WMD in Iraq?

hoepoe · 05-17-2004, 12:41

Hi all

Just posted on Debka.com

"Small amount of poison nerve agent sarin released in 155mm binary artillery shell laid as roadside bomb against US convoy near Baghdad airport Saturday. Coalition spokesman Gen. Kimmit said no one injured. Two members of ordinance team treated for minor sarin exposure. This is first discovery of chemical weapon in Iraq War and major escalation 45 days ahead of June 30 handover of sovereignty."

Thats quite a claim.

Hoepoe

**Team Sergeant** · 05-17-2004, 12:46

Foxnews is all over it.

It does show a level of resolve not seen before by the terrorists.

TS

**Kyobanim** · 05-17-2004, 13:30

I read where the experts think that the terrorists didn't know what they had which is why the chemicals didn't mix. Good thing they were the stupid variety.

**Team Sergeant** · 05-17-2004, 15:42

If I were a betting man Iâ€™d wager they knew it was a chemical weapon.

The stupid ingredient occurred when they tried unsuccessfully to employ the weapon.

I would not underestimate them in their choice of weapons. Iâ€™d like to know the where the weapon was placed (relatively close to a large number of troops, or on a deserted stretch of highway?) and which way the prevailing winds blew. That would help in determining if it was an intentional placement of a WMD.

Think about this, either way, now they know that cache of weapons includes WMDâ€™s, want to bet the next one works?

TS

**Roguish Lawyer** · 05-17-2004, 15:44

I note that foxnews.com has this is the lead headline, while it is not linked on the home page of cnn.com at all.

**Team Sergeant** · 05-17-2004, 15:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Roguish Lawyer
I note that foxnews.com has this is the lead headline, while it is not linked on the home page of cnn.com at all.

I watched CNN to see what they would say about the find, sure enough I was not disappointed when one of their big name reporters said and I quote;

â€œThis was not a WMD.â€

The same people that made rosie O and jerry springer famous must also be the same people that watch CNN and consider it news.

TS

WMD
Noun 1. weapon of mass destruction - a weapon that kills or injures civilian as well as military personnel (nuclear and chemical and biological weapons)

**Roguish Lawyer** · 05-17-2004, 15:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Team Sergeant
I watched CNN to see what they would say about the find, sure enough I was not disappointed when one of their big name reporters said and I quote;

â€œThis was not a WMD.â€

The same people that made rosie O and jerry springer famous must also be the same people that watch CNN and consider it news.

TS

WMD
Noun 1. weapon of mass destruction - a weapon that kills or injures civilian as well as military personnel (nuclear and chemical and biological weapons)

I've always thought that "WMD" is kind of a stupid term that someone must have invented for PR purposes. I prefer "NBC."

**Eagle5US** · 05-17-2004, 15:57

Our Chief EOD bubba here received a report of another IED with Mustard that was successfully disarmed last week...
Yes this was unclass...

Eagle

Surgicalcric · 05-17-2004, 16:45

Is the consensus here that the insurgents had no idea what they had or do you believe they knew it was Sarin and thus a planned munition that did not pan out?

If it was the latter, is there anyone here who believes the insurgents may have been holding off on using them (chemical WMD's) as long as possible, hoping the WMD's, or the lack of finding them, would be an issue in the coming election that would result in the POTUS not being re-elected and the end result of the US withdrawing its troops from Iraq?

Just something that crossed my mind. Am I reaching?

**Team Sergeant** · 05-17-2004, 17:12

Quote:

Originally posted by Surgicalcric
Is the consensus here that the insurgents had no idea what they had or do you believe they knew it was Sarin and thus a planned munition that did not pan out?

Without having all the intel one cannot make any assumptions. We (the lay public) do not have all the facts, yet.

Answer your own question SC, why would they deploy chemical weapons?

TS

DunbarFC · 05-17-2004, 17:19

Quote:

Originally posted by Team Sergeant
....... why would they deploy chemical weapons?

TS

I'll try

In the hopes that the injuries would be so horrific that it would sway American opinion to get out now and leave them a nice place to play ?

**Ambush Master** · 05-17-2004, 17:26

Also, none of the Press seem to be willing to point out that during the buildup before the war, the MILLIONS of Dollars worth of Atropine Injectors that Sadam had purchased over the previous several years !! WTF did he need that much Atropine for, are those people that asthamatic ???

.02
Martin

Surgicalcric · 05-17-2004, 17:28

Quote:

Originally posted by DunbarFC
...In the hopes that the injuries would be so horrific that it would sway American opinion to get out now and leave them a nice place to play ?

I agree with this line of thinking, but why now is my main question. Maybe there is no reason.

Back to PT...

rubberneck · 05-17-2004, 18:01

Quote:

I agree with this line of thinking, but why now is my main question.

I think the answer is more obvious than you might think. Coming shortly on the heels of abu graib media feeding frenzy anything that could further sour the US public on the war is a victory to them. If they had been able to kill scores of US troops it might provide the impetus for the likes of Kerry, Clinton, Gore, Kennedy, Daschle, Byrd, Rangle, Conyers, Jackson Lee, Pelosi, et alia (with their flanks covered by Rather, Jennings, NPR, CNN, Brokaw and the NY Times) to demand that the President withdraw our troops post haste.

**The Reaper** · 05-17-2004, 18:08

I think that we should be looking very hard for the people who placed this device and finding out where they got it from.

Chem arty rounds do not normally sit around by themselves, nor are they stored that way.

We should be very interested in where THAT storage bunker was.

TR