Sarin gas released in Iraq - 2 US troops injured

[Arles]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html

Sarin Gas Released by Iraq Roadside Bomb

BAGHDAD, Iraq — A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday. Two people were treated for "minor exposure," but no serious injuries were reported.

"The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found," said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search), the chief military spokesman in Iraq. "The round had been rigged as an IED (improvised explosive device) which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy.

"A detonation occurred before the IED could be rendered inoperable. This produced a very small dispersal of agent," he said."

[SackAttack]

But there's no WMD in Iraq, right?

[vex]

Shocking.

[nfg22]

Of course not, Bush planted that thing there anyways. Then detonated it to take away suspicion, just like he killed nick.

[sachmo71]

Heh. This should be a hoot.

[BishopMVP]

They've had at least one other incident in the past week where a roadside bomb contained chemical weapon (mustard gas IIRC,) but they defused that one. Unless we find a huge stash marked "To Osama with love" some people will still go around claiming no WMD. Even if we did, the majority would probably claim it was planted.

[nfg22]

Its not even the point that they were for Osama but the fact that he did indeed have them. Now yeah the justification was that Iraq harbored terrorists but that wasnt the initial reason. Iraq obviosly does harbor terrorists, but they do not like al queada as far I hear. If a pile of WMD are found thats an election clincher for bush.

[kcchief19]

Chill out, kids. If you actually read the story, it seems to indicate that the shell was at least 13 years old and appears that while it had a some sarin gas in it, the person who rigged it to explode didn't know that it had sarin in it.

[sachmo71]

Some might argue that the "WMDs" may have been smuggled in from Iran, or even Syria. Or stolen from Russia.

In my book, it's irrelevant. Bush's problems are what is happening now. The WMD debate is so 2003. :)

[Maple Leafs]

I've been relatively pro-war, but this is clearly not a situation where you can point and say "see, we found the WMD after all".

[vex]

Chill out, kids. If you actually read the story, it seems to indicate that the shell was at least 13 years old and appears that while it had a some sarin gas in it, the person who rigged it to explode didn't know that it had sarin in it.

Yes, I'm going to trust *that* person.

[BishopMVP]

I've been relatively pro-war, but this is clearly not a situation where you can point and say "see, we found the WMD after all".Yeah, I know. I was just commenting to SackAttack's sarcastic response.

[nfg22]

Yeah I dont think you could point this as a WMD either. I have been pro war and that is without the WMD. Yeah they were soverieng nation that defied the weapons inspection like 6 times. and Saddam wasnt going to be peacefull his whole life. I say one less dictator in this world, not that all dictators are or have been bad but saddam was.

[sachmo71]

I don't thnk Sadaam ever had a peaceful moment in his life. You don't get that cruel on a whim. Then again, if he wasn't wired that way, he probably never would have made it to the top.

[Arles]

What's amazing to me is CBS news' coverage. No mention on it on their front page:

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/home/main100.shtml

In order to find the story, you have to open up the story on the blast killing the Iraqi leader and go midway down the page:

"In other developments:

A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent exploded near a U.S. military convoy, but there were no casualties, the U.S. military said Monday. Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said the bomb was an old type of artillery shell, of the type that Baghdad claimed to have destroyed before the 1991 Gulf War."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml

Of course, there's a story on the top fold about the prisoner abuse with no new information:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/30/iraq/main614905.shtml

And, the WMD story wasn't big enough to get its own link and push this off the front page:

"It's not made of gold — just eggs, lobster, caviar and a few trimmings. But an omelet on the menu of a swank Manhattan hotel will set you back $1,000, plus tip."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/17/national/main617786.shtml

I guess a story about an expensive omelet is more important than the finding (even limited) of WMD agents in Iraq :rolleyes:

[nfg22]

Yeah it should be on the front page but a WMD that minorly injured 2 people when they were right next to it isnt a WMD, I believe Iraq has WMD somewhere or shipped em somewhere but that isnt one of em.

[chinaski]

Its a roadside bomb with sarin in it, how can anyone see this story and lump it in with the hunt for wmd's in iraq or say "see they did have wmd"?

do you have *any* idea how easy sarin is to make?

this story is not getting major press, because its not worthy of major press.

