The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

They have found a shell containing Sarin in Iraq. It was apparently something that the insurgents were trying to use but it malfunctioned. I think this is just the tip of the iceberg and I'm praying for our military over there.

I believe that with our dithering for months that a majority of the weapons were moved and or hidden well underground and that it could be much longer before we find evidence of it.

Sarin was what was used on the Kurds - and to devastating effect. Wiped out entire villages. Ugly stuff - you don't die nicely.

I just believe that a majority of it is in Syria now, which scares me almost as bad, since the terrorists are so out in the open over there that they have office fronts... you can tell a taxi driver "Take me to the Hizbollah office" and he can.

Gives me the shudders....

They also found some mustard gas a couple of weeks ago.

Geez, they found trace ammounts of Sarin...

For all we know part of that IED could have been made from metal that once was part of a bomb that was decommisioned. That doesn't really mean a thing on its own.

It doesn't make one bit of sense for their to have been chemical weapons stored by the government of Iraq during the end of Hussien's dictatorship... the fact that these chemicals are JUST NOW showing up make it seem PAINFULLY obvious to me that they are being imported from other terrorist powers.

If these weapons were hidden underground ready to go... then why wait to use them?

There's very flimsy evidence to back that up if you ask me.

i'm not trying to start an argument here, but does anyone have a link to a (reputable) site where this has been reported? I'm on boston.com and washingtonpost.com almost every day, and i haven't seen anything about any chemical weapon findings. if something has been found, i'd like to know more about it. any help?

I believe I saw this story on CNN.com. It was reported by the AP, if I'm not mistaken.

It certainly didn't get the amount of coverage the prisoner abuse scandal got. After all, why
would the liberal media report on ANYTHING that might give "Bush's war" an ounce of credibility?

THIS JUST IN:
Darkness overcame the country last night between 8:45 PM and 5:45 AM this morning.....

It, too, was probably the Bush administration's fault. John Kerry is scheduled to bash the Presiden over this matter later in the day.

on a lighter note, any of you guys watch dave chapelle? last nite was a re run, but he had the segment called "negrodamus". and when asked how did bush know iraq had weapons of mass destruction, negrodamus replied "cause he has the receipt." classic. not that i'm a bush hater, but that was too much.

RED(EEMED)SKIN wrote:I believe I saw this story on CNN.com. It was reported by the AP, if I'm not mistaken.

It certainly didn't get the amount of coverage the prisoner abuse scandal got. After all, why
would the liberal media report on ANYTHING that might give "Bush's war" an ounce of credibility?

THIS JUST IN:
Darkness overcame the country last night between 8:45 PM and 5:45 AM this morning.....

It, too, was probably the Bush administration's fault. John Kerry is scheduled to bash the Presiden over this matter later in the day.

Why did you put Bush's war in quotes? Are you quoting another post? Anyway, maybe this wasn't covered well because it's hardly an issue. For the ammount they found it may as well not have happened. Who cares if some terrorists have enough sarin to kill a goldfish?

Anyone who thinks this would give the war in Iraq some credibility (of which it is running dangerously low on) is really grasping at straws: "Look! They have a teaspoon full of sarin! This proves the existance of WMDs!!!!" humbug I say.

I will admitt that the prisoner abuse scandal got WAY too much ink, but I'd rather hear about a goofy story like that (who cares about those photos really?) than hear about soldiers dying because they can't figure out their purpose and role in this ridiculous war.

Skinsfan55 wrote:

Why did you put Bush's war in quotes? Are you quoting another post?

That's the way the media presents this. According to them, he made this war up on a whim while chopping wood on his ranch in Texas.

Anyway, maybe this wasn't covered well because it's hardly an issue. For the ammount they found it may as well not have happened. Who cares if some terrorists have enough sarin to kill a goldfish?

Tell that to the guys who found the sarin. Aren't THEY glad that the squashed an ooportunity to unleash a KNOWN TOXIN????!!!

