Where have all the chemicals gone?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where have all the chemicals gone?
As no WMD have yet been found in Iraq, are the Septics:
a) going to put some there for us
or
b) going to keep on invading Middle Eastern countries until they find some?
Your thoughts please!
a) going to put some there for us
or
b) going to keep on invading Middle Eastern countries until they find some?
Your thoughts please!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: A Travelling Man
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moggie
Too impatient by far old chap!
The Coalition have only just started to look, not just too busy before, but not safe to send small units off all over the country on their own until the entire country can be considered secure or sufficient troops are available to provide adequate protection.
They are looking for needles in haystacks, given the size of Iraq, a couple of thousand 45gal drums, split into small packets and scattered throughout the country could take years to find. Artillery shells deliberately wrongly marked could be hidden amongst other ammunition stocks as could smaller rockets.
If it helps a number of what are believed to be trailer mounted chemical weapon laboratories have been unearthed just south of Baghdad.
Just possible that Saddam Hussein will have rigged a few hideous booby traps in the hope that they will be sprung after he has long gone, his way of having the last laugh. Any searches will be painstakingly slow.
The Coalition have only just started to look, not just too busy before, but not safe to send small units off all over the country on their own until the entire country can be considered secure or sufficient troops are available to provide adequate protection.
They are looking for needles in haystacks, given the size of Iraq, a couple of thousand 45gal drums, split into small packets and scattered throughout the country could take years to find. Artillery shells deliberately wrongly marked could be hidden amongst other ammunition stocks as could smaller rockets.
If it helps a number of what are believed to be trailer mounted chemical weapon laboratories have been unearthed just south of Baghdad.
Just possible that Saddam Hussein will have rigged a few hideous booby traps in the hope that they will be sprung after he has long gone, his way of having the last laugh. Any searches will be painstakingly slow.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Somewhere in UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moggie
Old lad - Maybe you have seen TV recently? Unfortunately our boys have been putting out fires, fighting wars, becoming policemen/women and you want them to become detective inspectors.
Miracles take weeks not days!
Old lad - Maybe you have seen TV recently? Unfortunately our boys have been putting out fires, fighting wars, becoming policemen/women and you want them to become detective inspectors.
Miracles take weeks not days!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahh, but we were going to stumble over them all over the place, Saddam was certain to use them, and every Iraqi soldier had a nuke in his back pocket.
However, any thoughts on the "I'll just keep invading 'til I find some" approach by George? The echos from the last shots in Kabul had not died down before he was ranting about Iraq - now the same thing seems to be happening with Baghdad and Syria.
If he keeps moving West like this, he'll be invading Italy next! No point invading France because a) they confess to having WMD and b) they would just lie down and wait for the troops to come in (and the men, too!).
However, any thoughts on the "I'll just keep invading 'til I find some" approach by George? The echos from the last shots in Kabul had not died down before he was ranting about Iraq - now the same thing seems to be happening with Baghdad and Syria.
If he keeps moving West like this, he'll be invading Italy next! No point invading France because a) they confess to having WMD and b) they would just lie down and wait for the troops to come in (and the men, too!).
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apart from death and taxes, two things are absolutely certain.
1) Banned weapons will be displayed in Iraq
2) Whoever is next on the list will have been on it next longest to Iraq.
Life can be very predictable
1) Banned weapons will be displayed in Iraq
2) Whoever is next on the list will have been on it next longest to Iraq.
Life can be very predictable
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Not London
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed, finding the remnants of Saddam's chemical weapons will take weeks... possibly even months. But we knew that anyway, Blix told us as much!
What has been clearly demonstrated is that Iraq did not have enough of a coherent weapons programme to deploy or use them, or thus to pose any significant threat to its neighbours or the US or UK. What there was has probably been mostly bombed or 'inspected' away over the past 12 years.
At least with Iraq as an isolated, pariah state, hated by all, including extremist Islamist terrorists, the remnants of WMD were to some degree contained. Now where are they? Syria? Al Quaeda? Who knows?
Of course, this is a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy... Iraq's WMD could fall into terrorist hands, and the chosen strategy has probably made that all the more likely, thus providing justification for further action in the future.
In summary... I believe that, in the fullness of time, some remnants of WMD will be found in Iraq. I also believe that some other remnants will by now have been spirited away into Syria or elsewhere, or to terrorist groups. Unfortunately, now we have embarked on this aggressive, pre-emptive interventionist strategy, it is difficult to see where it will stop. Based on the Bush / Rumsfeld rhetoric, I fear Syria is next.
What has been clearly demonstrated is that Iraq did not have enough of a coherent weapons programme to deploy or use them, or thus to pose any significant threat to its neighbours or the US or UK. What there was has probably been mostly bombed or 'inspected' away over the past 12 years.
At least with Iraq as an isolated, pariah state, hated by all, including extremist Islamist terrorists, the remnants of WMD were to some degree contained. Now where are they? Syria? Al Quaeda? Who knows?
Of course, this is a bit of a self fulfilling prophecy... Iraq's WMD could fall into terrorist hands, and the chosen strategy has probably made that all the more likely, thus providing justification for further action in the future.
In summary... I believe that, in the fullness of time, some remnants of WMD will be found in Iraq. I also believe that some other remnants will by now have been spirited away into Syria or elsewhere, or to terrorist groups. Unfortunately, now we have embarked on this aggressive, pre-emptive interventionist strategy, it is difficult to see where it will stop. Based on the Bush / Rumsfeld rhetoric, I fear Syria is next.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Now,
I thougfht the reason we went to war, was because America had DEFINITE PROOF of not only WMD, but their locations. I also understand, that Tony Blair was "Party to information that he couldn't release" that justified going to war with Iraq.
If you wanted to justify to the world soonest, that your actions were correct, the very first thing you'd do, is go to the locations you suspected. Especially, as you realise that world cynicism will grow, the longer it takes to find anything.
The troops who are tasked for role, are not taken from the "Fighting strength" they are NBC specialists. They are primed and ready to go, and would normally move,(As far as I remember) at least a Platoon in support, and the other assets they'd need to conduct an investigation.
To recover the bulk of dispersed WMD's assuming they exist, might well be a needle in a haystack, but their primary task, is to look for depots or production facilities, which can hardly be "spirited away" , especially as that nice Mr. Powell, showed us SatIntel proving the Americans knew where they were.
Now why haven't any been found? We see Queen Ari postulating about "The finding of Gas masks " proving they have a chemical capability. I imagine a Gas mask, has been standard issue since the Iran-Iraq war, it is not proof, per se that that Army also posses Chem/Bio weps. After all, we have the best NBC kit in the world, but we don't have any chem/bio weps (Allegedly)
Why haven't we found Gas shells , or munitions, in the ready bins of the defensive forces? This is all pre-war deployment stuff, it does not get issued, after hostilities begin. So far, we have found zip, even in the Artillery ammunition bunkers. Plenty of out of date conventional munitions, but no nasties.
Barry makes reference to "Chemical trailers" . I had a long chat with another Ppruner, as we tried to remember back to our NBC briefings. If he is referring to the Unimogs, they are one of two things. Either Chemical DETECTION wagons, or NBC hardened forward control vehicles. Now that's interesting. The vehicles are old, and could certainly date back to the Iran-Iraq war, when both sides were using chemweps, so that is once again, not proof positive, that Iraq possess these items.
Yes, I believe they must have something knocking around, but where is it? If we haven't fallen over it yet, then it implies that it was not readily available, therefore not deployed, therefore not presenting a "real and present" danger to the indigenous population, Iraq's neighbours or as has been proved to the invading forces. George Tenet's analysis, was that Saddam MIGHT use WMD's IF he was invaded. It hasn't happened. maybe he took a decision not to use them? Or maybe they just weren't available.
One thing we can be sure of, we are going to find something. Any nation that can launch an invasion on the flimsiest of reasons, is going to make damn sure that the world will see they were justified.
I thougfht the reason we went to war, was because America had DEFINITE PROOF of not only WMD, but their locations. I also understand, that Tony Blair was "Party to information that he couldn't release" that justified going to war with Iraq.
If you wanted to justify to the world soonest, that your actions were correct, the very first thing you'd do, is go to the locations you suspected. Especially, as you realise that world cynicism will grow, the longer it takes to find anything.
The troops who are tasked for role, are not taken from the "Fighting strength" they are NBC specialists. They are primed and ready to go, and would normally move,(As far as I remember) at least a Platoon in support, and the other assets they'd need to conduct an investigation.
To recover the bulk of dispersed WMD's assuming they exist, might well be a needle in a haystack, but their primary task, is to look for depots or production facilities, which can hardly be "spirited away" , especially as that nice Mr. Powell, showed us SatIntel proving the Americans knew where they were.
Now why haven't any been found? We see Queen Ari postulating about "The finding of Gas masks " proving they have a chemical capability. I imagine a Gas mask, has been standard issue since the Iran-Iraq war, it is not proof, per se that that Army also posses Chem/Bio weps. After all, we have the best NBC kit in the world, but we don't have any chem/bio weps (Allegedly)
Why haven't we found Gas shells , or munitions, in the ready bins of the defensive forces? This is all pre-war deployment stuff, it does not get issued, after hostilities begin. So far, we have found zip, even in the Artillery ammunition bunkers. Plenty of out of date conventional munitions, but no nasties.
Barry makes reference to "Chemical trailers" . I had a long chat with another Ppruner, as we tried to remember back to our NBC briefings. If he is referring to the Unimogs, they are one of two things. Either Chemical DETECTION wagons, or NBC hardened forward control vehicles. Now that's interesting. The vehicles are old, and could certainly date back to the Iran-Iraq war, when both sides were using chemweps, so that is once again, not proof positive, that Iraq possess these items.
Yes, I believe they must have something knocking around, but where is it? If we haven't fallen over it yet, then it implies that it was not readily available, therefore not deployed, therefore not presenting a "real and present" danger to the indigenous population, Iraq's neighbours or as has been proved to the invading forces. George Tenet's analysis, was that Saddam MIGHT use WMD's IF he was invaded. It hasn't happened. maybe he took a decision not to use them? Or maybe they just weren't available.
One thing we can be sure of, we are going to find something. Any nation that can launch an invasion on the flimsiest of reasons, is going to make damn sure that the world will see they were justified.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: City of Culture
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dont expect them to find any chemical weapons any time soon. The US marines are to busy defending the Oil Ministry and the police ministry from looters than to do very important things like guard hospitals or look for banned weapons 
Thx to the hackers for liberating me from my Schrodinger cat box
Thx to the hackers for liberating me from my Schrodinger cat box
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: A Travelling Man
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I am referring to are vehicles that were recently buried close to a munitions factory south of Baghdad, and which locals showed to the Coalition forces who are now in the process of digging them out.
Have searched the archives of the newspaper I read it in but that article is not included.
Have searched the archives of the newspaper I read it in but that article is not included.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Solotk - my point exactly, but much more eloquent.
As for those chem lab trucks - would it be fair to say that as they were under several tons of sand they can not be considered an immediate threat?
Come on George/Tony - you told us you knew where they were - so tell us now that it is time to do so. Or were you never really sure where they were or even if they were.............................?
I may be "starting" to lose my belief in the honesty of our leaders...................
As for those chem lab trucks - would it be fair to say that as they were under several tons of sand they can not be considered an immediate threat?
Come on George/Tony - you told us you knew where they were - so tell us now that it is time to do so. Or were you never really sure where they were or even if they were.............................?
I may be "starting" to lose my belief in the honesty of our leaders...................
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Not in Kansas anymore
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest news on CNN was that coalition forces found an abandoned '84 Toyota pick-up truck that may be used to transport chemical or biological weapons. This is just the tip...
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WMD's = Zilch
Perceived threat to our airports a few weeks ago = Zilch
Missiles that would reach Akrotiri = zilch
Yep Princess Tony is certainly keeping his head down except in Parliament, how about a few answers then Tone?
Perceived threat to our airports a few weeks ago = Zilch
Missiles that would reach Akrotiri = zilch
Yep Princess Tony is certainly keeping his head down except in Parliament, how about a few answers then Tone?
The Looters would have them by now
Now that with the exception of the specially guarded Oil and Police Ministries, every Iraqi government facility has been stripped to the rafters, we have two possibilities:[list=1][*]The looters have them and will shortly use them to take out their frustrations on a nearby troop concentration -- a container of Sarin would be a suicide bomber's dream.[*]There aren't any.[/list=1]With a whole week gone by, possibility 1. is rapidly fading. Not so good for the Bush/Blair propaganda machine, but given the current (and predicted) chaos -- far better for the troops
Guest
Posts: n/a
Iraq War-room, Duty excuse speaking.....
Rumsfeld: Bioweapons May Be Hard to Find
Associated Press
April 17, 2003
WASHINGTON - The U.S. military's search for chemical and biological weapons is unlikely to succeed until Iraqis lead American forces to them, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Thursday.
"I don't think we'll discover anything, myself," Rumsfeld said at a town hall-style meeting with Pentagon employees.
"I think what will happen is we'll discover people who will tell us where to go find it. It is not like a treasure hunt where you just run around looking everywhere, hoping you find something."
U.S. troops have found suspicious chemicals and facilities at a number of sites but tests on the materials have proved negative or inconclusive. Eliminating such weapons was a chief reason President Bush gave for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq that began March 20.
A Defense Department employee asked Rumsfeld what could be done so the United States would not be accused of planting any chemical or biological weapons that might be discovered. Rumsfeld said he believed such charges are likely and there is little the United States can do to avoid it.
Only in the past few days, Rumsfeld said, have enough weapons searchers arrived in parts of Iraq where U.S. intelligence indicates chemical or biological weapons could be found.
"The teams have been trained in chain of control, really like a crime scene," he said. "That will not stop certain countries and certain types of people from claiming, inaccurately, that it was planted."
Appearing with Rumsfeld was Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, who cautioned against thinking that the fall from power of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party rule means the war is over.
"I wish I could say that we're winding all this down, but I can't," Myers said.
In other words, you've checked all the sites that you forced Colin Powell to present as evidence, and you've come up with d1ck.
I like that - Spot the politician covering his ass with both hands, and getting his denial ducks in a row. What will happen, if they don't discover any weapons? Now it's going to be hard to plant them in the quantities needed to make a conclusive arguement.
Meanwhile Hans Blix is spitting blood, and his top inspectors, have rejected an approach from USMIL, stating they'll go as UNMOVIC or not at all....
Associated Press
April 17, 2003
WASHINGTON - The U.S. military's search for chemical and biological weapons is unlikely to succeed until Iraqis lead American forces to them, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Thursday.
"I don't think we'll discover anything, myself," Rumsfeld said at a town hall-style meeting with Pentagon employees.
"I think what will happen is we'll discover people who will tell us where to go find it. It is not like a treasure hunt where you just run around looking everywhere, hoping you find something."
U.S. troops have found suspicious chemicals and facilities at a number of sites but tests on the materials have proved negative or inconclusive. Eliminating such weapons was a chief reason President Bush gave for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq that began March 20.
A Defense Department employee asked Rumsfeld what could be done so the United States would not be accused of planting any chemical or biological weapons that might be discovered. Rumsfeld said he believed such charges are likely and there is little the United States can do to avoid it.
Only in the past few days, Rumsfeld said, have enough weapons searchers arrived in parts of Iraq where U.S. intelligence indicates chemical or biological weapons could be found.
"The teams have been trained in chain of control, really like a crime scene," he said. "That will not stop certain countries and certain types of people from claiming, inaccurately, that it was planted."
Appearing with Rumsfeld was Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, who cautioned against thinking that the fall from power of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party rule means the war is over.
"I wish I could say that we're winding all this down, but I can't," Myers said.
In other words, you've checked all the sites that you forced Colin Powell to present as evidence, and you've come up with d1ck.
"A Defense Department employee asked Rumsfeld what could be done so the United States would not be accused of planting any chemical or biological weapons that might be discovered. Rumsfeld said he believed such charges are likely and there is little the United States can do to avoid it."
I like that - Spot the politician covering his ass with both hands, and getting his denial ducks in a row. What will happen, if they don't discover any weapons? Now it's going to be hard to plant them in the quantities needed to make a conclusive arguement.
Meanwhile Hans Blix is spitting blood, and his top inspectors, have rejected an approach from USMIL, stating they'll go as UNMOVIC or not at all....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting to see that the septics don't want Hans Blix and the UN to do the follow up weapons inspections, but want the coalition to do them.
So, why might that be? Could it be that the UN would not take kindly to the US planting stuff to "find" later? Can there be any other reason for the US stance?
If "von Rumsfeld" is concerned that people will think the US planted WMD in Iraq, then he should let Blix and his gang dig them up - Blix looks like a man we can trust.
Nice to see Blix saying what most free-thinking people believe - that the US "undermined" his inspectors efforts in the weeks leading up to the war and that the intelligence information they used to justsify the invasion was "shaky". He also said a few days ago that he was "inclined to think that Iraq did not in fact possess WMD" at the time the war began.
You can see and hear the arse-covering and question dodging going on all over the US government - it is SO unfair of saddam not to have WMD!!!
So, why might that be? Could it be that the UN would not take kindly to the US planting stuff to "find" later? Can there be any other reason for the US stance?
If "von Rumsfeld" is concerned that people will think the US planted WMD in Iraq, then he should let Blix and his gang dig them up - Blix looks like a man we can trust.
Nice to see Blix saying what most free-thinking people believe - that the US "undermined" his inspectors efforts in the weeks leading up to the war and that the intelligence information they used to justsify the invasion was "shaky". He also said a few days ago that he was "inclined to think that Iraq did not in fact possess WMD" at the time the war began.
You can see and hear the arse-covering and question dodging going on all over the US government - it is SO unfair of saddam not to have WMD!!!
1) No link to 9/11
2) No immediate threat to anyone, except his own people
3) No Scuds
4) No WMD
No justification for war.
Still, if regime change alone is justification for war, then there are undemocratic tyrants out there who could usefully be removed. George Dubya first, or President Tone?
2) No immediate threat to anyone, except his own people
3) No Scuds
4) No WMD
No justification for war.
Still, if regime change alone is justification for war, then there are undemocratic tyrants out there who could usefully be removed. George Dubya first, or President Tone?