[fantastic flying froggies]

Yeah it should be on the front page but a WMD that minorly injured 2 people when they were right next to it isnt a WMD, I believe Iraq has WMD somewhere or shipped em somewhere but that isnt one of em.
Exactly. WMD does stand for Mass Destruction after all. I'm not saying there aren't / weren't WMDs in Irak, but with just 2 minor injuries, this incident is clearly not a case of mass destruction...

[SackAttack]

Yeah, I know. I was just commenting to SackAttack's sarcastic response.

I'm just sayin', we've now had two of these things in the last week or so in the hands of insurgents attempting to use them against the troops. Whether they know what they had or not, eh, whatever.

I'm just a little bit disturbed that the press rushed to the conclusion "Well, we didn't find them in a two month span (or whatever), they must not have ever existed, and this whole thing must just have been a political ploy by Bush the Younger."

I don't buy that Saddam destroyed them, because what was the point of playing his little game of chicken if he really had complied?

But, eh, that's ground well-covered, and I won't pack it down any further today.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I'm not ready to declare this as the major WMD find of the decade or anything, but ... I don't believe the actual in-use effectiveness of a weapons neccessarily determines whether it's a WMD or not. That seems to be more determined by it's potential.

Here's an example: Let's say I booby-trap a pocket nuke. Turns out I wired it wrong & it wouldn't have exploded anyway, but when it's discovered, the bomb techs trigger the booby trap & two of them are killed. Only two fatalities, but that device is still a WMD ... it just wasn't used in a fashion that led to mass destruction.

[Mr. Wednesday]

do you have *any* idea how easy sarin is to make?Yes, but at least one of the stories I read suggested that the nerve agent was native to the shell -- it was claimed to be a two-chemical shell where the agent was created by mixing a pair of reagents.

[Arles]

Mr. Wednesday is right. This was from a just-released AP story:

"In this case, it appears two components in the "binary" shell, which are designed to combine and create deadly sarin, did not mix upon detonation, the official said."

The story also stated that had those components indeed mixed before detonation, there's a good chance the entire US regimine would have been killed.

[Greyroofoo]

This WMD goes off, 2 people treated for slight injury

weapon of MASS DESTRUCTION indeed. Is this really why we went into Iraq? Cuz Saddam had a weapon that could slightly injure 2 people?

[Radii]

This WMD goes off, 2 people treated for slight injury

weapon of MASS DESTRUCTION indeed. Is this really why we went into Iraq? Cuz Saddam had a weapon that could slightly injure 2 people?

A comment like that makes you and your arguments against the war look like they have absolutely no thought behind them and will cause many to see the entire anti-war 'camp' as having no credibility. Grabbing hold of this one single fact and saying "SEE I WAS RIGHT" makes you look like an idiot. (I'm possibly the single most non-confrontational person on this board, so you have to really go off the deep end to get this reaction from me).

Take the report for what its worth, which isn't much right now.

I was against us invading Iraq as much as anyone. I thought we made a big mistake going in there. I still think our decision was terribly flawed and that we need a change of leadership at home. But jesus, man, get a grip.

[CamEdwards]

This WMD goes off, 2 people treated for slight injury

weapon of MASS DESTRUCTION indeed. Is this really why we went into Iraq? Cuz Saddam had a weapon that could slightly injure 2 people?

you're either a dumbass or deliberately ignoring the information presented. This weapon, had it detonated properly, would have killed thousands. This weapon most likely came from Saddam's arsenal. This weapon should have been declared. This weapon should have been destroyed. Neither happened.

Is this a major WMD find? Nope. But along with last week's mustard gas incident, it's evidence that the WMD's are there, and undiscovered by the Iraqi Survey Group.

I give it 12 hours before the story is spun to blame the Bush administration for not finding these, rather than giving the Bush administration credit for being right about the weapons being there to begin with.

[Hurst2112]

They've had at least one other incident in the past week where a roadside bomb contained chemical weapon (mustard gas IIRC,) but they defused that one. Unless we find a huge stash marked "To Osama with love" some people will still go around claiming no WMD. Even if we did, the majority would probably claim it was planted.


