Nerve Gas Bomb Explodes In Iraq

[blueeyes]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3722255.stm

Brig Gen Mark Kimmitt said the blast had caused a small release of the substance and two people had been treated for exposure to the agent.

The substance was found in a shell inside a bag discovered by a US convoy a few days ago, he said.

It appears to be the first evidence of nerve gas existing in Iraq since the start of the US-led war last year.

'Limited effect'

The 155mm artillery round had been set up as a roadside bomb and it exploded before the US military were able to diffuse it.

Gen Kimmitt said the dispersal of the nerve agent from a device such as the homemade bomb was "limited".

"The former regime had declared all such rounds destroyed before the 1991 Gulf War," he said.

However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.

He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained.

Sarin is a toxic nerve gas 20 times as deadly as cyanide.

A drop the size of a pin-head can kill a person by effectively crippling their nervous system.

The gas is one of a group of nerve agents invented by German scientists in the 1930s as part of Adolf Hitler's preparations for World War II.

Although the Germans never released sarin in battle, it was used to lethal effect by Iraq during the 1980s both in the war against Iran and against the Kurds.

After the Gulf War, United Nations inspectors found large quantities of sarin in production at an Iraqi chemical weapons plant.

The Japanese doomsday cult, Aum Shinrikyo, also used the nerve agent in a Tokyo subway in 1995, in which 12 people died.


DEADLY SARIN
Invented in 1930s Germany
20 times deadlier than cyanide
Attacks nervous system
Pin head-sized drop can kill
Used in Iraq in 1980s
And in 1995 Japan subway attack
Antidotes are available

So what have we learned?
A)the BBC sucks at writing news stories.
B)Since sarin doesn't have a 15 year shelf life, new stuff must have been made or the old stuff must have been kept in some damn good conditions, or moved it in.

[Obsidian Claws]

C: WMDs have and do exist in Iraq.

My God... could it be, that oil wasnt the underlying cause of the war?! No... no, it cant be. Oil was always our perogative, and not even the finding of actual, live WMDs will convince me otherwise!

[blueeyes]

I'll take a liberal example, since we all know there are no lies in liberal media. http://www.alternet.org/print.html?StoryID=1 5854

According to Ritter, the chemical weapons which Iraq has been known to possess -- nerve agents like sarin and tabun -- have a shelf life of five years, VX just a bit longer.
...
But the truth of the matter is that Iraq’s WMD may have even less of a shelf life than Ritter now claims -- and the U.S. government knows it.

[Vendetta]

This doesn't mean that the Sarin HAD to come from within Iraq. I'm fairly certain there is still a healthy blackmarket in the country despite the US military's best efforts. Nearly every neighboring country probably has access to Sarin. Not to mention it is one of the easier nerve agents to produce, IIRC.

[Obsidian Claws]

This doesn't mean that the Sarin HAD to come from within Iraq

Doesnt matter who makes it. It was found IN Iraq. That means Iraq had and has possesion of WMDs.

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

Doesnt matter who makes it. It was found IN Iraq. That means Iraq had and has possesion of WMDs.

And if you bought it on the black market that means America has chemical weapons OMG lets all go bomb them because one isolated person got their hands on something.

[Blazer]

One antiquated artillery shell is not a weapon of mass destruction.
One of the reasons we (British) went to war was that we were told weapons of mass destruction could be launched against our troops in Cyprus.

The government has already told commons that this vindicates their decision.
I'd just like to ask them how this shell threatened our distant troops. Were they going to send it over to Cyprus with a team of well trained carrier pigeons?

If we find evidence of production, manufacture or distribution of a lot of weapons then I'll admit the government was right.
However, this is just an antique that some fighters dug up.

[kat]

Blueeyes, you say 'liberal media', but then--what sort of media do you want? Conservative? That's FoxNews, and they pretty much just suck at their jobs.

Liberal a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.

Conservative a. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
b. Traditional or restrained in style.
c. Moderate; cautious.

And props to Edwardo_son_of_haqim (http://www.werewolf.com/vb/member.php?u=1601). Precisely. A couple of terrorists do not a terrorist country make. If the opposite is supposed to be the case, then America is also a terrorist nation (and really--we're getting there).

[blueeyes]

Liberal Media :
a) a public group dedicated to reforms, the progress of new ideas, and hating the opinions of others.
b) a public group devoted to pointing out the wrongs of the Republican Party and the beneficial actions of other points of view. (see: Al Franken, Micheal Moore. Colaq: wet-behind-the ears [offensive], Bush-basher [offensive])

I'm just using a site that is against Bush's policies, closeminded as they are, because if I used Fox News or any moderate source, the information could likely be altered to be more accomidating to the views of Bush.

