Skip to comments.
Roadside Bomb Releases Sarin Gas in Baghdad (DoD)
DoD-AFPS ^
| May 17, 2004
| Donna Miles
Posted on 05/17/2004 9:56:37 AM PDT by Ragtime Cowgirl
Roadside Bomb Releases Sarin Gas in Baghdad
By Donna Miles American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, May 17, 2004 -- A roadside bomb containing the nerve agent sarin a substance Saddam Hussein's regime insisted it had destroyed more than a decade ago exploded near a U.S. military convoy traveling near Baghdad, coalition officials said today. Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, deputy operations director for Multinational Force Iraq, told reporters in Baghdad a U.S. convoy found the 155-millimeter artillery round rigged as an improvised explosive device. The round detonated before the explosive ordnance team could render it inert, Kimmitt said, spewing a small amount of sarin gas. The release caused two soldiers to be treated for only "minor exposure," Kimmitt said, and the surrounding area needed no additional decontamination. Kimmitt said whoever rigged the device, likely from old regime stockpiles, probably did not realize that it contained the deadly nerve agent sarin. The effect of the explosion was minimal because the agent was used in a roadside bomb rather than being fired by an artillery piece, Kimmitt said. The type of round used, a "binary chemical projectile," has two chambers that keep the chemical components inside separate until they are fired by an artillery piece, Kimmitt explained. After firing, the rotation of the artillery shell in flight causes the barrier between the two substances to mix, creating sarin. The device releases the agent when it lands and explodes. However, when the round is used in an improvised explosive device, Kimmitt said, the chemicals don't properly mix, so they produce only "very, very small traces" of sarin gas. "When you rig it as an IED, it just blows up and you have
minor amounts (of the chemical) going in different directions," he said. "It's virtually ineffective as a chemical weapon." Kimmitt said the incident does not pose a continuing threat. He said he would leave it to the Iraqi Survey Group to determine if the incident gives credence to charges that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. "The former regime had declared all such rounds destroyed before the 1991 Gulf War," he said.
*formerly, CJTF-7
|
|
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: deeplysaddened; freedom; goodguys; iraq; proofofwmd; sarin; supportourtroops; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
To: Ragtime Cowgirl

The former Majority Leader's reaction was, of course, predictable...
2
posted on
05/17/2004 9:59:13 AM PDT
by
presidio9
(Islam is as Islam does)
To: MJY1288; xzins; Calpernia; TEXOKIE; Alamo-Girl; windchime; Grampa Dave; anniegetyourgun; ...
Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, deputy operations director force Iraq, told reporters in Baghdad a U.S. convoy found the 155-millimeter artillery round rigged as an improvised explosive device. The round detonated before the explosive ordnance team could render it inert, Kimmitt said, spewing a small amount of sarin gas. The release caused two soldiers to be treated for only "minor exposure," Kimmitt said, and the surrounding area needed no additional decontamination.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Official Multinational Force Iraq, ping.
3
posted on
05/17/2004 10:01:59 AM PDT
by
Ragtime Cowgirl
('News': Saddam/Osama's deadly lies flow - uncontested- as our free press continues to attack allies.)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
"The type of round used, a "binary chemical projectile," has two chambers that keep the chemical components inside separate until they are fired by an artillery piece, Kimmitt explained. After firing, the rotation of the artillery shell in flight causes the barrier between the two substances to mix, creating sarin. The device releases the agent when it lands and explodes." I think this is such a crucial point, which needs to be made. This is why we "haven't found any actual WMD", they keep the ingredients separate, and don't mix them in advance, nevertheless, when mixed, they do produce WMD.
The reason this fact is important, is that Saddam could have had tons of the two chemicals kept separately, with the intent to put them in shells, such as this and create sarin. I bet that according to the UN inspectors and liberals having the two chemicals which create sarin wouldn't count as WMD, because they didn't store them as actual sarin. This, naturally is ludicrous.
The same is most likely true about other chemical weapons: Saddam could have created them at a moment's notice, but were not stored actually ready mixed.
With the biological weapons, he could just have kept a few vials, which he could have used to create more. I read he had a lot of material, for growing cultures.
I think Bush, Rumsfeld, Powell should demand an apology from the Democrats and the media, who basically called them liars over the WMD issue. They also need to revisit the chemicals found, and if mixing them can create WMD, they should count as WMD.
4
posted on
05/17/2004 10:03:27 AM PDT
by
QQQQQ
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Don't bother me! I'm still trying to figure out how someone can put WMDs in an artillery shell when they don't have WMDs. :-P
5
posted on
05/17/2004 10:03:44 AM PDT
by
Coop
(Freedom isn't free)
To: QQQQQ
You are exactly correct. The 2 chemicals must mix to form sarin.