I didn't know about the mustard gas bomb. That shit is horrible. My great-grandfather was in world war 1. He got explosed to mustard gas during a battle. I was real little, but I remember him telling my uncle about how painful it was.

So, how do you make sarin gas? Is that the shit that you can make by adding bleach to soap? If so, I did that to myself a couple times working as a dishwasher in my other uncles restaurant.

[Franklinnoble]

you're either a dumbass or deliberately ignoring the information presented. This weapon, had it detonated properly, would have killed thousands. This weapon most likely came from Saddam's arsenal. This weapon should have been declared. This weapon should have been destroyed. Neither happened.

Is this a major WMD find? Nope. But along with last week's mustard gas incident, it's evidence that the WMD's are there, and undiscovered by the Iraqi Survey Group.

I give it 12 hours before the story is spun to blame the Bush administration for not finding these, rather than giving the Bush administration credit for being right about the weapons being there to begin with.
12 hours? I'll take that bet...

I'd have set the over/under at 2 hours... you're slipping, Cam...

[Franklinnoble]

So, how do you make sarin gas? Is that the shit that you can make by adding bleach to soap? If so, I did that to myself a couple times working as a dishwasher in my other uncles restaurant.
Congratulations... that's QOTM material. Unfortunately, it looks like we'll have to wait for regime change around here before it gets due credit. ;)

[Hurst2112]

I give it 12 hours before the story is spun to blame the Bush administration for not finding these, rather than giving the Bush administration credit for being right about the weapons being there to begin with.

Does that 12 include the time until the Germans and French say, "you were right, we are sorry".

[Hurst2112]

Congratulations... that's QOTM material. Unfortunately, it looks like we'll have to wait for regime change around here before it gets due credit. ;)

Thanks, I think.

Wait, f-you for making me look stupid. Wait, no...thanks.

Oh nevermind.

;)

[Cringer]

A couple things, as othes have said it is driving me nuts all the WMD talk, a chemical weapon YES! WMD NO! Also, from the "expert" i saw on the Republican News Network (FOX) they were saying the schmucks using these may not even be totally aware that they had serin in them, or if they do, which ones have it and which ones don't.

[sachmo71]

FWIW, Chemical Weapons=WMD to the media.

[Sharpieman]

There has been 2 incidents of chemical weapon findings recently. They are small discoveries, but significant to Bush's case because no one can deny that there is a least some chemical weapons in Iraq. But then again, these were made about 13 years ago, so it wasn't like they were being stockpilled recently.

All this WMD talk doesn't matter anymore, it was significant before the war, but now that we are in Iraq, we need to focus on the task at hand. I'm not saying that you shouldn't still be against the war (I still am vehemently opposed to it), I'm just saying lets turn our focus to the war at hand.

To thread jack, does the large majority of people on this board believe that its a good idea to leave Iraq at the June 30th deadline?

[Ryche]

If properly deployed, chemical weapons are definitely WMD. Clearly not the case here, so it's not anything to get worked up about yet.

But it does raise the question of where it came from. Worse case scenario, whoever planned this bombing had no clue what they had until now, then realizes they have a whole cache of sarin available from what they thought was merely old shells.

[Ryche]

To thread jack, does the large majority of people on this board believe that its a good idea to leave Iraq at the June 30th deadline?

We're not going anywhere June 30th, few people are advocating that. That's just the change of government.

[Radii]

I'm not saying that you shouldn't still be against the war (I still am vehemently opposed to it), I'm just saying lets turn our focus to the war at hand.

To thread jack, does the large majority of people on this board believe that its a good idea to leave Iraq at the June 30th deadline?


I think I share some of your feelings. It's a mistake that we're there, we never should have started this, but now that we have started it, we've got to finish it. We'll be there for years, in a reasonably signifigant capacity but that should have been the understanding and expectation by the american public from the start.

I disagree that we should turn the focus totally away from things like WMDs and the reasons that we're there in the first place. It's up to the American People to evaluate everything that's happened so far and decide if Bush deserves another four years or not. To do that we must focus on the beginnings of all of this and decide whether the current Administration made a mistake or not

[Greyroofoo]

If we go anywhere on June 30, whoever the US puts in charge of Iraq will be #*$&^%.