Anyone who thinks this would give the war in Iraq some credibility (of which it is running dangerously low on) is really grasping at straws: "Look! They have a teaspoon full of sarin! This proves the existance of WMDs!!!!" humbug I say.

I agree. There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that Saddam, the picture perfect, Kurd-friendly, harmless dictator, could have hidden his WMDs or had them transported to neighboring countries. There's no evidence of this so IT CANNOT HAVE HAPPENED, right? (LOOK OUT: SARCASM SPEWING!!!)

I will admitt that the prisoner abuse scandal got WAY too much ink, but I'd rather hear about a goofy story like that (who cares about those photos really?) than hear about soldiers dying because they can't figure out their purpose and role in this ridiculous war.

Both of these stories deal a devastating blow to the operations in Iraq. It's tragic and painful to know that so many have lost there lives. I hardly believe that you can enter and exit a military operation unscathed, but the chances of casualties increases exponentially when the enemy is the author of the book of underhanded, cowardly, and inhumane attacks (i.e., ambushes, suicide bombings, car bombs, etc.) against our troops.

God bless our troops and grant them divine protection in the heat of battle.

i still can't find any story on any findings of wmd anywhere. i even looked on the rnc web site (i feel so dirty) - http://www.rnc.org/Default.aspx. i figure if it happened, the story would be there. if there is a story on this out there, i'd love some help in finding it. thanks.

Quote:
Anyway, maybe this wasn't covered well because it's hardly an issue. For the ammount they found it may as well not have happened. Who cares if some terrorists have enough sarin to kill a goldfish?


Tell that to the guys who found the sarin. Aren't THEY glad that the squashed an ooportunity to unleash a KNOWN TOXIN????!!!

goldfish everywhere are breathing bubbles of relief. if it truly is a tiny amount of sarin, the i'd say using the term 'unleash' is a bit overdramatic.

Quote:
Anyone who thinks this would give the war in Iraq some credibility (of which it is running dangerously low on) is really grasping at straws: "Look! They have a teaspoon full of sarin! This proves the existance of WMDs!!!!" humbug I say.


I agree. There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that Saddam, the picture perfect, Kurd-friendly, harmless dictator, could have hidden his WMDs or had them transported to neighboring countries. There's no evidence of this so IT CANNOT HAVE HAPPENED, right? (LOOK OUT: SARCASM SPEWING!!!)

actually, i would venture a guess that any movement of any kind in iraq would have been followed very closely by us satellites. not to mention that iraq would have to find a willing neighboring country in which to stash his weapons. if i were syria, and i knew the us was coming for saddam's wmd, and he asked me to hold on to them for him, i'd tell him to go blow.

i guess we'll find out soon enough who is holding on to saddam's weapons, since we'll be taking over the middle east in a few years.

RED(EEMED)SKIN wrote: I hardly believe that you can enter and exit a military operation unscathed, but the chances of casualties increases exponentially when the enemy is the author of the book of underhanded, cowardly, and inhumane attacks (i.e., ambushes, suicide bombings, car bombs, etc.) against our troops.

Um, did you really just say that? I will agree that the Islamic people fighting against America to kill anyone supporting the Red White and Blue are going against human decency, and even their own religion... but what is cowardly about their tactics?

Was it "cowardly" when the Minutemen hid behind trees and peppered lines of British soldiers with Muskets? No, it was smart. There were more of them, and they were better equiped so we needed to even the odds. suicide bombings don't make a whole lot of sense (to us anyway, I suppose I'd feel differently if the US killed all the people I loved and destroyed my business, maybe I'd feel like I had nothing to live for too) but carbombs, and ambushes are tactics that may not be fair, but this is a war... we INVADED THEIR LAND. Why do people not understand this? They hate our way of life and us "saving" them from Saddam disgusts a large majority of middle eastern people. We have no business in their affairs, and yet... here we go into the middle east to tell them who's right and who's wrong and to tell them what type of government they must live under. If the French had stayed after the revolutionary war and told us what to do about our government would we have the same nationalistic pride that we do? No, absolutely not. We had to screw up a few times before we got it right, before we drafted the constitution, a document that should, by all rights last forever.

