OT: Smoking Gun?

[CamEdwards]

No evidence of WMD's in Iraq?

Chemical Tipped Missiles Found

Rabid warmongereres NPR (National Public Radio) is reporting the discovery of 20 missiles tipped with sarin and mustard gas. The missiles were found near Baghdad, "ready to fire".

This is in addition to the following discovery:

U.S. Investigates Nerve Agent Find

Blister and nerve agents found in an agricultural facility. They were in a pit camouflaged with leaves. 11 25-gallon barrels and 3 55-gallon barrels were found.

Golly, I guess Iraq hadn't disarmed after all.

[User #2735]

Don't be brainwashed....It's obvious that the U.S. has planted everything /sarcasm

[Bee]

While it doesn't really change the arguments made by most of the antiwar folks, I'm really glad to see we found something. Otherwise, we'd have looked like complete idiots.

[CamEdwards]

where the hell is the "biting my tongue" graemlin????????

[stkelly52]

It is still to early to know that this is true. How many reports have come out that later proved to be totally false?

[Ksyrup]

Nothing as specific, frankly. The original reports were of white powder that had yet been tested, and reports of that type. This is actual weapons with clear vials containing substances that have at least been field-tested and confirmed positive.

[GrantDawg]

Confirmation of this report is being spread around, but Centcom still hasn't confirmed.

[Mike D]

I was/am hoping that evidence like this would not be produced until after Saddam Hussein and his government are firmly contained so as to not give them a reason to say, "Oh, what the hell....fire at will."

In my mind this is not a question of confirmation, but when to confirm it. There are a lot of soldiers over their that are being put in danger by the admittance of any such evidence at this point and time.

[RonnieDobbs]

Looks pretty legit... big headline under Breaking News at cnn.com:

Material found at paramilitary camp in Hindiyah, Iraq, tests positive for chemical-warfare agents in preliminary testing, Pentagon sources tell CNN. Samples being flown to U.S. for confirmation. Details soon.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Dutch
I was/am hoping that evidence like this would not be produced until after Saddam Hussein and his government are firmly contained so as to not give them a reason to say, "Oh, what the hell....fire at will."

In my mind this is not a question of confirmation, but when to confirm it. There are a lot of soldiers over their that are being put in danger by the admittance of any such evidence at this point and time.

Dutch, that is an EXCELLENT point. I'll admit I hadn't thought about that at all. IF they still have the ability to do so, this confirmation pretty much removes one of the biggest reasons they wouldn't use them.

[Bee]

At this point the Iraqis couldn't even throw up a road block when we drove into downtown Baghdad, I seriously doubt they are organized enough to use chemical weapons without killing a lot more of their soldiers than ours.

[SackAttack]

http://www.jsonline.com/news/gen/apr03/131713.asp

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel is reporting that not only were suspected chemical weapons found, there were reactions among troops and journalists consistent with low-level exposure to sarin.

Smoking gun, indeed.

[SackAttack]

Dola -

Bee, why doesn't the presence of the proscribed weapons change the arguments of the anti-war folk? Not looking for a fight here, I'm just honestly curious as to how something they could be willing to overlook something that powerful.

Josh

[MJ4H]

SIGH

NEAR NAJAF, Iraq (AFP) - A facility near Baghdad that a US officer had said might finally be "smoking gun" evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons production turned out to contain pesticide, not sarin gas as feared.

[RonnieDobbs]

SA - don't want to speak for Bee here, but he did a good job of summing up his position here .

[GrantDawg]

Originally posted by MattJones4Heisman
SIGH

NEAR NAJAF, Iraq (AFP) - A facility near Baghdad that a US officer had said might finally be "smoking gun" evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons production turned out to contain pesticide, not sarin gas as feared.

That is a different site.

[MJ4H]

Ugh. Yahoo's News headlines removed the Possible Smoking Gun headline and replaced it with that story Grrrr

[Bee]

Originally posted by SackAttack
Dola -

Bee, why doesn't the presence of the proscribed weapons change the arguments of the anti-war folk? Not looking for a fight here, I'm just honestly curious as to how something they could be willing to overlook something that powerful.

Josh

I was careful to use most anti-war folk. There were a few that didn't think Iraq had WMDs, but I think they were definitely the minority. Most of the arguments I've seen revolved around the necessity of war to disarm Iraq, not the fact that Iraq didn't have WMDs.

To be completely honest, if anything I think this war to date has strengthened the argument of the anti-war crowd. Despite a military invading Iraq and it taking 3 weeks to get into Baghdad, Iraq has not used WMDs. There have been chances to use it. They appear to have had it. But they have been unable to use it even in Iraq. To me, that doesn't sound like they were on the verge of using their WMDs against us or our allies. This was supposed to be a pre-emptive strike, but I really don't see what we were pre-empting.

[Bee]

Originally posted by RonnieDobbs
SA - don't want to speak for Bee here, but he did a good job of summing up his position here .

Thanks, that saves me time trying to explain my position all over again.

