[VMI70]

EVIL PROOF [Brits Find Bunker Full of WMD's in S. Iraq Oil Fields]

Is this the true headline?

Now stay with me on this--Are there any inconsistencies in the following quotes from the article?

"EVIL PROOF [Brits Find Bunker Full of WMD's in S. Iraq Oil Fields]" (That is the headline) then the following from the story:

"It was not immediately clear if the weapons contained chemical or biological warheads"

"...piles of shells said to contain the deadly warheads."

"British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon said the find "proves categorically" that Iraq is ready to use weapons of mass destruction against allied forces."

Strange

[k2blader]

"Evil Proof" is the headline. I added the stuff in brackets, taken from the article's first sentence.

I should have typed "[Brits Find Bunker Full of Suspected WMD's in S. Iraq Oil Fields]". Sorry about that.

[lasereye]

"British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon said the find "proves categorically" that Iraq is ready to use weapons of mass destruction against allied forces."

I think he was referring to the suits, not the warheads.

[piasa]

There's no inconsistency there. I presume you mean that there is a possibility they could be conventional shells, too. I don't think conventional explosive warheads resemble warheads designed to disperse (but not heat) chemicals or biological agents. Heating from explosives might render biochemical weapons useless by incinerating the contents before they can do any "good" - sort of the way the first WTC bombing didn't go as planned because the explosive blast neutralized the cyanide gas and rendered it harmless.

The shells are apparently not the type containing a typical explosive warhead, but are of a type that could be used only for nonexplosive, chemical or biological substances- the latter are designed to disperse the substances, not kill with fire, concussion, and shrapnell. That would make them look different since the function is markedly different; a visual inspection will make it clear they aren't conventional explosive types so that possibility is not on the table. That leaves them with the other possibilities, which are either biological or chemical, and that might require testing to determine exactly what the substance is.