But why should we want Iraq to enjoy the same autonomy we had? Why would we want them to flurish as a country. We're bying hypocrites about this whole thing, and the Iraqi government is going to be built like a new computer... set to be useless in 5 years...

I agree. There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that Saddam, the picture perfect, Kurd-friendly, harmless dictator, could have hidden his WMDs or had them transported to neighboring countries. There's no evidence of this so IT CANNOT HAVE HAPPENED, right? (LOOK OUT: SARCASM SPEWING!!!)

joebagadonuts wrote:actually, i would venture a guess that any movement of any kind in iraq would have been followed very closely by us satellites. not to mention that iraq would have to find a willing neighboring country in which to stash his weapons. if i were syria, and i knew the us was coming for saddam's wmd, and he asked me to hold on to them for him, i'd tell him to go blow.

Totally, but I don't even think it makes sense for Saddam to have these weapons in the first place. I mean, when's the last time he gassed someone anyway? The point is that Saddam had a cushy job as a dictator and wouldn't want to do anything to upset that. So why have stockpiles of weapons around, if we had ANY evidence of such a thing we'd be on him faster than stink on a pig... well, it turns out we did it with NO evidence and now we have egg on our faces when it turns out no WMD's were there to begin with. The greatest minds in America and England are scrambling to find a reason for this war after the fact, and we can come up with nothing... was it to turn all the Iraqis gay (prison photos) so they would stop procreating and once they all died we would inherit Iraq and it's oil? Because that's the best I, or anyone else can come up with.

joebagadonuts wrote:i still can't find any story on any findings of wmd anywhere. i even looked on the rnc web site (i feel so dirty) - http://www.rnc.org/Default.aspx. i figure if it happened, the story would be there. if there is a story on this out there, i'd love some help in finding it. thanks.

From CNN.com:

More testing set for shell
Meanwhile, a U.S. convoy in Iraq found an artillery shell believed to have the makings of sarin -- a deadly nerve gas used in chemical weapons, the coalition said Monday.

A senior defense official said a preliminary field test had been completed on the shell, which will undergo further testing. Field tests sometimes yield false positives.

Kimmitt said the shell contained two chemicals which, when mixed during the flight of an artillery shell, formed the nerve agent.

He said the shell had been rigged as a makeshift bomb that resulted in a small dispersal of the agent when it exploded before an ordnance team could disarm it.

U.S. intelligence officials in Washington said the shell was discovered Saturday near the Baghdad International Airport.

"The area that was affected was very minor," Kimmitt said. "There's no need for any further decontamination. The [ordnance team] people who went up there showed some minor traces of exposure, but it was so minor the doctors already have these people released."

Kimmitt said the artillery round was of an old style that Saddam Hussein's regime had declared it no longer possessed after the Persian Gulf War.

Kimmitt said it appeared that whoever set up the roadside bomb was unaware that it contained the chemicals.

"It was a weapon we believed was stocked from the ex-regime time," Kimmitt said. "It had been thought to be an ordinary artillery shell, set up like an IED [improvised explosive device]. When it exploded, it indicated that it had some sarin in it."

The general said the Iraqi Survey Group, headed by Charles Duelfer, would determine if the shell's discovery indicated Saddam possessed chemical weapons before the U.S. invasion last year. Officials in Washington said another shell -- this one containing mustard gas -- was found 10 days ago in Iraq.

No other evidence of possible chemical weapons has been found in Iraq. The Bush administration cited weapons of mass destruction as a key reason for its invasion.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/05/17/iraq.main/index.html

Hope this helps.

... was it to turn all the Iraqis gay (prison photos) so they would stop procreating and once they all died we would inherit Iraq and it's oil?