I'd like to note that, although Sarin is likely available for purchase on the black market, it doesn't apply very well to destruction when unleashed into a large open area. Nor would produced sarin, weaponized for use against crowds, be in a cannon shell. It seems also that any group away that it was a biological weapon, and were smart enough to produce it, would also know that it could do far more damage if applied to a crowded or enclosed area. Explosives would work better in a road bomb.

Also, given how difficult (note sarcasm) it is to get a vial of something from one place to the next, I'd think that the existance of powerful amounts of this stuff would scare people. Although it's hard to get from Iraq to Europe, detonating just one shell of this in a city could lead to huge lose of life, treatment available or not. And getting it there is not completely impossible, missle (unlikely, but it could have been possible) or by some other means.

BTW, Kat, before you get too upset about my definition, realize that dictionary.com quote is getting old. The part about bigotry is starting to sound like Totah's race card.

[kat]

Hey, that's only the second time I've used it. ;) I just wanted to point out that with all the "liberal media", what's the alternative? And is that alternative any better?

Edit: Some fun reading on Sarin gas (http://cfrterrorism.org/weapons/sarin.html).

[Obsidian Claws]

And if you bought it on the black market that means America has chemical weapons

If someone buys something on the black market, it means America has chemical weapons? I dont see the connection, as for there to be a connection in the way you posted it, America would have to be the only supplier of the black market. I dont know where you get your information, but I have never heard of America selling WMDs on the black market.

OMG lets all go bomb them because one isolated person got their hands on something.

Im not sure how to respond, because I have no real idea what the hell you are trying to say, it just looks like jibberish. Is Saddam this 'one isolated person'? Obviously hes not to isolated if he was able to use chemical weapons against Iran, and really any other neighboring country if he felt like it.

And this 'something', I guess means chemical weapons. Wake up, buddy, chemical weapons are capable of killing thousands of people or more if used properly. You really dont want chemical weapons in the wrong hands.

And props to Edwardo_son_of_haqim . Precisely. A couple of terrorists do not a terrorist country make

What? You tryed to say that a couple terrorists in a country dont make that country a terrorist nation, I guess? No one ever said Iraq was a terrorist nation, but the person leading it was, and he supposed other terrorists. The removal of any terrorist from any country is a good thing.

If the opposite is supposed to be the case, then America is also a terrorist nation (and really--we're getting there).

Really Kat? I had no idea that America supported terrorism and had terrorists organizations within it that went on suicide missions to other countries with the express purpose of killing civilians... please, enlighten me as to how America is a terrorist nation.

[blueeyes]

There's conservative media, which can be pretty bad, and middleground, which is increasingly rare. Actually, both are pretty rare, but there are more pure conservative media groups than middle ground ones. And there are also 'sidist groups', which

Nice link, though. So sarin's hard to make, very deadly, and a pain to keep around. Still doesn't seem too useful as a roadside bomb.

I can see where Kat's coming from, even if I don't agree with her. She thinks that our actions in other nations is a lot like terrorism in one way; we are using fear as a weapon and not paying attention to certain international opinions or accords, along with the loss of civillian life in Iraq (minimal compared to other wars of this century).

# It is premeditated—planned in advance, rather than an impulsive act of rage.
# It is designed to change the existing political order. It is not merely criminal, like the violence that groups such as the mafia use to get money.
# It is aimed at civilians—not at military targets or combat-ready troops.
# It is carried out by subnational groups—not by the army of a country.
# The State Department and many leading experts define terrorists as members of subnational groups, not government leaders or states.
So that's a little hard to press into the cookie cutter.

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

Okay WTF by you I meant YOU an American.

And as for Saddam no he wasn't isolated I never said he was but unless you've been in a cave for the last year you might have noticed that he's been captured and his regime crumbled so whoever but the bomb there was isolated!

And as for America supporting terrorism please they've toppled more governments than I count, they trained Bin Laden in the first place, they sold the weapons to Iraq for use against Iran so wake up and smell the shit if America don't kill civilians then maybe you've never heard of a cluster bomb which killed more people in Iraq than anything else.

[blueeyes]

Uh... cluster bombs and such weapons aren't used now. We've got guided weapons and the ability to direct even an unguided bomb within meters of the target. No, it was destruction of power and fresh water that caused loss of life during the begining of this war.
That, and the terrorist's car bombs... but even those aren't cluster bombs.

