Mustard gas also found

[pope]

BAGHDAD, Iraq*—*A roadside bomb*containing sarin nerve agent (search)*recently exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday.

Bush administration officials told Fox News that*mustard gas (search)*was also recently discovered.


Two people were treated for "minor exposure"*after the sarin incident*but no serious injuries were reported. Soldiers transporting the shell for inspection suffered symptoms consistent with low-level chemical exposure, which is what led to the discovery, a U.S. official told Fox News.


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


The round detonated before it would be rendered inoperable, Kimmitt said, which caused a "very small dispersal of agent."


A senior Bush administration official told Fox News that the sarin gas shell is the second chemical weapon discovered recently.


Two weeks ago, U.S. military units discovered mustard gas that was used as part of an IED. Tests conducted by the*Iraqi Survey Group (search)*and others concluded the mustard gas was "stored improperly," which made the gas "ineffective."


They believe the mustard gas shell may have been one of 550 for which former Iraqi*President*Saddam Hussein failed to account when he made his weapons declaration shortly before Operation Iraqi Freedom began last year.


Investigators are trying to determine how insurgents obtained these weapons — whether they were looted or supplied.


It also appears some top Pentagon officials were taken by surprise by Kimmitt's announcement of the sarin discovery; they thought the matter was classified, administration officials told Fox News.


Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam Hussein's government*said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war (search). Experts believe both the sarin and mustard gas*weapons date back to the Persian Gulf War.


"It was a weapon that we believe was stocked from the ex-regime time and it had been thought to be an ordinary artillery shell set up to explode like an ordinary IED and basically from the detection of that and when it exploded, it indicated that it actually had some sarin in it," Kimmitt said.


The incident occurred "a couple of days ago," he added. The discovery reportedly occurred near Baghdad International Airport.


It was the first announcement of the discovery of such a weapon on which Washington made its case for war. Washington officials say the significance of the find is that some chemical shells do still exist in Iraq, and it's thought that fighters there may be upping their attacks on U.S. forces by using such weapons.


The*Iraqi Survey Group*is a U.S. organization whose task was to search for weapons of mass destruction after the ouster of Saddam Hussein in last year's invasion.


The round was an old "binary-type" shell in which two chemicals held in separate sections are mixed after firing to produce sarin, Kimmitt said.


He said he believed that insurgents who rigged the artillery shell as a bomb didn't know it contained the nerve agent, and that the dispersal of the nerve agent from such a rigged device was very limited.


"The former regime had declared all such rounds destroyed before the 1991 Gulf War," Kimmitt said. "Two explosive ordinance team members were treated for minor exposure to nerve agent as a result of the partial detonation of the round."


The shell had no markings. It appears the binary sarin agents didn't mix, which is why there weren't serious injuries from the initial explosion, a U.S. official told Fox News.


Not everyone found the deadly artillery surprising.


"Everybody knew Saddam had chemical weapons, the question was, where did they go. Unfortunately, everybody jumped on the offramp and said 'well, because we didn't find them, he didn't have them,'" said Fox News military analyst Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney.


"I doubt if it's the tip of the iceberg but it does confirm what we've known ... that he [Saddam Hussein] had weapons of mad destruction that he used on his own people," Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, told Fox News. "This does show that the fear we had is very real. Now whether there is much more of this we don't know, Iraq is the size of the state of California."


But there were more than weapons to the need to depose of Saddam, he added. "We considered Saddam Hussein a threat not just because of weapons of mass destruction," Grassley said.


Iraqi Scientist: You Will Find More


Gazi George, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist under Saddam's regime, told Fox News that he believes many similar weapons stockpiled by the former regime were either buried underground or transported to Syria. He noted that the airport where the device was detonated is on the way to Baghdad from the Syrian border.


George said the finding likely will just be the first in a series of discoveries of such weapons.


"Saddam is the type who will not store those materials in a military warehouse. He's gonna store them either underground, or, as I said, lots of them have gone west to Syria and are being brought back with the insurgencies," George told Fox News. "It is difficult to look in areas that are not obvious to the military's eyes.


"I'm sure they're going to find more once time passes," he continued, saying one year is not enough for the survey group or the military to find the weapons.


Saddam, when he was in power, had declared that he did in fact possess mustard-gas filled artilleries but none that included sarin.


"I think what we found today, the sarin in some ways, although it's a nerve gas, it's a lucky situation sarin detonated in the way it did ... it's not as dangerous as the cocktails Saddam used to make, mixing blister" agents with other gases and substances," George said.


Officials: Discovery Is 'Significant'


U.S. officials told Fox News that the shell discovery is a "significant" event.


