Features

Ronnie Raygun · #1

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...dc_3&printer=1

U.S. Army Says It Finds Shell with Sarin Agent in Iraq

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - A small amount of the nerve agent sarin was found in a shell that exploded in Iraq (news - web sites), the U.S. army said Monday in the first announcement of discovery of any of the weapons on which Washington made its case for war.

Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt told a news conference the substance had been found in an artillery shell inside a bag discovered by a U.S. convoy a few days ago. The round had exploded, causing a small release of the substance, he said.

"The Iraq Survey Group has confirmed today that a 155 (mm) artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found. The round had been rigged as an IED (improvised explosive device) that was discovered by a U.S. force convoy," he said.

"A detonation occurred before the IED be could be rendered inoperable," Kimmitt said, adding that two members of an explosives team had been treated for exposure to the substance.

Kimmitt said the round, designed to mix the sarin in flight, belonged to a class of ordnance that the ousted government of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) claimed to have destroyed before the 1991 Gulf war.

"It is 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... when it exploded it indicated that it actually had some sarin in it," he said.

IEDs are bombs usually planted at the side of the road to explode as coalition vehicles pass.

The United States launched its invasion of Iraq last year, accusing then-president Saddam Hussein of developing chemical, biological and possibly nuclear weapons. Failure to find such weapons has stirred criticism in the United States and Britain, Washington's closest ally in the war.

sspadowsky · #2

One shell. From who-knows-where. I saw this about three hours ago, and knew you'd jump for it like a dog chasing a Nerf ball.

Get back to us when they find a few tons of these buried. In Iraq.

Sethomas · #3

That you think this proves something indicates just how pathetic the case for war really was.

Besides your imbecilic credulity, what even makes you think that this shell wasn't imported by the insurgents recently? Does it really make sense that if they had these all along, they would wait until the war had come and gone to use them?

So. Fucking. Stupid.

mburbank · #4

Yeah, I was kind of watching the clock waiting for you to jump all over this as WMD FOUND!!!

A single old dud shell that didn't work, designed to fly, jury rigged as a road side bomb that went off prematurely. This is like the burried cyclotron parts. It's a leftover piece of the old program, if that.

I've no doubt at all you think it's way more significant than that, but ask yourself this. If this were WMD FOUND!!! Why do you think there was no massive press conference with W. himself trumpeting the news? Why aren't Rummy and Dick Chenney pre-empting programming right now to say "I told you so! We were right to do this all along!" ny theories, nalds? Or are you just once more posting a WMD FOUND!! thread yet again without bothering to see if anyone thinks it's meaningful or even real besides you?

AChimp · #5

Hmm... they would be able to massively blow up part of a small house with it. Horror.

Sethomas · #6

Now I understand why the deaths of over 3000 civilians were necessary.

kellychaos · #7

Absolved at last! Whew! That was a close one.

ScruU2wice · #8

I swear when i heard about it on the news, I knew ronnie would jump all over this...

now i see everyone is totally denouncing this whole thing, so i'm gonna say that these are pretty deadly weapons, and they could kill alotta people.

However if they were weapons of the Iraqi army then why would insurgents use them now. I mean that the bomb was armed and ready to fire so i don't think it was iraqi.

But it's certainly not worth going to war for. so many more people died over this than that bomb could've killed, that is if it were ever used...

The One and Only... · #9

Doesn't more imply we found some in the past?

Drew Katsikas · #10

Weren't you one to post that we had?

mburbank · #11

Yeah, I seem to recall you were all over some story in the Indian press about how WMD had been discovered.

Immortal Goat · #12

He must have forgotten that when he became mesmerised by the size of his massive cock.

kellychaos · #13

Weapon of Mass De-Seduction. :/

The One and Only... · #14

If you recall, I also said that if the major media outlets did not report on it, I would accept it as false.

Well, the media didn't report on it.

Helm · #15

kellychaos · #16

Oh, you bastard irony! It reminds me of that "Twilight Zone" episode where Burgess Meredith had the world to himself and his books and then his eyeglasses broke.

kahljorn · #17

Or the family guy where peter went to the "Wonka beer factory" and then came home drunk and busted out on the piano so his wife wanted to put him into a piano contest but he cou ld only play when he was drunk so his wife kept him perpetually drunk for like seven days and at the end she goes, "Oh I feel terrible" and peter goes, "NO, the lesson here is you can drink a smuch alcohol as you like and nothing bad will happen". Then it goes inside his head to this braincell who goes, "O.. o, I'm the only one left, just me and my books, there's time now!" Then his glasses break and he cries.

mesobe · #18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sethomas

Now I understand why the deaths of over 3000 civilians were necessary.

3000? try 10,000

ScruU2wice · #19

than try citing your source

mesobe · #20

my source? its common fucking knowledge. Do I need to provide you a credible source that the earth isnt flat?

Ronnie Raygun · #21

So now YOU don't have to provide a source.

Max Burbank disagree's with you...Max Burbank says cite a source.

ziggytrix · #22

For fucks sake, type "iraqui civilian casualties" into a google search.

The number of civilian casualties is NOT common knowledge, furthermore, it is disputable - and the US military would rather folks not know how many folks have died over there, you know, cuz it sends the wrong message to our troops and our enemies.

Go to iraqbodycount.net (first result) and check their numbers. Their figures are a database compiled from online news reports. The figure is between 9 and 11 thousand, but they include 7,000+ deaths from before May 1, 2003, so at least 3000 civilians have died since then - maybe that's where Seth got his number? Who knows, who cares.

According to the Christian Science Monitor (second worthwhile result) "Evidence is mounting to suggest that between 5,000 and 10,000 Iraqi civilians may have died during the recent war, according to researchers involved in independent surveys of the country. "

Ya know, if for each 100 civillians killed because of our actions over there, if for each 100 deaths, just 1 survivor vows revenge on America, then the war in Iraq has created at least 70 new fanatics bent on the destruction of America. I'm sure we've killed more than 70 terrorists over there, surely, so at least we've had some net gain from this, right?

That's what I call a predicament.