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

Last I heard the US was useing cluster bombs in Iraq for ten years since the gulf so it's news to me that they've stopped unless it's recent.

[kat]

Um, blueeyes, they DO use cluster bombs. I have no idea why you thought that they don't. One website (http://www.hrw.org/press/2003/04/us040103.htm) of many found by plugging "cluster bombs iraq" into Google.

Heh, me thinks that you've been misinformed in many areas.

[blueeyes]

My apologies...

[Obsidian Claws]

Okay WTF by you I meant YOU an American.

Dont get all pissy because people cant understand your poor english.

And as for America supporting terrorism please they've toppled more governments than I count

Name a couple governments we have 'toppled' aside from Saddams and the Taliban, and explain to me how removing both Saddam and the Taliban from power has supported terrorism.

if America don't kill civilians then maybe you've never heard of a cluster bomb which killed more people in Iraq than anything else.

Civilians die in war, and there is no way around it. The fact is, the United States does not TARGET civilians. If our intent was to kill civilians, America would have had no trouble launching huge air raids on Bahgdad and completely demolishing the entire city in a day. But we didnt. We purposefully only strike military targets, and try as much as possible to avoid civilian deaths. If a civilian dies, then it was a mistake, not a goal we were happy to accomplished.



I dont know what else to say. I think the war is just and much good will come from it, and I have faith that my country knows what it is doing. I might not agree with some tactics used, but I will back my country 100% in any decision it makes. Thats really my whole stance on the war and anything that involves it.

[kat]

Dont get all pissy because people cant understand your poor english. If by "people" you mean "just Obsidian Claws", then maybe. Otherwise, his generalized "you" was appropriately used, and you're just mentally slow not to have caught it.

You might also try not getting pissy just because someone doesn't worship the American United States just as you do. We can't all belong to your political cult.

[Obsidian Claws]

You might also try not getting pissy just because someone doesn't worship the American United States just as you do. We can't all belong to your political cult.

I dont worship the US, I simply have faith in my country that it will decide to do the right thing based on the infomation it has. And like I said, Ill back any decision the US makes, even I dont know all the details and it seems like it is the incorrect decision to make. I hardly think being loyal to your country qualifies as 'worshiping' it. Im sorry if you dont feel the same way about the US as I do.

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

Here's what a simple google search reveled:

Some of the democratically elected governments which are toppled by the US ("the Champion of democracy") so far:

IRAN 1953
CIA directs overthrow of elected left-leaning government, installs Shah.

INDONESIA 1965
Army coup assisted to an unknown degree by CIA; left-leaning elected government toppled; between 250,000 to 1,000,000 lives lost.

CHILE 1973
CIA-backed coup ousts elected leftist president; rightist dictator installed.

Turkey
By means of repetitive coups the US-backed army has ousted the democratically elected parties for several times.

The US in many other countries support the dictator regimes, such as Saudi Arabia.

Some other US interventions:

GREECE 1947-49
Supports and directs extreme right in civil war.

PHILIPPINES 1948-54
CIA directs war against leftist Huk Rebellion.

PUERTO RICO 1950
Nationalist insurrection challenges American occupation; US command operation puts down rebellion.

KOREAN WAR 1950-53
Joins South Korea and other allies to fight China and North Korea.

GUATEMALA 1954
CIA directs exile invasion and overthrow of leftist government; military junta installed.

LEBANON 1958
US occupation ends under UN Observer Group.

VIETNAM WAR 1960-75
Fought South Vietnam rebels and North Vietnam forces; 1-2 million killed.

CUBA 1961
CIA-directed "Bay of Pigs" invasion.

LAOS 1962
Green Berets active in training, military buildup, support of rightist forces during guerrilla war.

PANAMA 1964
Control of Panama Canal Zone challenged; rioting against US forces.

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC 1965-66
Troops invade during election as pre-emptive action against leftist rebellion or communist government.

GUATEMALA 1966-67
Command operation; Green Berets aid in combat against leftist rebels.

CAMBODIA 1969-75
War against leftist forces; intense bombing; up to 2 million killed.

OMAN 1970
US directs Iranian invasion in support of Omani government against Marxist "Dhufar rebellion."

LAOS 1971-73
US directs South Vietnamese invasion.

ANGOLA 1976-92
CIA assists South African-backed rebels.

EL SALVADOR 1981-92
Advisors aid government forces against leftist rebels.

NICARAGUA 1981-90
US directs guerrilla exile invasion ("Contra war") against revolutionary government; US forces plant mines.