And the sarin IED does not prove Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs. Most intelligent people who actually have experience to speak on these things (such as David Kay) believes the sarin was left behind from 1990. Any chemist will tell you the low-quality sarin Iraq produced from the 80s is not a threat now.

[CamEdwards]

Any chemist will tell you the low-quality sarin Iraq produced from the 80s is not a threat now.

And I'm sure that's very reassuring for the two soldiers injured by the gas, which, if detonated properly, could have killed thousands. :rolleyes:

[Arles]

If we go anywhere on June 30, whoever the US puts in charge of Iraq will be #*$&^%.

And the sarin IED does not prove Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs. Most intelligent people who actually have experience to speak on these things (such as David Kay) believes the sarin was left behind from 1990. Any chemist will tell you the low-quality sarin Iraq produced from the 80s is not a threat now.
CNN reported that if the bomb had mixed the chemicals correctly, it would have probably killed all the US soldiers in the convoy. I would hardly classify that as "not a threat".

It also doesn't matter if it was left behind or not. The resolution was for Sadaam to account for and destroy all chemical weapons. The assumption that he didn't was a big part of the US WMD claim before the war.

[stevew]

If we go anywhere on June 30, whoever the US puts in charge of Iraq will be #*$&^%.

And the sarin IED does not prove Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs. Most intelligent people who actually have experience to speak on these things (such as David Kay) believes the sarin was left behind from 1990. Any chemist will tell you the low-quality sarin Iraq produced from the 80s is not a threat now.


The whole "you are not intellegent" debate is getting fucking old.

:rolleyes:

[ice4277]

You guys would save yourselves some time if you just started to cut and paste your posts from other threads into this one.

[Fritz]

VOTE HERE! (http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showthread.php?t=25636)

[Dutch]

So let's get this straight. An isolated case of prisoner abuse is enough to call for the head of Donald Rumsfeld. But a scattering of chemical shells and toxins across Iraq is not big deal and Saddam Hussein's birthday should be celebrated in all major US cities?

Just so I'm reading you fine folks right. :)

[WussGawd]

So let's get this straight. An isolated case of prisoner abuse is enough to call for the head of Donald Rumsfeld. But a scattering of chemical shells and toxins across Iraq is not big deal and Saddam Hussein's birthday should be celebrated in all major US cities?

Just so I'm reading you fine folks right. :)

Ahem. It's not just an isolated case. The abuse has now been attributed to another camp, and courtesy of Sy Hersh's article, it now appears that the abuse was policy.

Now, what we do have is one shell, which may or may not contain sarin (even Rumsfeld says more tests need to be conducted), which according to some reports may date back to Gulf War I.

No, I wouldn't call this a smoking gun...yet.

[Franklinnoble]

Ahem. It's not just an isolated case. The abuse has now been attributed to another camp, and courtesy of Sy Hersh's article, it now appears that the abuse was policy.

Now, what we do have is one shell, which may or may not contain sarin (even Rumsfeld says more tests need to be conducted), which according to some reports may date back to Gulf War I.

No, I wouldn't call this a smoking gun...yet.
Who is Sy Hersh? Who said raping prisoners was "policy?"

Oh, and just about every WMD we've ever accused Saddam of having dates back to the cold war... so I don't see how the age of the warhead makes any difference in this case.

[WussGawd]

Who is Sy Hersh? Who said raping prisoners was "policy?"

Oh, and just about every WMD we've ever accused Saddam of having dates back to the cold war... so I don't see how the age of the warhead makes any difference in this case.

Sorry, Seymour Hersh.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040524fa_fact

[WussGawd]

Who is Sy Hersh? Who said raping prisoners was "policy?"

Oh, and just about every WMD we've ever accused Saddam of having dates back to the cold war... so I don't see how the age of the warhead makes any difference in this case.

Untrue. Many of the claims in the runup to the war asserted that Saddam was still creating biological and nuclear weapons. Remember the aluminum tubes and the mobile weapons labs on wheels?

[Mac Howard]

David Kay never said that there were no WMD materials in Iraq - that was merely the spin of the anti-war faction. He said (in his opinion and probably) that there were no LARGE STOCKPILES of WMDs there. He also said that, in his opinion and probably, immediately before the war, WMD material was moved into Syria, was destroyed and/or was buried in the desert.