[Mike D]

This was supposed to be a pre-emptive strike, but I really don't see what we were pre-empting.

On an interesting side note,

Amnesty International's web site is no longer reporting the possible death of 200,000 Iraqi children under the age of 5 since 1991 as a result of sanctions.

They are now reporting the hundreds if not thousands that are suffering due to the conflict.

Basically, we will always see what we want to see.

[Bee]

Amnesty International updates it's website pretty often. Right now I see one of their headlines concerns our "ally" Turkey where where there seems to be a large number of reports of women sexually tortured while in police custody. I wonder what the US government will do about that (other than send Turkey money for use of their airspace)?

[Bonegavel]

The smartest thing that Sadaam could have done was rid his country entirely of WMDs in the weeks leading up to the deadline. Sending them all to syria or wherever so that when we came in, we would find zip.

Seems to me that Sadaam under-estimated Bush. Probably thought that he wouldn't dare follow up on his word. Oops. Thankfully, these meglomaniacs (hitler and co.) are missing a few too many screws.

[Bee]

The smartest thing he could have done was comply initially to the UN resolutions.

I think with all the surveillance we have in the area if he had tried to move all the WMDs to another country we'd have intercepted the bulk of them.

I do think he underestimated Bush's desire to remove him and he probably overestimated the Russian and French abilities to stop Bush from acting.

[Franklinnoble]

I think Saddam should have spent more time watching American satellite news broadcasts and planned more accordingly. If he thought he was going to realistically be able to repel the American and British advance, he's either poorly advised or just incredibly delusional. His best time to use the chemical weapons would have been while US troops were queued up at the Kuwaiti border just prior to the invasion - increasing his odds of actually hitting something, stalling the advance, and keeping his own guys healthy at the same time.

That said, it probably would have slowed things down by maybe a week or two.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by Bee
The smartest thing he could have done was comply initially to the UN resolutions.

Nice.

I should have prefaced my comment with, "given that he won't ever comply with the UN resolutions..."

I think with all the surveillance we have in the area if he had tried to move all the WMDs to another country we'd have intercepted the bulk of them.

I heard tell of truckloads of stuff going to Syria. Unconfirmed, of course.

I do think he underestimated Bush's desire to remove him and he probably overestimated the Russian and French abilities to stop Bush from acting.

agreed.

[CamEdwards]

Just so you know, the AFP (a French news agency, btw) is the only agency reporting that the chemicals are pesticide. Everybody else is waiting for the tests to come back. It's entirely possible that there were pesticides contaminating the samples (it was found in an agricultural complex). Of course, it's also possible that the drums were simply pesticide.

Still doesn't explain the chemical tipped missiles though, unless that's the Iraqi method of cropdusting.

[astralhaze]

Maybe so, maybe no, anything is possible. I'm in the wait and see camp myself.

[Airhog]

I am also in the wait and see camp. Even if they do confirm this as being true, its still very little WMD. The reports before the war was hussien was supposed to have produced tons of some of those chemicals. I would hate to think we went to war over 20 missiles and a few hundred gallons of chemicals...

[Tarkus]

Originally posted by Airhog
I am also in the wait and see camp. Even if they do confirm this as being true, its still very little WMD. The reports before the war was hussien was supposed to have produced tons of some of those chemicals. I would hate to think we went to war over 20 missiles and a few hundred gallons of chemicals...

and a few hundred thousand dead Iraqis.

Tarkus

[Fritz]

Airhog,

What quantity would be enough?

[Bonegavel]

Be patient all you non-believers. The desert is a big place and Chipmunk Hussein had plenty of time to hide the stuff. After we settle things down, there will be plenty of time to play Hide-n-go-Chem weapons.

And, like Fritz was alluding to, even if we only find 1 weapon that is in violation, that is still a violation.

[MJ4H]

Originally posted by Airhog
I am also in the wait and see camp. Even if they do confirm this as being true, its still very little WMD. The reports before the war was hussien was supposed to have produced tons of some of those chemicals. I would hate to think we went to war over 20 missiles and a few hundred gallons of chemicals...

Thats the great thing about WMD. It doesnt take much to kill a lot of people.

[NoMyths]

Fritz: 17 ml.

[Fritz]

Originally posted by NoMyths
Fritz: 17 ml.

I am sure the Allies will find 17 mighty llamas, if not more. What does that have to do with anything? Was there a mighty llama issue that I was not aware of?

[Fritz]

doal,

I am not hitting Airhog with a zero tollerance argument. I am genuinely interested in how much/many we would need to find.

[NoMyths]

Originally posted by Fritz
I am sure the Allies will find 17 mighty llamas, if not more. What does that have to do with anything? Was there a mighty llama issue that I was not aware of?

It's how much sarin I extracted from the collosal squid.

[ice4277]

Why do I have a feeling that Lobsterboy had something to do with this?

[Fritz]

Originally posted by NoMyths
It's how much sarin I extracted from the collosal squid.

Is that something like the colossal squid? Are you attacking squidkind?