LEBANON 1982-84
Marines help police negotiated evacuation of Palestine Liberation Organization; US forces combat Muslim and Syrian fighters in support of Christian government.

HONDURAS 1983-89
Military bases established for US-backed "Contra war" with Nicaragua.

GRENADA 1983-84
US troops topple pro-Cuban government.

LIBYA 1986
Air strikes against nationalist government with terrorist links.

BOLIVIA 1986
Operation Blast Furnace; US troops and Bolivian police face peasant resistance in cocaine-producing regions.

IRAN 1987-88
Intervention on side of Iraq in war against Iran.

U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS 1989
Troops restore order after civil unrest spurred by Hurricane Hugo.

PHILIPPINES 1989
Armed US aircraft support constitutional government against failed coup.

PANAMA 1989-90
Nationalist government ousted by 27,000 US soldiers; more than 2,000 people killed.

GULF WAR 1990-
Operation Desert Storm drives Iraq out of Kuwait; 200,000+ killed. No-fly zone ongoing; periodic bombing.

SOMALIA 1992-94
US-led United Nations occupation during civil war.

YUGOSLAVIA 1992-94
US troops in NATO operation to enforce sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro.

BOSNIA 1993-95
Operation Deny Flight patrols civil war no-fly zone; air combat, Serbs bombed.

CROATIA 1995
American and NATO forces attack Bosnian Serb airfields prior to Croatian offensive.

SUDAN 1998
Pharmaceutical factory bombed; retaliation for terrorist attacks on US embassies in Africa.

AFGHANISTAN 1998
Bombing of Islamic fundamentalist military camps; retaliation for terrorist attacks on US embassies in Africa.

YUGOSLAVIA 1999
US aircraft play the key role in heavy NATO air strikes against Serbian forces in Kosovo.

COLOMBIA 2000
Special Forces anti-rebel battalions, supply combat aircraft.

MACEDONIA 2001
US forces in NATO's Operation Essential Harvest partially disarm Albanian rebels.

AFGHANISTAN 2001
In retaliation for terrorist attacks in US, forces attempt ouster of Afghanistan's Taliban government, attack bases linked to Islamic militant Osama bin Laden.

And as for "worshiping" I'd class blind obedience and fate as as worship. But that's just me.

[Darth Cluich]

Over half of these were part of the Cold War and should not be counted as purely US "interventions." In many of these cases, the Soviets with either directly or indirectly supporting the other side. You're painting them all, though, as if it were solely the US getting its grubby little paws into another country.

Also, c'mon...including a deployment of troops to ease civil unrest after a hurricane. Really... :rolleyes:

[kat]

Tropps are tasty with milk and little slices of banana.

[Darth Cluich]

Damn you, Kat :p

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

Sorry just copied them all good and bad but he asked for examples so...

[Darth Cluich]

You should be a little more discerning, then, in the examples you use. As I pointed out, a lot of those were totally irrelevant.

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

I will, I was just showing where the US has placed their hands outside of Iraq as asked.

[Zombie]

Didnt we sign something this year to phase out the use of subunition rounds?

Also they have found another 155mm artillery round, this one containing mustard gas. Nasty stuff. (causes blistering of lungs etc) have you SEEN these rounds? There fairly large, over 4 inches in diameter. You can pack a lot of nastiness in one of these things.

-Z

[Darth Cluich]

Didnt we sign something this year to phase out the use of subunition rounds?

Key phrase: "phase out." That means we'll get rid of them...eventually and at our own pace. We did place a moratorium on their use for a while, though.

[Zombie]

We will probably demill our supply and use something more accurate (ie LGM, or laser guided missle) that doesnt kill indiscriminately, wether it be a hostile or civilian.

Its curious, out of the 4 newspapers I read everyday, (Philly Inquirer, Delaware News Journal, USA today, and Philly daily News) only 1 had a peep about the 155mm rounds. And a peep it was. 10 friggin` words! C'mon! this is front page material if there ever was something newsworthy! But no, a stupid animal by the name of Smarty Jones dominated the papers except for USA Today. Who cares about a dumbass horse? He will be in Elmers Glue bottles by next year. They find chemical weapons in Iraq, and nobody says squat. No, only buried in the back was the 10 words on the shell, and a little factoid on sarin.

-Z

[Blazer]

Originally posted by blueeyes: Also, given how difficult (note sarcasm) it is to get a vial of something from one place to the next, I'd think that the existance of powerful amounts of this stuff would scare people. Although it's hard to get from Iraq to Europe, detonating just one shell of this in a city could lead to huge lose of life, treatment available or not. And getting it there is not completely impossible, missle (unlikely, but it could have been possible) or by some other means.

