« when is a weapon not a weapon? | Main | getting on the same page »

I'll have a sarin sandwich, with mustard

Via Ed, we find that mustard gas has also been discovered in Iraq.
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.
Failed to account for. Do you get it now? Saddam lied. Imagine that, he was lying on his weapons declarations. Does that matter to you at all? If he lied about the sarin and mustard, does the thought even enter your mind that he may have lied about everything else? What are the excuses? What is your spin going to be? How will you twist and turn this so that the mustard and gas mean nothing, and his lying on the declaration mean nothing. He lied. He said he did not have any weapons and he did. What do you make of that? Anything? Or should I keep walking towards the ever moving goalposts?

TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference I'll have a sarin sandwich, with mustard:

» SARIN FOUND IN IRAQ from Citizen Smash - The Indepundit
BREAKING NEWS FROM BAGHDAD: The US military has discovered an Iraqi artillery round loaded with the deadly nerve agent Sarin,... [Read More]

» Nothing to see here... from camedwards.com
As silent as the blogosphere is on Seymour Hersh's piece... the mainstream media is just as silent on the fact that WMD have been used in Iraq. Both sarin gas and mustard gas have been used in IED's in the... [Read More]

Comments

Run, don't walk. --s

All this just as it has been reported that Bush and Blair speed up their exit strategy

http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/16211.html

At the risk of being called everything except an intelligent woman, I have to ask - is it not possible that the gas was brought in from somewhere else?

No Lisa. To beleive that would make you appear to be pushing to goal posts back.

This isn't a faith issue. Believing or not believing won't help you. Sarin and MG were found. Period. Saddam violated resolutions. Period. If you have proof of otherwise, advance it, please.

My question is born out of a need to know the truth. I don't understand how anyone can know where the chemicals in question came from. The Iraqi bloggers that I read and friends that I have in Pakistan say that a lot of the chaos is imported - terrorists from other countries who hate us and want to undermine anything and everything. Yet other people will still yell about Saddam and how it's all him. I am simply asking for well thought out explanations.

Lisa, they can tell, a chemist explained it when Jordan discovered the chem attack a couple of weeks ago.

The impurities can tell, they're the markers. If they have samples of what Saddam mixed, they can match it against what was found.

Maybe Rantburg or dailypundit's archives on this topic would have it. Someone has a lengthy explanation somewhere. But I read so much....

Jesus Michele. I think it's time to take a Xanax.

"At the risk of being called everything except an intelligent woman, I have to ask - is it not possible that the gas was brought in from somewhere else?"

That depends on whether this was your first instinct... ;-)

Chemical weapons have various markers(how they were made, original chemcials etc) making it easier to determine where they were processed.

From the story:

"Kimmitt said the shell belonged to a class of ordnance that Saddam Hussein's government said was destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war. 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 likelihood of this having come in from the outside is extremely, extremely remote. You don't just make a chemical weapon, and put it in a 155mm shell that you conveniently had lying around from the Persian Gulf War. Production of chemical weapons requires significant effort - they don't just spring forth spontaneously.

Apply Occam's Razor. The most logical and likely explanation for the existence of mustard gas and sarin shells is that they were in Iraq already. We know that Saddam had chemical weapons in the past because he used them in the past - there is no argument there...he used them...case closed.

Any other explanation requires incredible leaps of logic, convoluted, twisting explanations, and asinine assertions (like "Rumsfeld brought them in") that are only suited for complete moonbats.

That make sense top you as an intelligent woman, Lisa, or do you have a simpler and more logical explanation?

Oh, I'm sorry, Shelley. I forgot I'm not allowed to get worked up about anything now, lest people tell me to get back on the meds or take something to chill out.

Wow, I'm so glad that fuckwits like Shelby are here to contribute to the conversation. Be a dear and go back to your daytime Long Island Iced Tea's and Tivo'd Oprah reruns, sweetie.

So the truth comes out: if we HAD found lots of WMD quickly, America must have planted it. If we DO find tons of WMD anywhere in or near Iraq, America planted it. If we DO find scraps of WMD dropped by accident as it was hastily moved in a retreat, America planted it. And when the next 9/11 happens in America, blame America.

Thanks. I do not know much about chemical weapons as it's my personality to be anxiety prone. I do what I have to do to get some sleep each night. Part of that means plugging my ears and turning a blind eye. Then there are occasions such as this where I need more facts. Thanks to those who provided them without name calling or talking down to me.

Eric Alterman was saying a year ago that he'd dismiss any WMDs found as planted by the Evil Appointed One and His Minions--I suppose we'll be hearing from the whiny idiot to that effect before long.

It's not a matter of a stray shell here or there...

“The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists, a group he calls his ‘nuclear mujahideen’.... his nuclear holy warriors… Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof.... the smoking gun.... that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.”
George W. Bush October 2002

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."
George W. Bush
January 28, 2003

"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
Donald Rumsfeld
March 30, 2003

...BUT THEN...

"I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program."
George W. Bush
May 6, 2003

"They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer."
Donald Rumsfeld
May 27, 2003

"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."
Paul Wolfowitz
May 28, 2003

"It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there."
Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
May 30, 2003

“I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons… I don't know anybody in any government or any intelligence agency who suggested that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons. That's fact number one.”
Donald Rumsfeld June 2003

One stray shell...

What the hell.

Lisa:

Aside from the chemical micro-analysis of the nerve agent mentioned by Ryan and SandyP the manufacturing marks on the shell itself should tell the Army Ordinace experts where the shell was made and loaded with sarin. It's a little like checking the markings on a bullet found at the scene of a crime and tying it to a certain gun. It'll take a little time to gather all the data but they should be able to place the shell to a particular armory and time.

Jbouler

You know, I'm hearing a lot about goal posts here, and I'd like a little explanation. What goal posts make it a victory (and for who!?) that terrorists are rigging up sarin gas shells to ambush our troops? I imagine Ted Rall is cheering, but he's an idiot! Why is Clyde happy?! I don't get it.

Because, for me, it seems like this is a bad thing for everyone. However, I want to keep it in perspective (ie compared to the weapons they have already used, ricin and anthrax, they have not gained any strategic position) because it doesn't help anyone if people are in a panic, worrying that we might lose a city (which is what I think most of us that grew up during the cold war think when we hear WMD).

I don't see what the partisan issue is. Both sides agree that Saddam was in violation of the UN resolution. Both sides agree that Saddam had sarin in the past. Both sides agree that we don't want terrorists to have sarin. The anti-war radicals are the ones who've been saying that Saddam would give his weapons to terrorists if we attacked. And now we're saying "haha, you were right, you bastards!"? It makes no sense (to me).

I think it's time to take a Xanax.

Take a whole bottle, Shelby.

Re: Damon - and the Rumsfeld quote:

“I don't know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons… "

I can think of one - John F. Kerry:

"If you don't believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." -- USA Today on 2/13/03

reference: link

Michele does not need to take any Xanax - aside from the fact that commenting she should is rude, Michele has a clear mind and an honest anger.

Many of you, I fear, have neither.

Oddly, Damon neglects to point out that Bill Clinton was positive that Saddam had CBR weapons in 1998. that was when the Congress passed the resolution, signed by Clinton, that it was official US Policy to achieve regime change in Iraq.
Somehow the belief has changed on the Left, with the change in administrations. There is now the belief that the Nerve Gas Fairy flitted down in her yellow tutu and exchanged all that gas for fairy dust.
He had it. He killed thousands of Iraqis and uncounted Iranians with it. Now the stuff is turning up. We'd damned sure better find the rest of it before it finds us. If you live in a city, you are a target. Gas does not look at your voter registration card. It does not see your religion. It's incapable of caring about your stance on this war. All it does is kill and quite nastily.
We got lucky this time. It was a binary shell rigged to go by someone who didn't understand binary agents. You can bet the house and farm that alQ, Hamas and the rest of those assholes are now feverishly looking for more of those shells and when the next one they find is set off, it will be set off by someone conversant with binary gasses.
Hey, what do I care? I and my kids live in the country.

I am not concerned with Mr. Clinton or Mr. Kerry, it is Mr. Bush and his meandering WMD claims that disturb me. He whips the country into a lather asserting these weapons are stockpiled by the ton and ready to destroy American cities. Rummy chimes in that we know where they are...so naturally the populace responds, "Well let's go get 'em then." And magically, ***poof***, Rummy doesn't know where they are anymore and Bush starts talking about WMD "program related activities". Coming from a band of notorious war profiteers (Bush family & co.), don't you find this faded rationale the least bit disquieting??

It's convenient, Damon, to claim you're not concerned with Kerry or Clinton. Now.
But Bush said nothing they didn't say.
Are Clinton and Kerry liars? Or were they hoodwinked by bad intel from the intel folks under Clinton's eight years?
The same bad intel Bush got.

I've got an idea! In order to keep the dreaded Bush War profiteers from getting a victory, lets just let the terroists kill us all.