineffective weapons from before the last Gulf War and saying it connects with Bush's remarks that Saddam has been recently buying the materials and the payload to make WMDs that are very real and could be delivered via ICBM to our door very soon.

 

Look at how often the Middle East has been a battleground. The fact that there's some improperly used sarin shell or a rocket that won't go off lying around doesn't suprise me. And the fact that we've managed to find these virtual duds aren't amazing me either.

First off the shell was not a "dud." The reason it didn't go off had nothing to do with the viability of the shell itself but because of its design. It was meant to be deliver its vile contents after being fired not exploded on the ground with an IED. Had it been fired from a 155mm Howitzer at a city or military base the result would have been the same as if it had been fired ten years ago (i.e. massive casualties).

 

Second, everyone seems to be conviently lumping all Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, and Radiological (NBCR) weapons under the lable of OMGWMD~! This particular type of binary artillery shell was NEVER declared to UNSCOM who did find some lower quality non "Mix-in-Flight" binary shells in 1996. As for UNMOVIC, while they had their suspicions, they could not find any direct evidence of the creation of "Mix-in-Flight" binary artillery shells but didn't rule it out since Saddam never turned over the information that UNMOVIC demanded. So fast forward to a year plus later and one of these previously unknown binary artillery shells finds itself in the hands of an unknown group, which apparently doesn't know they have or purposely ignores it. This fact is so widely dismissed in almost every media report I've read that its almost impossible to believe. Are the media really this blind and/or lazy? Surely this would bring up more questions about Iraq's WMD program prior to the invasion. Apparently not, since its 'only one shell.'

 

Thirdly, you can't make a binary sarin artillery shell like you would a Molotov cocktail or even a normal 155mm artillery shell. All but the very crudest CBWs (like Anarchist Cookbook crude) require vast resources, connections, and facilities that only a national government can provide. The idea that there were just some "lying around" like empty beer cans at a Dave Matthews concert is absurd. Don't forget either, we didn't 'find' this shell any more than the people at Oklahoma City "found" a bomb in a Ryder truck. It was attempted to be used on us.

[Guest INXS]

The amount of Sarin that was found a month or two ago was negible. Such a small amount it would have no affect on anyone. In other words, it can be discounted. All it shown was that at somepoint, the shell had been full of Sarin or had come into contact with Sarin.

 

This new "find" was a false start.

 

Any WMD found probably originated from the US anyway....not that we've found ANY yet.

[k thx 0]

I'm trying to figure out why people are all awed and amazed by these mostly ineffective weapons from before the last Gulf War and saying it connects with Bush's remarks that Saddam has been recently buying the materials and the payload to make WMDs that are very real and could be delivered via ICBM to our door very soon.

 

Look at how often the Middle East has been a battleground. The fact that there's some improperly used sarin shell or a rocket that won't go off lying around doesn't suprise me. And the fact that we've managed to find these virtual duds aren't amazing me either.

If he has them PERIOD --- which you seem quite willing to state that he did --- then all the more reason to go in.

 

These shells were supposed to have been destroyed.

-=Mike

In well over a year of searching, the best equipped armies in the world have found a handful of relics from the last war. Is it so hard to believe that in around 10 years, a delapidated Iraqi army couldn't find them? I know who I'd trust to search for my stuff more.

[Guest Cerebus]

The amount of Sarin that was found a month or two ago was negible. Such a small amount it would have no affect on anyone. In other words, it can be discounted. All it shown was that at somepoint, the shell had been full of Sarin or had come into contact with Sarin.

 

This new "find" was a false start.

 

Any WMD found probably originated from the US anyway....not that we've found ANY yet.

You're a complete dumbshit. A "negligable" amount? THREE LITERS OF SARIN IS NEGLIGABLE?

 

Christ what WOULDN'T be a "negliagable" to you? A goddamn water tower full of the stuff? Exposure to 100 MILLIGRAMS (a drop) to the skin without protection would cause respiratory failure and death almost immidietly with no hope of survival. Hell exposure to 40 miligrams is less pleasent, it basically means you're going to spend the next few hours (which most likely will be your last) of your life in agonizing pain.

 

The Tokoyo subway attack contained only a liter of sarin but was exploded improperly. If it had been exposed in a manner to maximize casualities you would have seen the number of dead and wounded reversed, most likely, though, the number for both would be much much higher. And that was with ONE LITER.