Some day you might need a favor from the Colossal Squid! Then where'll you be?!

[Fritz]

Originally posted by ice4277
Why do I have a feeling that Lobsterboy had something to do with this?

Lobsterboy is an angry man.

[Airhog]

Originally posted by Fritz
Airhog,

What quantity would be enough?

Hmm, thats a tought question. Im not real sure how much mustard gas or sarin would be required to kill the population of a small town. Also, the reports Ive read said it might not be pure gas, but a mixture. They also werent sure if it was weapons grade material.


I would have to say 50+ warheads containing sarin or something as deadly as sarin.

As far as the concentrates go. I would have to say 5+ barrels of sarin would probably be enough. And this would have to be pure sarin, the kind that can be used in a warhead


However, Im not sure if one should be able to set a rigid limit. he shouldnt of had any of course, but how much would be needed to do serious damage? I know far to little to make an educated guess about this. Maybe someone can shed some light on how much sarin would be needed to wipe out a populated area of say
1sq mile.

Originally posted by Airhog
Hmm, thats a tought question. Im not real sure how much mustard gas or sarin would be required to kill the population of a small town. Also, the reports Ive read said it might not be pure gas, but a mixture. They also werent sure if it was weapons grade material.


I would have to say 50+ warheads containing sarin or something as deadly as sarin.

As far as the concentrates go. I would have to say 5+ barrels of sarin would probably be enough. And this would have to be pure sarin, the kind that can be used in a warhead


However, Im not sure if one should be able to set a rigid limit. he shouldnt of had any of course, but how much would be needed to do serious damage? I know far to little to make an educated guess about this. Maybe someone can shed some light on how much sarin would be needed to wipe out a populated area of say
1sq mile.

It is quite simple. The UN resolutions state that he is not allowed to have any what so ever. He has claimed that he doesn't have any what so ever. So why would you even allow for a little bit to be acceptable? Isn't enough measured by the ability to kill just one person? If our laws say that a felon cannot have any guns and we find out that a felon does in fact have a gun should we allow it to slide?

[CamEdwards]

the answer is yes, as long as it's a tiny gun.

Originally posted by CamEdwards
the answer is yes, as long as it's a tiny gun.

With only enough bullits to kill only one person right?

[Bee]

Originally posted by couriers
It is quite simple. The UN resolutions state that he is not allowed to have any what so ever. He has claimed that he doesn't have any what so ever. So why would you even allow for a little bit to be expectable? Isn't enough measured by the ability to kill just one person? If our laws say that a felon cannot have any guns and we find out that a felon does in fact have a gun should we allow it to slide?

No but we generally don't kill him and his entire family because he is caught with a weapon.

Originally posted by Bee
No but we generally don't kill him and his entire family because he is caught with a weapon.

We would if he held up in their household with weapons and refused to surrender after being given countless opportunities to either get rid of the gun or to turn himself in.

[Airhog]

Originally posted by couriers
It is quite simple. The UN resolutions state that he is not allowed to have any what so ever. He has claimed that he doesn't have any what so ever. So why would you even allow for a little bit to be acceptable? Isn't enough measured by the ability to kill just one person? If our laws say that a felon cannot have any guns and we find out that a felon does in fact have a gun should we allow it to slide?

I think that your taking what I said out of context. Im not talking about the resolution, what im talking is about is justification of declaring war on Iraq over what? some pesticide and a few missles? My comments had no bearing on what the UN had passed. I was simply asking how much chemical weapons it would take to destroy a sizable population.

How will the US look if they infact find only a few chemical weapons? I think it would take more than 25 missles to convince people that this war was in fact needed.

Does the end justify the mean? We have killed 1000's of Iraqi soldiers and 100's of civilians. Does that cost of life justify us findiing a few WMD? not IMHO

[astralhaze]

I continue to find the defying the U.N. argument to be hilarious. Iraq has been defying U.N. resolutions so we punish them by.....defying the U.N. Makes sense, right?

[CAsterling]

Originally posted by Tarkus
and a few hundred thousand dead Iraqis.

Tarkus

Sorry, tried really hard to let this one go, but just can't.

When was this conflict ever about the Iraqis that Saddam's regieme had already killed - it has never been about this, but this angle plays well for PR now.

[Bee]

Originally posted by couriers
We would if he held up in their household with weapons and refused to surrender after being given countless opportunities to either get rid of the gun or to turn himself in.

I'd hate to have police like that in my neighborhood. Be in possession of a firearm and they blow up your house?

Originally posted by Airhog
How will the US look if they infact find only a few chemical weapons? I think it would take more than 25 missles to convince people that this war was in fact needed.

Considering recent polls the majority of Americans feel that the war is justified regardless of WMD. Considering Israel is within range of Iraq's missiles I think you would be hard pressed to convince them that this war was not justified over 25 missiles. Besides, he claimed to not have any at all. If zero actually equals 25 then 25 would soon equal 100 and so on and so on if he was left to his own accord.