Artillery shells of the 155-mm size are about as big as it gets when it comes to the ordnance lobbed by infantry-based artillery units. The 155 howitzer can launch high capacity shells over several miles; current models used by the United States can fire shells as far as 14 miles. One official told Fox News that a conventional 155-mm shell could hold as much as "two to five" liters of sarin, which is capable of killing thousands of people under the right conditions in highly populated areas.


The Iraqis were very capable of producing such shells in the 1980s but it's not as clear that they continued after the first Gulf War, so officials are reluctant to guess the age of the shell or the capacity of the Iraqis prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom to produce such shells.


In 1995, Japan's*Aum Shinrikyo (search)*cult unleashed sarin gas in Tokyo's subways, killing 12 people and sickening thousands. In February of this year, Japanese courts convicted the cult's former leader, Shoko Asahara, and sentence him to be executed.


Developed in the mid-1930s by Nazi scientists, a single drop of sarin can cause quick, agonizing choking death. There are no known instances of the Nazis actually using the gas.


Nerve gases work by inhibiting key enzymes in the nervous system, blocking their transmission. Small exposures can be treated with antidotes, if administered quickly.


Antidotes to nerve gases similar to sarin are so effective that top poison gas researchers predict they eventually will cease to be a war threat.

[Piper]

It doesn't count.

Bush never said we were invading to find Mustard gas... <_<

[Spirit of Weeb]

Well, well, well... WMDs in Iraq do exist.

I'll brace myself for the myriads of appologies from the likes of tailgators, section8, BBTJF, outsiders and bman. Guys that supposedly put the love of country before politics.

You all said Bush lied about WMDs. The tip of the WMD iceberg has reared it's ugly head, so I guess he didn't lie after all. But a lie was perpetrated on America. The lie that the left cares about American integrety and success in a war started by ME radicals on 9/11. The lie that the media is the unbiased watchdog of the American people.

[i]I actually thought WMDs didn't exist, before I saw they did.[/i]

[bitonti]

the only thing that would make you guys happier is if more nerve gas was used on our troops

"see he did have WMD and we have the body bags to prove it!"

[pope]

[quote][i]Originally posted by bitonti[/i]@May 17 2004, 02:54 PM
[b] the only thing that would make you guys happier is if more nerve gas was used on our troops

"see he did have WMD and we have the body bags to prove it!" [/b][/quote]
I have a brother in Iraq right now, yah that's exactly what I want :rolleyes:

Don't worry bit as you mentioned earlier it's only 1 shell, there couldn't possibly be more :rolleyes:

[Warfish]

[u][b]Good News:[/b][/u] Chemical Weapons have been found (in tiny amount to date) and NO US service men lost their lives finding them. More may be found, possibly legitimizing the US assult into Iraq in the Global community.

[u][b]Bad News:[/b][/u] Bush did not imply we would find 80 year old Chemical Weapons. He implied (basically stated openly) we would find Nuclear WMD's or the components to create Atomic WMD's. I fear such WMD's will never be found, either due to having escaped Iraq (in the hands of terrorists) or more likely, they were never there in the first place.

EVERYONE knew Saddam had Sarin, Mustard and other Chemical weapons. The fact the he used them, repeatedly, on his own people (though oddly not on US forces in Us vs. Iraq I) was proof enough for even the most "head-in-sand" non-believer. This was never in question IMO.

But the fact remains that Hussain was never going to shoot any US terrority or citizens with 155mm Artillery shells with minor amounts of Sarin. This find does NOT, IMO, legitimize the "WMD Threat" rationale for the Iraq war. Only the discovery of a flourishing Atomic WMD production facillity (or finished Atomic WMD's) would do that.

[Come Back to NY]

Here's an interesting thought posed by an "expert" on CNN: the chances are the people using these weaponized bombs now don't even know which ones have chemical weapons in them as Sadaam was notoriously bad at marking things. He did a great job taking notes on the people he totured though.

Pope...best to your brother!

[bman]

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A roadside bomb containing deadly sarin nerve agent exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday. It was believed to be the first confirmed discovery of any of the banned weapons that the United States cited in making its case for the Iraq (news - web sites) war.


AP Photo


AFP
Slideshow: Iraq





Latest headlines:
· In U.S. Prison Abuse Trials, Justice Is Uncertain
Reuters - 6 minutes ago
· U.S. Army Says It Finds Shell with Sarin Agent in Iraq
Reuters - 11 minutes ago
· Sarin-Filled Munitions in Iraq Worry U.S.
AP - 20 minutes ago
Special Coverage





Two members of a military bomb squad were treated for "minor exposure," but no serious injuries were reported.


