|
Wmd?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Shakka |
| Just heard it reported that Reuters is reporting a story of an artillery shell found in Iraq filled/loaded with Sarin gas. I haven't found the news story yet--anybody heard this yet? I literally just heard it 2 minutes ago. CNBC is reporting on it now. |
|
|
| imokruok |
Yes, just coming across the wires now. It was an improvised explosive device fashioned from an artillery shell wired to explode as troops went past. It exploded before US forces were able to do a controlled detonation. No troops were seriously injured.
Gen. Mark Kimmitt was doing a routine live press conference from Baghdad, and just happened to open with the announcement. |
|
|
| imokruok |
Further information:
The weapon produced little to no effect because of the way chemical artillery shells work. The shell must be launched from an artillery cannon to get a proper mixing of the chemicals. When rigged as an IED, there is little to no mixing, so very little sarin effect.
The bombers apparently did not know that they had made an IED from a sarin shell. |
|
|
| occrider |
Unless they find massive underground stockpiles ...
But on an more important note, perhaps we should hire terrorists to be weapons inspectors. Apparentely they're doing a better job than the UN or the US military. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
Ahh, just in the nick of time! It's not like Bush is gettin' his ass handed to him with Iraq or anything with the latest poll numbers and torture scandals.
Bring out da WMD!
Okay, conspiracy theories aside, I concur with Occ. I do recall Bush mentioning "stockpiles" somewhere in his SOU speech. I'm still waiting for that wonderful pot o' gold... |
|
|
| imokruok |
What you see here is what the press will be doing tomorrow. It's called raising the bar.
Just like what the Democrats did with national missile defense. 'It will never work. What? It hit a dummy warhead? It will never be able to hit two. What? It hit two? It will never be able to hit three - it's so unreliable! What? It hit three?....' |
|
|
| Shakka |
| Good points on both sides. I do like how the media, given enough time to report something, can essentially bring it to light in a way that each incremental news story simply numbs the masses a bit more so that when a big break finally comes along, the general populice is so numbed (as Imokurok points out, the bar gets raised gradually, but to such a high level) that even a big story seems like small potatoes/business as usual. But alas, it's a new story and details are just starting to leak out so I'll reserve final judgement for now, though this could potentially be quite big. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by imokruok
What you see here is what the press will be doing tomorrow. It's called raising the bar.
Just like what the Democrats did with national missile defense. 'It will never work. What? It hit a dummy warhead? It will never be able to hit two. What? It hit two? It will never be able to hit three - it's so unreliable! What? It hit three?....' |
Ahh yes, "raising the bar".
Just like what the Republicans did with the torture scandals. "It was only a couple of evil military renegades. What? It was more than a couple? It will only be a handful of evil military renegades. What? It may go further up the chain? It will never go higher than 10 or 12 people? What? It might go higher?....."
And as for your analogy in the first place and the missiles hitting the targets:
http://64.177.207.201/pages/16_534.html
| quote: | | "The administration hasn't gone through the technical and testing steps the way they've been advised to do by the Pentagon's own operations and testing people," said Rep. John F. Tierney (D-Mass.), who requested the GAO review. "The report very clearly indicates that there's not been enough progress to give us any sense of security and comfort that this system is at a place where it ought to move forward." |
But more specifically:
http://64.177.207.201/pages/16_548.html
| quote: | Of the 10 flight tests that have been completed, eight were intercept tests; five of the eight have been declared successful. However, all five have employed the same unrealistic target missile trajectory, known in advance, and flown at low speed and altitude. The simple target missiles have been rigged with transmitters that exaggerate their signatures to a surrogate transponder/FPQ-14 radar combination for mid-course tracking that employs GPS technology.
Following the deployment decision, nine of the 20 remaining programmed tests have been canceled, and others postponed |
-and-
http://64.177.207.201/pages/16_571.html
| quote: | Technical difficulties with deployment in 2004:
-The system has not even completed its developmental tests, much less its operational tests under realistic combat conditions.
-The booster rocket for the system has suffered many development problems, and is behind schedule.
-A ground-based X-band radar needed to enhance satellite tracking is not scheduled to be fielded any time soon.
-A sea-based X-band radar which is needed to enhance satellite tracking is not scheduled to be fielded until 2005 at the earliest.
-An infrared satellite system capable of tracking incoming missiles, discriminating warheads from decoys and helping guide the interceptor will not be in place for many years.
-The system cannot deal with decoys and countermeasures. |
It's understandable why Bush was so obsessed with missile defense. It seems that he wanted it to be his staple for his legacy, until that darned 9/11 thingy got in the way:
http://64.177.207.201/pages/16_554.html
But hey, it's not like he listens to scientists on anything, so why would he listen to them now?:
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...issile_usa_dc_4
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_securi...cfm?pageID=1403
At least he'd listen to his own Congress and GAO.
Wait, no he didn't:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2004Apr23.html
| quote: | Missile Defense Agency Faulted On Testing and Accountability
A congressional audit of the Bush administration's efforts to build a nationwide defense against ballistic missile attack warned yesterday that the system, due to be fielded later this year, will be "largely unproven" because of a lack of realistic testing.
The report, by the General Accounting Office, said that the eight flight intercepts attempted so far have been largely "repetitive and scripted," and that critical parts of the system have yet to be flight-tested together...... |
Perhaps a better analogy shoulda been used? |
|
|
| DaveSZ |
David Kay says the shell was probably from the mid to late 80s, and meant for the Iran/Iraq conflict.
Maybe it was one of the ones Rummy and Raygun provided Saddam with.:conf: |
|
|
| imokruok |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Perhaps a better analogy shoulda been used? |
Maybe you should have used a better example, since it was a perfect representation of what the 'bar' has been raised to. The first scientists who chided the administration said it wouldn't work at all. Remember how many of them said, "You can't hit a bullet with a bullet?" Now they say the tests are unrealistic - a change from their original position. It's apparent that the technology works now. Their issue is now that's it's not being properly applied.
I also don't put much stock in your two major cites, as they are both partisan scientific groups. CACNP? C'mon.
But regardless of this issue, you're missing the bigger point here. Sarin in Iraq. |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by imokruok
Maybe you should have used a better example, since it was a perfect representation of what the 'bar' has been raised to. The first scientists who chided the administration said it wouldn't work at all. Remember how many of them said, "You can't hit a bullet with a bullet?" Now they say the tests are unrealistic - a change from their original position. It's apparent that the technology works now. Their issue is now that's it's not being properly applied.
I also don't put much stock in your two major cites, as they are both partisan scientific groups. CACNP? C'mon.
But regardless of this issue, you're missing the bigger point here. Sarin in Iraq. |
I'm not sure if anyone ever said it could "never" be accomplished, perhaps you have a citation of someone saying as much? Even Clinton backed a plan of sorts, so this really isin't too much of a partisan plan - Bush only propelled it much further. My point is, he propelled it (and is currently still doing so) with too much haste and blatant disregard for the rest of the world politically. Bush is also giving billions of dollars to the program without very much oversight (although there is some, thanx to the democrats 2 yrs. ago requiring GAO oversight on budget). If you don't take too much stock into what the scientists say (they just seem to be so liberal nowadays, other than the ones who work for oil companies it seems:D), you should at least take stock in the Congressional audit and the GAO reports.
Besides, it might be more interesting to actually read the report and critique the content from the scientists before commenting on it (and thus avoiding an ad hominem logical fallacy). Did you and Yoepus not accuse me of doing the same in regards to listening to Rummy's Q&A session with the troops (which you were right, of course)?
For the record, I too also see a need for missile defense, but not in the messy methodology and haste that Bush is doing at present. But you're right, this thread is not about missile defense, it's about the sarin gas found. From the CNN website:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast...main/index.html
It seems it was accidental for the maker of the roadside bomb to have had the sarin material within it. Nevertheless, it does show that there was chemicals in Iraq.
So that begs the question - so?
Was anyone ever discounting the fact that there were any in the first place? As the Republicans love pointing out, even Clinton and the old weapons inspectors Blix and Kay all believed at one point that there were some chemicals and/or biological WMDs. The problem is, there is a difference between finding a couple scattered here and there versus finding a stockpile, which were supposedly pointed at us. Oh yeah, we could become a "mushroom cloud" if we didn't act soon, remember that one?
The point is, a couple of pieces here and there are not the argument, nor were they ever the argument. If we went to war over a coupla heads of chemical nerve gases, we need to seriously re-examine our priorities. It was always the stockpiles and nukes that scared the public and Congress into going to war, nothing less. |
|
|
| Shakka |
Well hell, at this point we could find a friggin' mountain of Plutonium covered in a blanket of dead bodies. Someone would have an excuse like, "Well, there's no viable delivery method" or "Those materials are naturally occuring, those people shouldn't have gotten so close to radioactive material" or whatever excuse wants to be made.
Imokurok made a good point about missing the bigger picture. Sarin gas has been found in Iraq. Where there is smoke, there's generally fire. I hope this will lead to something more substantial, but in the meantime I think it's foolish to write it off simply because they haven't found some sophisticated weapons plant literally churning out gas filled artillery shells out by the minute. Hell, the fact that the thing exploded sends a chill down my spine!:confused: |
|
|
|
|