The reason (we were told) Britain join the US in the new war in Iraq, rather than wait for a new UN resolution, was that weapons of mass destruction could be launched against our troops in Cyprus within 45 minutes of Sadaam giving the order. Britain claimed the war was not illegal citing reasons of self-defence.

The US probably had a better idea declaring war for the reason of breach of UN regulations. They went in using the old UN resolution.
It is likely Britain would have waited for a new resolution rather than follow the US if it hadn't have been for the 45 minute claim.

Is America a terrorist state? - Propably not.
Has America heard of the Geneva Convention? - Definately not. (Look at this. (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_objectid=14195963&method=full&siteid=50143&headline=outrage-at-american-torture-of-iraqi-prisoners-name_page.html))

Just one question to everyone. How is Iraq linked to the War on Terror? I've looked everywhere & can't find a link to Bin Laden & Sadaam.

[blueeyes]

There were early reports that a few of the 9/11 pilots had spent time training in Iraq, but nothing too incriminating... particularly since they'd spent time training here in the U.S, although they didn't use ground that Bush or Clinton owned.
Some other less than reliable (http://www.tennessean.com/nation-world/archives/03/06/34908297.shtml= ) sources claim/claimed that there are very distinct signs of a link, but there's not been enough extremely good proof.

Actually, another few sources suggested that Saddam and Bin Laden were enemies, although there's about as much (http://www.spiked-online.com/Articles/00000006D9F9.htm) good evidence for this as the ones above.

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

You should be a little more discerning, then, in the examples you use. As I pointed out, a lot of those were totally irrelevant.

Here's a more accurate site (http://www.whatreallyhappen ed.com/usinterventionism.ht ml)

[Darth Cluich]

More accurate? Don't you mean even more anti-US? This still includes proxy wars between the US and USSR. And c'mon...US murder rate? Fuckin' bullshit.

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

More accurate? Don't you mean even more anti-US? This still includes proxy wars between the US and USSR. And c'mon...US murder rate? Fuckin' bullshit.

Yes but it specifies between them and details the type of involvment if that turns out anti-US well then whose to be blamed for that? And I feel that murder rate is an applicable term for most of those examples given or any foriegn war for that matter (Nazi-Germany exempted)
And it should be safe to assume anybody willing to read it all such as yourself would also be mature enough understand that.

[blueeyes]

Hmmm... where to start.

Edwardo, that site blames the U.S. for the Holocaust. Its 'conservative' estimates are ten or more times what any reputable source provides.

For example, on the death tolls... even Micheal Moore only gives numbers in the 30,000s for Nicaragua, and the reports I heard about Chile didn't give ten thousand, but two or three. Very accurate, eh?

1951 : Constitutional Monarch, the Shah Pahlavi, and Parliment reinstalled after 'Prime Minster' Mossadeq removed in the war. For those who care to know the history, Mossadeq had been dismissed one year after his appointment, for attempting to illegally take over the armed forces, came back and forced the Shah to re-appoint him. After that, he declared himself Communist and brought Iran through the fun that is three digit inflation, and it finally came to the world's attention.
Not the best guy, but better than giving some random puppet the crown/hood/whatever the Shaw wears. Yes, Mossadeq, now that's a democraticly... elected... no, appointed... ah, screw it.

1989, Panama's democratic reforms... the reason America invaded Panama was due to Noreiga's imprisonment, harassment, and killing of American troops and civilians who were legally stationed in Panama, as well as his role in the drug trade, financing left-wing terrorist groups in neighboring countries, and his December 1989 declaration of war on the United States. Now, I can see harassment and illegal imprisonment being in the list for democratic values, but not the drugs thing. Also, Noreiga wasn't President or Prime Minister, no, he was a 'military advisor' who seemed capable of impeaching police chiefs.
One of his kindest acts involved Guillermo Endara, a democratically elected President, having his head beat in with a lead pipe, and his opponent, who got less then ten percent of the vote, but happened to be a very close friend of Noriega, being put in place.
Death rates for that war were about 300-400.

There are a good many other examples (look up Chile, 1973. This guy makes the Bush election thing look like a clean sweep). Read the history books, even the ones in France. You'll see a good deal of information proving your nice litte 'alrighty comrades' wrong. Propoganda is really bad if you don't even bother to check it.

And before the U.S. gets blamed for arming Saddam Hussein...