PDA

View Full Version : Tests Confirm Sarin Gas in Baghdad Bomb



lucky wilbury
05-25-2004, 05:49 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040525/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_iraq_sarin_2

Tests Confirm Sarin Gas in Baghdad Bomb

1 hour, 3 minutes ago

By JOHN J. LUMPKIN, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Comprehensive testing has confirmed the presence of the chemical weapon sarin in the remains of a roadside bomb discovered this month in Baghdad, a defense official said Tuesday.

The determination, made by a laboratory in the United States that the official would not identify, verifies what earlier, less-thorough field tests had found: the bomb was made from an artillery shell designed to disperse the deadly nerve agent on the battlefield.

The origin of the shell remains unclear, and finding that out is a priority for the U.S. military, the defense official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

Some analysts worry the 155-millimeter artillery shell, found rigged as a bomb on May 15, may be part of a larger stockpile of Iraqi chemical weapons that insurgents can now use. But no more have turned up, and several military officials have said the shell may have been an older one that predated the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites).

It likewise is not known whether the bombers knew they had a chemical weapon. Military officials have said the shell bore no labels to indicate it was anything except a normal explosive shell, the type used to make scores of roadside bombs in Iraq (news - web sites).

No one was injured in the shell's initial detonation, but two American soldiers who removed the round had symptoms of low-level nerve agent exposure, officials said last week.

The shell was a binary type, which has two chambers containing relatively safe chemicals. When the round is fired from an artillery gun, its rotation mixes the chemicals to create sarin, which is supposed to disperse when the shell strikes its target.

Since it was not fired from a gun but was detonated as a bomb, the initial explosion on May 15 dispersed the precursor chemicals, apparently mixing them in only small amounts, officials said then. In battle, such shells would have to be fired in great numbers to effect a large body of troops.

Iraq's first field-test of a binary-type shell containing sarin was in 1988, U.S. defense officials have said.

Saddam's government only disclosed the testing and production after Iraqi weapons chief Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel al-Majid, Saddam's son-in-law, defected in 1995. Saddam's government never declared any sarin or shells filled with sarin remained.

Saddam's alleged stockpile of weapons of mass destruction was the Bush administration's chief stated reason for invading Iraq. U.S. weapons hunters have been unable to validate the prewar intelligence.

Some trace elements of mustard agent, an older type of chemical weapon, were detected in an artillery shell found in a Baghdad street this month, U.S. officials said previously. The shell also was believed to be from one of Saddam's old stockpiles.

Viking
05-25-2004, 09:02 PM
The sound of liberals is deafening in here. I suppose they're plotting their response: 'it was just a gallon......'it was a BCE plant'.......'Saddam just forgot he had it'..........:rolleyes:

If you leftist fuckers think we're just going to magically produce Osama for the election, don't you think we'd have magically produced a shitload of WMD's by now, so you'd shut the fuck up? :rolleyes: It must be hell to live in an alternate reality..........

FORD
05-25-2004, 09:46 PM
The shell's been around since before Poppy's invasion. So it doesn't meet the criteria required to justify PNAC's invasion.

John Ashcroft
05-26-2004, 11:50 AM
Nothing would justify the Iraq war with you libs, so quit pretending with your topical approach.

Mr Grimsdale
05-27-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by lucky wilbury
[url]Some analysts worry the 155-millimeter artillery shell, found rigged as a bomb on May 15, may be part of a larger stockpile of Iraqi chemical weapons that insurgents can now use. But no more have turned up, and several military officials have said the shell may have been an older one that predated the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites).

Minor point, but...

If it was a 155mm shell that's interesting cos' Russia and China never made 155mm artillery pieces. Who sold them the Western callibre artillery?

The version of the story reported over here, at least the one I heard, was that it was a conventional artillery round attached to a cannister of Sarin. Which if we believe the hype served up by the press/governments is pretty easy for anyone to make.

Blairs' whole argument for involvement in the war was that the UK was at risk of being attacked by WMDs within 45 minutes. Now unless that's a revolutionary 155mm cannon I don't think we really need to worry too much.

John Ashcroft
05-27-2004, 12:26 PM
Um, dude, it's not the shell but the contents that are the problem...

Mr Grimsdale
05-27-2004, 12:44 PM
You've missed my point. Or rather two points.

A - the origin of the shell, a minor point - I'm sure you or I can get hold of a Western 155mm cannon if we try hard enough and ask the right people.

B - the story that I heard reported was that it was a CONVENTIONAL shell rigged up to a separate cannister of Sarin. If the hype put out by our governments and press regarding the ease of manufacture of Sarin are true it is not conclusive proof that the chemical was made under Saddams regime - since any muppet with a little common sense can allegedly refine the "magic beans" using a saucepan in their kitchen.

I wish to point out to any listening CIA/MI6/Mossad/KGB/BND/SGDN operatives that I am not encouraging people to experiment with this!!

Mr Grimsdale
05-27-2004, 12:45 PM
Just as I hit the submit button I remembered the chemical made from the "magic beans" is actually Ricin not Sarin. Ooops. :)

John Ashcroft
05-27-2004, 01:05 PM
That's alright, it's all "FM" anyway...

lucky wilbury
05-30-2004, 06:56 PM
bump