Saddam might have been even more sneaky and had Chemical A and Chemical B in their precurser forms as well. He had the recipe that would make Chem A in a short time, and the same for Chem B.
I'd like to read a report on the availability of ingredients that could be used in a sarin recipe.
6
posted on
05/17/2004 10:08:24 AM PDT
by
xzins
(Retired Army and Proud of It!)
To: Coop
>>>
Don't bother me! I'm still trying to figure out how someone can put WMDs in an artillery shell when they don't have WMDs<<< It's simple! If you put your WMDs into artillery shells, you don't have WMDs any more, the artillery shell's have WMDs. This is known as "DemocratPoliticalYearLogic" or DPYL.
7
posted on
05/17/2004 10:10:01 AM PDT
by
HardStarboard
( Wesley...gone. Hillary......not gone enough!)
To: Coop
What I am trying to figure out is why, if they had WMD, as this seems to show they did, they didn't use them against us when they had chance!
8
posted on
05/17/2004 10:10:27 AM PDT
by
Brit_Guy
To: Brit_Guy
I expected they'd hit our troops with WMDs around Baghdad a year ago. I was wrong. This IED thing indeed sounds like the perps didn't know the warhead had WMDs inside. Fortunately.
9
posted on
05/17/2004 10:13:45 AM PDT
by
Coop
(Freedom isn't free)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
No WMD's eh ~ Bump!
We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, democrats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!
~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~
10
posted on
05/17/2004 10:18:07 AM PDT
by
blackie
(Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
To: presidio9
THE PRESIDENT PROVEN RIGHT ?

"I'm
deeply
saddened"
12
posted on
05/17/2004 10:40:40 AM PDT
by
ChadGore
(Vote Bush. He's Earned It.)
To: QQQQQ
When the US military was knocking on Saddam's door, he was in the bathroom frantically flushing all the contraband down the john. He must have missed a little.
To: Brit_Guy
What I am trying to figure out is why, if they had WMD, as this seems to show they did, they didn't use them against us when they had chance! A couple of reasons, one we bought off many of the commanders of the units that would have used them. Two, we have WMDs of our own, and promised to use them if Saddam's military used theirs. If we had used them, Saddam would not be a prisoner today, he'd be well dispersed into Iran, Afghanistan, Mongolia and points east. Or he'd be glowing in the dark, and well done as well, if he'd been a bunker deep enough and strong to survive the blast.
14
posted on
05/17/2004 10:54:54 AM PDT
by
El Gato
(Federal Judges can twist the Constitution into anything.. Or so they think.)
To: Brit_Guy
What I am trying to figure out is why, if they had WMD, as this seems to show they did, they didn't use them against us when they had chance! A couple of reasons, one we bought off many of the commanders of the units that would have used them. Two, we have WMDs of our own, and promised to use them if Saddam's military used theirs. If we had used them, Saddam would not be a prisoner today, he'd be well dispersed into Iran, Afghanistan, Mongolia and points east. Or he'd be glowing in the dark, and well done as well, if he'd been a bunker deep enough and strong to survive the blast.
15
posted on
05/17/2004 10:54:59 AM PDT
by
El Gato
(Federal Judges can twist the Constitution into anything.. Or so they think.)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
16
posted on
05/17/2004 10:56:05 AM PDT
by
drq
To: QQQQQ
I'll bet you a few million dollars that they have found tons of the "seperated" chemicals, but no "WMD".
17
posted on
05/17/2004 10:59:03 AM PDT
by
Bryan24
To: Coop
"This IED thing indeed sounds like the perps didn't know the warhead had WMDs inside."
That's what it would seem. However, consider the possibility that they did know what it was and purposely tried to set it off. Make our guys have to don chem/bio gear often when the temp is high.
What I found curious is that some freeper relayed the information on the long thread on this subject that the WH was surprised by Gen. Kimmitt's announcement since they thought it was still classified. Maybe that's just crossed signals, but I do wonder about that.
18
posted on
05/17/2004 11:05:30 AM PDT
by
Cap Huff
To: Cap Huff; Dog
Hmmm. Well, if the White House was surprised, then I'm sure the good general will hear about it. :-)
19
posted on
05/17/2004 11:09:11 AM PDT
by
Coop
(Freedom isn't free)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
"Nothing to see here, move along and read about how Rumsfeld ordered the prison abuses"
CNN and NPR
20
posted on
05/17/2004 11:10:49 AM PDT
by
SAMWolf
(The original point and click interface was a Smith & Wesson.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson