This Iraqi scientist wasn't surprised that a weapon containing sarin was found exploded earlier in the week. From FOX News:
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.
Stay up to date at The Command Post.




Comments (12)
Of course, the Bushistas pl... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Jay Tea | May 17, 2004 12:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Of course, the Bushistas planted the shell themselves...
You KNOW that's what the moonbats are gonna claim.
J.
1. Posted by Jay Tea | May 17, 2004 12:34 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2004 12:34
2. Posted by Betty | May 17, 2004 2:35 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Although just about anyone can make sarin, I doubt even G.W.'s babies would try that stunt (i.e. endanger their own troops).
However, a 155 mm mortar shell *hardly* qualifies as a weapon of *mass* destruction. What little sarin could have survived the shell being fired & exoploding wouldn't kill very many people.
2. Posted by Betty | May 17, 2004 2:35 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2004 14:35
3. Posted by Fritz | May 17, 2004 2:41 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I believe that anyone who isn't worried about poison gas and bioweapons being brought into the U.S. is a definitely a "moonbat."
Seriously, there's a false belief that since WMDs haven't been found in Iraq that they're completely mythical. At least these kind of stories may shatter that perception.
They exist. The terrorists either already have them or are close to getting them. And, they're headed for a subway or airport near you.
3. Posted by Fritz | May 17, 2004 2:41 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2004 14:41
4. Posted by finite | May 17, 2004 4:46 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The story I heard on NPR this morning said the gas was mostly ineffective because it was 13 years old. We all know they *used* to have chemical weapons programs, as Bush 1 helped them start it. This news is not evidence of any recent checmical weapons programs. And sarin shells aren't WMD anyway, are they?
4. Posted by finite | May 17, 2004 4:46 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2004 16:46
5. Posted by Sam | May 17, 2004 9:23 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I always wondered why, if he didn't have WMDs, he wouldn't let the weapon inspectors do their job. Well, now we know that it's because he had WMDs. Yes, the mustard gas was old, but it was still a violation of UN resolutions. Sarin is deadly, the amount that can fit on a pin head can KILL YOU. I consider any amount of Sarin a WMD.
There were and are many legitamate reasons for this war.
1. Saddam and his horrible evils aganst his own people and others.
2 Freedom for millions of Iraqis
3. the threat of WMDs
4. Iraq as a safe haven for terrorists.
5. Oil
Yes, oil. The profits from which were being used to fund terrorism. Not to mention the bribing of UN officials to thwart the United Interests interests at every turn. Don't forget Germany, France, and Russia, who are NOT America's allies, all getting a piece and rubbing their hands together in glee over their increasing power over the United States. The oil is the center of very complicated foreign political and economic relations issues, and it was VITAL for America's interests to do something about it.
5. Posted by Sam | May 17, 2004 9:23 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2004 21:23
6. Posted by Sam | May 17, 2004 9:26 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I always wondered why, if he didn't have WMDs, he wouldn't let the weapon inspectors do their job. Well, now we know that it's because he had WMDs. Yes, the mustard gas was old, but it was still a violation of UN resolutions. Sarin is deadly, the amount that can fit on a pin head can KILL YOU. I consider any amount of Sarin a WMD.
There were and are many legitamate reasons for this war.
1. Saddam and his horrible evils aganst his own people and others.
2 Freedom for millions of Iraqis
3. the threat of WMDs
4. Iraq as a safe haven for terrorists.
5. Oil
Yes, oil. The profits from which were being used to fund terrorism. Not to mention the bribing of UN officials to thwart the United Interests interests at every turn. Don't forget Germany, France, and Russia, who are NOT America's allies, all getting a piece and rubbing their hands together in glee over their increasing power over the United States. The oil is the center of very complicated foreign political and economic relations issues, and it was VITAL for America's interests to do something about it.
6. Posted by Sam | May 17, 2004 9:26 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 17, 2004 21:26
7. Posted by IXLNXS | May 18, 2004 1:39 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Anyone who starts claiming this as the end all of the WMD's claim in really stretching. Instead of unfurling the "Mission Accomplished" banner, the wiser move would be to wait until more had been found. One shell of outdated Sarin gas is not WMD. A highschooler could cook up a more powerful angent with materials from Wal Mart and a few pots.
7. Posted by IXLNXS | May 18, 2004 1:39 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 18, 2004 01:39
8. Posted by capt joe | May 18, 2004 2:05 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Iraq's form of sarin during the Iraq-Iran war (pre 1991) was unitary. That form rapidly decomposed and required frequent replacement.
If Sarin was detectable in this partiucular explosion, then it could not have been from that time period. Rather it would have been at least a few years old. So what does that mean. It means that Saddam has an ongoing WMD program for sarin manufacture from at least 2001.
Betty, putting sarin in an artillery shell is a normal means of deploying it. Deployment via a 155 shell contains enough sarin to kill thousands.
I think however that those responsible for placing it there were not knowledgeable on how these sort of shells are normally deployed. A chemical shell is required to be "popped rather than blown up so that the sarin is not burned up in the explosion.
8. Posted by capt joe | May 18, 2004 2:05 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 18, 2004 02:05
9. Posted by Jay | May 18, 2004 2:45 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
It was ineffective not because it was old. It was ineffective because the idot arabs who planted it didn't realize that the shell has a safety feature that causes the sarin to mix in flight. The Sarin was not mixed and that is why it was ineffective.
9. Posted by Jay | May 18, 2004 2:45 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 18, 2004 02:45
10. Posted by bill | May 18, 2004 6:03 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Sarin? Mustard gas, anyone? It doesn't matter what will be found - it will never be enough! Don't you get it? It's hammer on Bush, no matter what. Run the hooded Iraqi prisoner story into the ground. Let's run America into the ground while we're at it, shall we?
If we found a nuclear warhead sitting by a road in Iraq, the news media would shrug it off. It was just an "old one" - right?
Stay tuned. Or better yet, don't stay tuned, because this stuff will drive you crazy. Tune in around October - after Osama, Zarqawi and more WMD is found.
It will be a summer of oohs and aahs as Iraq morphs into further mayhem, followed by stability(after the Bush landslide) as the battle of wills unfolds.
Just pray these fools planting bombs can't figure out how to really make them work.
10. Posted by bill | May 18, 2004 6:03 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 18, 2004 18:03
11. Posted by Boggun | May 19, 2004 4:54 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I found one statement rather funny, someone said the shell could not be considered a WMD cause how much would survive the firing and detonation of the shell thus not causeing many casualtys.. well for one Chem weapons do NOT explode they pop like a balloon (if done correctly) and one drop of Syrin on the skin will kill you if ya dont have the anadote and take it soon after
11. Posted by Boggun | May 19, 2004 4:54 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 19, 2004 04:54
12. Posted by Stag | May 19, 2004 4:46 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
There are more dangerous weapons than that here in Texas....Bush should come back home and make my neighborhood safer. I would appreciate it. Why are we fighting this war? Who gets the politicians elected...big business. Who gets the benefit of Bush's tax policies....big business. Who gets the $ from the Iraq war and rebuilding projects....big business. Wake up...
12. Posted by Stag | May 19, 2004 4:46 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 19, 2004 16:46