The chemicals were inside an artillery shell dating to the Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) era that had been rigged as a bomb in Baghdad, said Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the chief military spokesman in Iraq.


It appears two chemical components in the shell, which are designed to combine and create sarin during flight, did not mix properly or completely upon detonation, a U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. Kimmitt, however, said a small amount of the nerve agent was released.


Two former weapons inspectors — Hans Blix and David Kay — said the shell was likely a stray weapon that had been scavenged by militants and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles of such weapons.


Kimmitt said he believed that insurgents who planted the explosive didn't know it contained the nerve agent.


Sarin-type agents produced by Iraq were largely of low quality and degraded shortly after production, U.N. inspectors said in a March 2003 report. They said it was unlikely that agents produced in the 1980s would still work today.


U.S. troops have announced the discovery of other chemical weapons before, only to see them disproved by later tests. A dozen chemical shells were also found by U.N. inspectors before the war; they had been tagged for destruction in the 1990s but somehow were not destroyed.


"The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found," Kimmitt said. "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.


The incident occurred "a couple of days ago," he said.


The Iraqi Survey Group is a U.S. organization whose task was to search for weapons of mass destruction after Saddam's ouster.


The round was an old `binary-type' shell in which two chemicals held in separate sections are mixed after firing to produce sarin, Kimmitt said.


Many of the materials used for roadside bombs are believed to have been looted from arsenals after the collapse of the regime in April 2003.


Dispersal of the gas would be far more effective if a shell containing nerve agent were fired from an artillery piece, he said. Kimmitt said he believed it was the first case in which U.S. forces had found an artillery shell containing sarin.


It was unclear if the sarin shell was from chemical rounds that the United Nations (news - web sites) had tagged and marked for destruction before the U.S. invasion.


Prior to the war, U.N. inspectors had compiled a short list of proscribed items found during hundreds of surprise inspections: fewer than 20 old, empty chemical warheads for battlefield rockets, and a dozen artillery shells filled with mustard gas. The shells had been tagged by U.N. inspectors in the 1990s but somehow not destroyed by them.


Kay, who led a U.S. team hunting for weapons, said it appears that the shell was one of tens of thousands produced for the Iran-Iraq war, which Saddam was supposed to destroy or turn over to the United Nations. In many cases, he said, Iraq did comply.

"It is hard to know if this is one that just was overlooked — and there were always some that were overlooked, we knew that — or if this was one that came from a hidden stockpile," Kay said. "I rather doubt that because it appears the insurgents didn't even know they had a chemical round."

While Saturday's explosion does demonstrate that Saddam hadn't complied fully with U.N. resolutions, Kay also said, "It doesn't strike me as a big deal."

In 1995, Japan's Aum Shinrikyo cult unleashed sarin gas in Tokyo's subways, killing 12 people and sickening thousands. In February of this year, Japanese courts convicted the cult's former leader, Shoko Asahara, and sentence him to be executed.

Developed in the mid-1930s by Nazi scientists, a single drop of sarin can cause quick, agonizing choking death. There are no known instances of the Nazis actually using the gas.

The Bush administration cited allegations that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction as a main reason for launching the war in Iraq last year.

The Iraq Survey Group, made up of dozens of teams, has been conducting a secretive and largely fruitless weapons hunt across Iraq for more than a year. The survey group combines members of the CIA (news - web sites), the Defense Intelligence Agency, U.S. military Special Forces and others.

The team has run into a number of dead ends. In January, for example, field tests on discovered mortar shells near Qurnah in southern Iraq indicated a blister agent was in the shells. But followup tests indicated that the munitions did not contain the agents, though U.S. officials said Saddam had such agents in the early to mid-1990s.

Blix, the former U.N. weapons inspector, said in Sweden Monday that before the war, his team found 16 empty warheads that were marked for use with sarin.

He said it was likely the sarin gas used could have been from a leftover shell found in a chemical dump.

"It doesn't sound absurd at all. There can be debris from the past and that's a very different thing from have stocks and supplies," he said.

According to U.N. weapons inspectors, sarin-type agents constituted about 20 percent of all chemical weapons agents that Saddam Hussein's government declared it had produced.

The accounting for sarin was one of a dozen remaining disarmament tasks that inspectors submitted to the U.N. Security Council in March 2003, said Ewen Buchanan, a spokesman the U.N. inspectors.

"Iraq was known to possess a lot of this material, and there were questions about the accounting," Buchanan said.