 

And you're telling me three liters of Sarin is a "negligable" amount? Go read, at least a little bit, on this shit then come back here and talk. You obvioulsy know both jack and shit on the subject.

[Guest MikeSC]

I'm trying to figure out why people are all awed and amazed by these mostly ineffective weapons from before the last Gulf War and saying it connects with Bush's remarks that Saddam has been recently buying the materials and the payload to make WMDs that are very real and could be delivered via ICBM to our door very soon.

 

Look at how often the Middle East has been a battleground. The fact that there's some improperly used sarin shell or a rocket that won't go off lying around doesn't suprise me. And the fact that we've managed to find these virtual duds aren't amazing me either.

If he has them PERIOD --- which you seem quite willing to state that he did --- then all the more reason to go in.

 

These shells were supposed to have been destroyed.

-=Mike

In well over a year of searching, the best equipped armies in the world have found a handful of relics from the last war. Is it so hard to believe that in around 10 years, a delapidated Iraqi army couldn't find them? I know who I'd trust to search for my stuff more.

chave, WMD isn't marmalade. You tend to keep track of where WMD's are. And there is still good reason to assume that much of it was shipped to Syria right before the war broke out.

-=Mike

[Guest Hero to all Children]

Actually the only reason that Tokyo really worked out, even exploded improperly, was because the Subway is a closed space. Try properly blowing up three liters in an open space. Woosh the wind comes and you have yourself some very uncomfortable people but almost no death counts.

 

100 milligram are lethal for one person. We're talking about weapons of MASS destruction here. The problem is that most of the gas in gas attacks dissipates without being directly capable of hurting anyone. That's why you need such big ammounts in open warfare. Of course .. if it's a house you're setting this shit off in you have a far higher bodycount due to the aforementioned lack of dispersion abilities (windows, open doors are the only ones.)

 

 

As said, this is one un-accounted for shell from the fore-last decade. 16 years old. That's older than some people who post on this board. The question is if Iraq was still stockpiling large number of WMD and if they were still being produced.

 

The ultimate smoking gun would be a factory which has been obviously used for this, provable by chemical residue and some abandoned, half-finished products. Or a warehouse/bunker stacked with chem/bio-missiles up to the roof.

[Guest MikeSC]

Hero, simple question:

 

What kind of a country would just have WMD shells laying around in the desert?

 

One that had them and tried to ship them out of country in a hurry?

-=Mike

[k thx 0]

I'm trying to figure out why people are all awed and amazed by these mostly ineffective weapons from before the last Gulf War and saying it connects with Bush's remarks that Saddam has been recently buying the materials and the payload to make WMDs that are very real and could be delivered via ICBM to our door very soon.

 

Look at how often the Middle East has been a battleground. The fact that there's some improperly used sarin shell or a rocket that won't go off lying around doesn't suprise me. And the fact that we've managed to find these virtual duds aren't amazing me either.

If he has them PERIOD --- which you seem quite willing to state that he did --- then all the more reason to go in.

 

These shells were supposed to have been destroyed.

-=Mike

In well over a year of searching, the best equipped armies in the world have found a handful of relics from the last war. Is it so hard to believe that in around 10 years, a delapidated Iraqi army couldn't find them? I know who I'd trust to search for my stuff more.

chave, WMD isn't marmalade. You tend to keep track of where WMD's are. And there is still good reason to assume that much of it was shipped to Syria right before the war broke out.

-=Mike

If you were keeping track of WMDs, surely it would be stockpiled in a convenient place so it could be used. Surely an isolated and delapidated WMD found after a year of searching doesn't fulfil the criteria of something Saddam was gonna pull out on the troops. Hell, its not entirely unfeasable that this was a relic from the previous war that they assumed had been used.

[Guest MikeSC]

If you were keeping track of WMDs, surely it would be stockpiled in a convenient place so it could be used. Surely an isolated and delapidated WMD found after a year of searching doesn't fulfil the criteria of something Saddam was gonna pull out on the troops. Hell, its not entirely unfeasable that this was a relic from the previous war that they assumed had been used.

Which is why it reeks of them trying to ship the WMD out of country quickly as humanly possible and leaving some behind in the mad scramble.

-=Mike

[Guest Hero to all Children]

Yes, Mike. Most certainly such a country would have old warheads lying around in the desert.

 

But the following types of countries would also have them lying around:

Countries that used WMDs in conflict situations long, long ago. (They're still finding WW2 duds in Germany, old grenades that were just never cleaned up as the Germans fled the scenes of lost battle, etc)

Countries that are an official or inofficial warzone into which terrorists can easily import single, old WMDs to use them against their enemies.

Countries that used to have WMD at some point of a time under a corrupt system. Those can get anywhere.

 

 

So really, unless there's pictural evidence, witnesses and stockpiles of WMD found in Syria to prove this, I won't believe this.

[Guest MikeSC]

Yes, Mike. Most certainly such a country would have old warheads lying around in the desert.

 

But the following types of countries would also have them lying around:

Countries that used WMDs in conflict situations long, long ago. (They're still finding WW2 duds in Germany, old grenades that were just never cleaned up as the Germans fled the scenes of lost battle, etc)

Countries that are an official or inofficial warzone into which terrorists can easily import single, old WMDs to use them against their enemies.

Countries that used to have WMD at some point of a time under a corrupt system. Those can get anywhere.

 

 

So really, unless there's pictural evidence, witnesses and stockpiles of WMD found in Syria to prove this, I won't believe this.

Keep in mind, Iraq was required to destroy ALL WMD's. Leaving "some" was not acceptable.

-=Mike

[Guest Cerebus]

If you were keeping track of WMDs, surely it would be stockpiled in a convenient place so it could be used. Surely an isolated and delapidated WMD found after a year of searching doesn't fulfil the criteria of something Saddam was gonna pull out on the troops. Hell, its not entirely unfeasable that this was a relic from the previous war that they assumed had been used.

 

The ultimate smoking gun would be a factory which has been obviously used for this, provable by chemical residue and some abandoned, half-finished products. Or a warehouse/bunker stacked with chem/bio-missiles up to the roof.

 

Wrong.

 

First off, as I said before, the shell was old but not "delapidated." If it had been fired from a Howitzer it would still be just as deadly as it was 10+ years ago. Second, the concealment apparatus that Saddam devised did a very good job of disguising BCWs as conventional munitions which Kay, the head of the ISG, explained in his report to congress.

 

Saddam's minions weren't stupid enough to stash a whole shitload of illegal weapons in a big barn with a "keep out" sign on it. There were reports of shipping BCW material with military unifroms to Ba'athist headquarters, others of them being buried, concealed in lakes, relocated to agricultural areas and private homes, or hidden beneath Mosques or hospitals.

 

Saddam had most of his intelligence apparatus devoted to hiding NBCR weapons. You really think they would pile them all together in a big "WMD Factory?" The bulkiest materials that the ISG was expecting to find could fit in a two car garage. If you honestly think there was a big ass cache somewhere in Iraq you're either delusional or know nothing about Iraq's NBCR warfare programs.

[Guest INXS]

I think Mike's right..Saddam obviously sent all his WMD to Syria. Let's invade them next. After we've been there and found no WMD let's assume they actually went to Iran and invade them too!

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Keep in mind, Iraq was required to destroy ALL WMD's. Leaving "some" was not acceptable.

          -=Mike

Keep in mind destroying WMDs takes time.

 

Bush recently proposed destroying 50% of our nuclear arsenal a few weeks ago. We're the most industrialized nation in the world and yet we won't even be able to start until about 2009. Now obviously, Bush is taking his sweet time on this for some reasons, probably both political and more reasonable, but I don't think we'll be able to destroy all of that immediately.

 

Nobody was interested in this war just because Saddam maybe coulda woulda have something that fits in the non-typical term of WMDs. People were interested in it because Bush had us thinking he could launch an A-Bomb across the ocean in 3 days. You can sit and say "but this is WMD too!" but you simply cannot deny this.

[Guest MikeSC]

Keep in mind, Iraq was required to destroy ALL WMD's. Leaving "some" was not acceptable.

          -=Mike

Keep in mind destroying WMDs takes time.

 

Bush recently proposed destroying 50% of our nuclear arsenal a few weeks ago. We're the most industrialized nation in the world and yet we won't even be able to start until about 2009. Now obviously, Bush is taking his sweet time on this for some reasons, probably both political and more reasonable, but I don't think we'll be able to destroy all of that immediately.

 

Nobody was interested in this war just because Saddam maybe coulda woulda have something that fits in the non-typical term of WMDs. People were interested in it because Bush had us thinking he could launch an A-Bomb across the ocean in 3 days. You can sit and say "but this is WMD too!" but you simply cannot deny this.

Saddam's had 13 years to do it and it can be done, easily, in that time.

-=Mike