This find is entirely consistent with that.

I can only really speak for what the Australian Prime Minister said here and that was that the danger in Iraq was not Saddam attacking the west with his WMDs but that WMD material would come into the hands of terrorists and massively amplify their ability to create mayhem and inflict death.

This find justifies that claim. There is clearly WMD material in Iraq. That has always been obvious to all but the ideologically blind - Saddam had it, he didn't destroy it, so it's still there (hidden or moved).

It doesn't matter if it's 15 years old - it will kill just as effectively and it's absolutely essential that it's kept away from terrorists.

[BishopMVP]

It doesn't matter if it's 15 years old - it will kill just as effectively and it's absolutely essential that it's kept away from terrorists.Now wait for the anti-war spin that our war just drove the WMD into the hands of terrorists (ignoring that they admitted there was/is WMD) as if waiting around longer would have somehow reduced the likelihood of this happening.

[Buccaneer]

Mac, kinda like sticking ones head in the sand could be an appropriate analogy?

I am coming to conclusion that there are those that do not believe in the terrorist mindset or in faction-sponsored terrorism. Do those think that if we play nice, the terrorists will just behave themselves? How should one respond to that?

[Mac Howard]

But unfortunately, BishopMVP, there will be some truth in that - not so much because of the war but because of the failure to handle the peace well enough. I supported, and still support, the war but I'm very unimpressed by the subsequent performance in the aftermath. The coalition really does have to lift its game there.

[Mac Howard]

>Mac, kinda like sticking ones head in the sand could be an appropriate analogy

Yes, I like that. I shall plagiarise that sometime :)

[EagleFan]

Wow, it's kind of funny reading this. You have the anti-Bush camp who are saying not to make anything out off such a small claim but that is the same camp that jumped immediately on the bandwagon of the prisoner abuse after the first report. I guess what they mean to say is "I cannot acept such a small amount of evidence as proof unless it is something that I can spin in my favor."

Also, on the comment of the person planting the bomb not knowing that it was nerve gas? How does this not count against Iraq haing WMD in that case? By that logic, the same group of people could stumble upon a huge stiockpile of WMD and attempt to set them off as bombs but we can't count this as WMD because they may not have known? Wow, talk about putting a spin on things.

For the record, I am taking a wait and see attitude before passing judgement. But remember, a journey must start with one step; so just a couple now might either be isolated incidents or the beginning of something much worse. Personally, I hope for the former rather than the latter (I would rather not be right about possible WMD, then be right and see thousands die as the proof is being detonated in the wrong hands).

[Dutch]

Fox News reports on their homepage that 3 to 4 litres of sarin nerve agent was in the bomb. They are still investigating the mustard gas believed to have been found a couple of weeks ago.

http://www.foxnews.com/

CNN doesn't mention it on their homepage.

http://www.cnn.com/

[Buccaneer]

Someday I would love to have someone admit that CNN is no better (or worse) at the propaganda game.

I don't know if this news mean anything or not but is it not news? If it goes against the network's political agenda, shouldn't journalistic integrity at least put it up as a news item (or at least copy and paste something from AP)?

[chinaski]

why does this matter at all? We didnt find sarin, it found us. Theres absolutely no way to say this was from saddams hidden stock piles. Do people really believe WMD are exclusive to saddam? Its sarin, as common in the world as mustard gas and much easier to make. its been around since wwII, thanks to the nazis. Syria, Russia, Jordan, and Iran have all produced mass quantities of sarin over the past 20 years. Russia in fact had the largest WMD program in the world as of 1989. Why arent we concerned about the proliferation of their stock piles? Osamas right hand man has already stated that they have purchased 3 suitcase nukes from russia, why not all the wmd too?

It could have killed 2-3000 people? please. The doomsday cult in japan released over 100 litres of sarin in 2 seperate attacks, it only killed 17 people.

If saddam still had this crap, dont you think someone in his army would have used it on us (in iraq) by now? saddam sure as hell isnt the only one who knows where they are(nt). They sure wouldnt pluck out a single shell and use it improperly.

Why is there such a rush to say "i told you saddam had wmd!".