Iraq declared that between 1984 and 1990, it produced 795 tons of Sarin-type agents. About 732 tons were put in bombs, rockets and missile warheads. Iraq further declared that about 650 tons were consumed during the period 1985 to 1988, which included the Iran-Iraq war, and 35 tons were destroyed through aerial bombardment during the Gulf war in 1991.

Iraq destroyed 127 tons of Sarin-type agents under U.N. supervision, including 76 tons in bulk and 51 tons from munitions.

[chiefst2000]

[quote][i]Originally posted by Warfish[/i]@May 17 2004, 03:28 PM
[b] [u][b]Good News:[/b][/u] Chemical Weapons have been found (in tiny amount to date) and NO US service men lost their lives finding them. More may be found, possibly legitimizing the US assult into Iraq in the Global community.

[u][b]Bad News:[/b][/u] Bush did not imply we would find 80 year old Chemical Weapons. He implied (basically stated openly) we would find Nuclear WMD's or the components to create Atomic WMD's. I fear such WMD's will never be found, either due to having escaped Iraq (in the hands of terrorists) or more likely, they were never there in the first place.

EVERYONE knew Saddam had Sarin, Mustard and other Chemical weapons. The fact the he used them, repeatedly, on his own people (though oddly not on US forces in Us vs. Iraq I) was proof enough for even the most "head-in-sand" non-believer. This was never in question IMO.

But the fact remains that Hussain was never going to shoot any US terrority or citizens with 155mm Artillery shells with minor amounts of Sarin. This find does NOT, IMO, legitimize the "WMD Threat" rationale for the Iraq war. Only the discovery of a flourishing Atomic WMD production facillity (or finished Atomic WMD's) would do that. [/b][/quote]
Actually no one ever said that Saddam had nuculear weapons. Where did you get that from? What was said was that he could be attempting to obtain nuculear weapons. No one ever expected to find nuculear weapons. Many people on the left have been screaming that Saddam had no WMD. The point is that to rational people it was never in question that Saddam had WMD. He had used them on his own people. I can point to thread after thread and article after article screaming no WMD.


[b]But the fact remains that Hussain was never going to shoot any US terrority or citizens with 155mm Artillery shells with minor amounts of Sarin[/b]

Can you state with certainty that it would be impossible for Saddams Sarin Gas or Mustard Gas to reach the US? I didn't realise you could see into the future.

I ask you this:

Is it at all possible that Saddam could have supplied terrorists with chemical weapons which could have ended up being used in the US?

[pope]

[quote][i]Originally posted by Come Back to NY[/i]@May 17 2004, 03:32 PM
[b]
Pope...best to your brother! [/b][/quote]
Thanks CBTNY.

[Warfish]

[quote][b]Actually no one ever said that Saddam had nuculear weapons.[/b][/quote]

While I cannot prove they (Bush) did, since I have no desire to reasearch all his pre-War quotes, I am sure that Atomic WMD's were referred to as the main WMD we feared. As I said, no one cared (Democrat or Republican) about his murder of thousands of his own people using the 80 year old gasses we knew he had.

[quote][b]Many people on the left have been screaming that Saddam had no WMD.[/b][/quote]

Well, they are wrong. But I still think many do not consider weak 80 year old gas to be a WMD. When one speaks of WMD's, they think Atomic weapons.

[quote][b]Can you state with certainty that it would be impossible for Saddams Sarin Gas or Mustard Gas to reach the US? I didn't realise you could see into the future. [/b][/quote]

And can you state with certainty that Saddams Sarrin or Mustard gas WOULD reach the US? I may not be able to see the future, be clearly neither can you.

[quote][b]Is it at all possible that Saddam could have supplied terrorists with chemical weapons which could have ended up being used in the US?[/b][/quote]

Yes, it is possible that Saddams weak 80 year old Gas could be smuggled into the US (perhaps through the Mexican border some Conservitives seem so anxious to open to all, eh?)

It is also possible, since we are speculating, that North Korea will have a viable nuclear warhead, and the missle to carry it as far as Washington D.C. or New York, within two years. Sorry, but THAT is a much greater threat than 80 year old gas the terrorists don't even seem to know is there.

[bman]

i ask you this..is it possible..just for a moment for you to actually believe the truth: That the bush administration had an agenda, was hell bent on getting Saddam hussein and therefore trumped up evidence and overstated the actual threat that saddam posed...

how come we didn't attack lybia? Qaddafi was no friend to America..Guily of Terrorism and suspected of having a chemical weapons program..why wasn't qaddafis name being mentioned the day AFTER 9-11!
because Lybia doesn't sit on the second largest oil reserves in the world..

