Nope, they discovered some with Mustard Gas as well...

Try to keep up holly.


On Sep 11, 2:41 pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gaar,
>
> A (as in one) 155mm shell containing Sarin gas?????
>
> On Sep 11, 1:43 pm, Gaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> >http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/m-n/mariani/2004/mariani052804.htm
>
> > The Sound of Silence: Iraq's WMDs Found
>
> > May 28, 2004
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­-----
> > by Joe Mariani
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­-----
>
> > After spending more than a year attacking the Bush administration
> > daily for their supposed failure to produce the WMDs that everyone --
> > including the United Nations, as well as most leading Democrats --
> > believed Saddam had hidden, the Left has suddenly gone strangely
> > silent on the subject. The "mainstream" media has been tiptoeing
> > around the discovery of a 155-mm mortar shell containing Sarin gas in
> > Iraq, the contents of which have been confirmed. The shell was used as
> > part of an improvised explosive device (IED) on a road near the
> > Baghdad International Airport, and exploded as it was being disarmed.
>
> > The shell contained three liters of Sarin -- nearly a gallon. It was a
> > type of shell designed to mix chemical components during flight, which
> > was why the explosion didn't kill anyone (though two soldiers were
> > treated for exposure). Three liters of Sarin is enough, if the
> > components are mixed properly, to realistically kill hundreds, and
> > potentially thousands. A concentration of 100 milligrams of Sarin per
> > cubic meter of air is enough to constitute a lethal dose for half the
> > people breathing it within one minute.
>
> > This type of chemical warfare shell had never been declared by Iraq --
> > it was not even known that Iraq had ever made them. The 1999 UNSCOM
> > report on Iraq reported that thirty binary/Sarin shells were known to
> > exist, and stated that all had been accounted for. According to
> > UNSCOM, "Iraq developed a crude type of binary munition, whereby the
> > final mixing of the two precursors to the agent was done inside the
> > munition just before delivery." Someone actually had to physically
> > pour the components of the Sarin (or other type of G-series nerve
> > agent) into the shells before they could be fired. At least, that's
> > how the ones we knew about worked.
>
> > So, a previously-unknown type of artillery shell is found in Iraq,
> > containing an actual, verifiable chemical weapon. This is front page
> > news, right? Should we expect apologies from formerly doubting
> > Liberals? Newspapers filled with retractions from prominent Democrats?
> > Conciliatory visits to President Bush from Jaques Chirac and Gerhardt
> > Schroeder? Not so fast. Remember: it's an election year. Liberals,
> > Democrats, terrorists and appeasers all want President Bush to lose
> > the election so everyone can get back to business as usual. Terrorists
> > want to get back to their implacable war against Western civilisation,
> > and the others want to get back to trying to placate them. The media,
> > as long as we let them get away with it, will only run stories that
> > attack President Bush and undermine support for him. In fact, Liberals
> > already have their spin on this Sarin find ready to go. The vast
> > majority of them -- when you can get them to admit that the Sarin and
> > the shell are real -- argue that it doesn't matter for one of four
> > "reasons."
>
> > A. The shell is old, from before the 1991 Gulf War, so it's not what
> > we were looking for.
>
> > Since the cease-fire that suspended the Gulf War depended on Saddam's
> > handing over to the UN "[a]ll chemical and biological weapons and all
> > stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all
> > research, development, support and manufacturing facilities", this
> > shell is precisely what we were looking for, especially if it predates
> > 1991. This shell and others like it is why the UN passed 17
> > resolutions demanding that Saddam disarm. No matter how old it was, it
> > was still lethal. There is no statute of limitations on weapons of
> > mass destruction.
>
> > B. There is only one shell, not a stockpile, so it doesn't mean
> > anything.
>
> > This one shell contained enough WMD material to potentially kill as
> > many people as died on 9/11, all by itself. Is it logical to assume
> > that this is the only one in existence -- or just wishful thinking?
> > The fact is that we still don't know how much Sarin Iraq actually
> > produced. "At first, Iraq told UNSCOM that it had produced an
> > estimated 250 tons of tabun and 812 tons of sarin. In 1995, Iraq
> > changed its estimates and reported it had produced only 210 tons of
> > tabun and 790 tons of sarin." (Yes, that's tons.) At the very least,
> > it tells us that we haven't nearly finished looking for the WMDs that
> > Saddam was supposed to surrender, and didn't. Besides... a shell
> > containing mustard gas was also found. Well, maybe there were only two
> > WMD shells in all of Iraq.
>
> > C. Just because Saddam had WMDs after all, it doesn't mean Bush didn't
> > lie about them.
>
> > As ridiculous as it sounds, this appears to be the instinctive,
> > defensive reaction of many Liberals to this news. They so badly need
> > to believe that President Bush lied in order to legitimise their
> > hatred of him that they're capable of this sort of twisted reasoning.
> > The rationale seems to be that WMDs don't count if they aren't exactly
> > where the CIA told us they were, as if they couldn't be moved.
>
> > D. The terrorists didn't even know it was a chemical shell.
>
> > Well, they do now. And they know where they found it, too.
>
> > We need to redouble our efforts to stop the terrorists and find
> > Saddam's WMDs, before they're used to derail the new Iraqi
> > government's formation. The media's refusal to give this news the
> > coverage it deserves can only be due to a calculated attempt to reduce
> > American support for our efforts in Iraq, including that of tracking
> > down Saddam's banned weapons. The Left's deliberate silence on this
> > subject for the purpose of influencing our election only helps our
> > enemies.
>
> > Joe Mariani
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­-----
> > Joe Mariani is a computer consultant born and raised in New Jersey. He
> > lives in Pennsylvania, where the gun laws are less restrictive and
> > taxes are lower. Joe always thought of himself as politically neutral
> > until he saw how far left the left had really gone after 9/11. His
> > essays and links to articles are available athttp://guardian.blogdrive.com/.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­------
> >  Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to