What happens if China slips a wmd to a terror group..what happens if France does..or England?

you can't having yr foriegn policy depend on 'what ifs

[chiefst2000]

I'll repeat, no one ever said or thought that Saddam had nuculear weapons. At most it was thought that he was pursuing nuculear weapons. It is precisely chemical and biological weapons which we were concerned with.

The point of the question I posed was that no one can say for certain whether or not Saddams WMD could have ended up being used in the US. We'll never know. I certainly wouldn't put it past Saddam to help terrorists hurt America. Would you?


I agree that North Korea is a problem right now as is Iran. What that has to do with this conflict is what I dont understand. If the government believes there is a diplomatic track in which they could take in order to attempt to solve those problems I'm all for it. We should exhaust all diplomatic options before going to war. Just like we did with Iraq.

Remember 12 years 17 UN resolutions. We spent 12 years trying to disarm Saddam diplomatically. If he didnt have somthing to hide, then why didn't he accept the UN inspectors with open arms? Why didn't he cooperate with them?

The resolution which ended the first Gulf was specifically stated that the burden of proof of disarmament was on IRAQ. They did not fulfill their obligations.

[chiefst2000]

[quote][i]Originally posted by bman[/i]@May 17 2004, 04:27 PM
[b] i ask you this..is it possible..just for a moment for you to actually believe the truth: That the bush administration had an agenda, was hell bent on getting Saddam hussein and therefore trumped up evidence and overstated the actual threat that saddam posed...

how come we didn't attack lybia? Qaddafi was no friend to America..Guily of Terrorism and suspected of having a chemical weapons program..why wasn't qaddafis name being mentioned the day AFTER 9-11!
because Lybia doesn't sit on the second largest oil reserves in the world..

What happens if China slips a wmd to a terror group..what happens if France does..or England?

you can't having yr foriegn policy depend on 'what ifs [/b][/quote]
That you compare Iraq to France and England is proof of your idiocy.

[bman]

We should exhaust all diplomatic options before going to war. Just like we did with Iraq.


that is proof oy yr idiocy!
we rushed to war you moron

[pope]

[quote][i]Originally posted by bman[/i]@May 17 2004, 04:44 PM
[b] We should exhaust all diplomatic options before going to war. Just like we did with Iraq.


that is proof oy yr idiocy!
we rushed to war you moron [/b][/quote]
14 resolutions over how many years?

Yup we rushed to war :rolleyes:

[Warfish]

[quote][b]What that has to do with this conflict is what I dont understand[/b][/quote]

Then I'll explain and elaborate on it for you.

The US was, post 9/11, faced with a number of geopolitical threats:

-- Terrorists (Hiding in Afganistan, as well as Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Iraq and a dozen other nations).

-- North Korea (Working on and close to having the capabillity to produce, Atomic weapons. Also posessed missle technology already to reach California, will have missle tech to reach D.C./NY within two years).

-- Iraq (minimal, out-dated Chemical and Biological Weapons. No missle tech to reach US territory. No proven ties to terrosists AQ group).

The first, of course, could not be handled diplomatically. However, before we finished (or even adequately handled) the first and most pressing danger (the AQ terrorist Network), we lauched an aggessors war in Iraq, the least dangerous of the three threats to US citizens and territory. The terrorist network, for all our work and sacrifice in Afganistan, is hardly even affected by the US efforts to-date. Witness the Madrid bombing, and it's aftereffects on that states position on US policy.

The second two could attempt to be handled diplomatically. We choose Iraq, the lesser threat, over North Korea, a MUCH greater threat with an equally socipathic and evil leader. This may (and we pray it won't) come back to haunt us someday.

[chiefst2000]

[quote][i]Originally posted by pope+May 17 2004, 04:45 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (pope @ May 17 2004, 04:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--bman[/i]@May 17 2004, 04:44 PM
[b] We should exhaust all diplomatic options before going to war. Just like we did with Iraq.


that is proof oy yr idiocy!
we rushed to war you moron [/b][/quote]
14 resolutions over how many years?

Yup we rushed to war :rolleyes: [/b][/quote]
12 years 17 resolutions. That doesn't seem like rushing to war.

[bman]

no one ever implied Saddam and Nukes!!
Your boy Dick Cheney said saddam had a Nuke Program!
the same dick cheny who had illegal business dealings with Saddam in the late 90's!

[chiefst2000]

[quote][i]Originally posted by bman[/i]@May 17 2004, 04:51 PM
[b] no one ever implied Saddam and Nukes!!
Your boy Dick Cheney said saddam had a Nuke Program!
the same dick cheny who had illegal business dealings with Saddam in the late 90's! [/b][/quote]
Wrong and Wrong.