Well, this tactic would fall in line with some political agendas in the US right now. Why aren't we all gay??? It's the best thing according to the media. Traditional marriage?? WHAT IS THAT!!!!????? That type of marriage is too offensive.

Skinsfan55 wrote:Um, did you really just say that? ...what is cowardly about their tactics?

Was it "cowardly" when the Minutemen hid behind trees and peppered lines of British soldiers with Muskets? No, it was smart.

That's RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT. I must have fallen asleep the day we covered the chapter on how the minutemen dressed up as "minutewomen" to ambush the British. Or the time they sent their children to put a cap in the British. I knew my education was missing something. My bad.

thanks for the link, red(eemed) skin. 'preciate it.

UGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Skinsfan I should have known you'd jump all over this. Listen to the news dude. A few drops of Sarin can have a deadly effect. It's not made up at all. And it's not set out to effec the "goldfish". And by the way we have a few sick soliders because of this. Take it lightly if it fits your agenda, but I DO NOT. If this weapon were correctly used with no malfunctions it could have effected a whole lot more then a few. It's amazing how you totally ignored Rich's post. He used this same chemical on other groups. As for why he'd have piles of chemical weapons, why on earth would he mutilate and mistreat his own people, if he had such a cushy job and that was his only concern he'd surely show the people who put him there some respect. Hmmmm somewhere this story line doesn't hold up. I posted this because I saw it on the news, not because I made it up. This has nothing to do with my support for Bush or my support of this war. I posted a fact and for some reason you jumped all over making it meaningless. Look I have done nothing to you, and I've learned my lesson. I will not post anything polictically related at all. Not fact, not opinion.
It just really aggrevates me that your concern here is that this matter is being over inflated as a threat. My concern here if you read my original post was our military and the threat these things pose to him.

BTW Did you hear that Iraq consists of loads of HUGE deserts. Wonder where on earth they could possibly hide WMD??? Hmmmmmm

I just want to say that whoever takes a saw to a civilian's head with his hands tied behind his back is a coward; ESPECIALLY DURING A TIME OF WAR!!!!! Whoever attacks and/or kills the Citizens who are contractors or journalists of other countries and not the occupying soldiers is a coward. When the British were here we attacked their soldiers. Remember Bunker Hill? What about Trenton? UHHHHHH Yorktown? Those battles involved Soldiers. The only "Battle" involving Civilians was the Boston Tea Party, BUT NO CIVILIAN ON THAT SHIP WAS KILLED OR INJURED. Name me one battle that we as Americans fought which involved killing civilians during the Revolutionary War.

SkinsFan55 worst nightmare is for the U.S. to find any WMDs. The more WMDs found in Iraq, the more it hurts Kerry's chances at becoming president. Now SkinFan55, I know you will have something to say. You may proceed with your liberal drivel.

the liberal drivel makes me wanna

Pretty pathetic stuff there Skinsfan. Saddam boasted about paying the families of homocide bombers - that means Saddam financed terror operations. If I need to use smaller words let me know.

Abu Abbas was arrested in Iraq - he hijacked the cruise liner and killed the old man in a wheel chair... for being a Jew. Saddam provided safe haven, training and more money to other terror organizations.

We've found mass graves of hundreds of thousands of people. There are video tapes of Iraqi torture - real torture - rape, fingers getting cut off, people dipped in acid, babies being gassed to death.

In addition, he had dozens of opportunities to avoid the war. He rested on the belief that the Powerful French government, along with the Germans and Russians - who will soon be proved to have lined their pockets with the "oil for food" money.

If we don't take the fight to them - they'll come for us. Maybe you were asleep for a few years - but they murdered over 3,000 Americans 9/11/2001.

The name of the enemy is TERRORISTS. You can spew all the trash you want about WMD's, no connection to Al Queda, Ted (prom-date) Kennedy's war theory... and you can swallow all of it that you want.

It's simple - If you hide terrorists = you're a terrorist. If you give money to a terrorist = you're a terrorist. If you have something to hide and you bow your chest and dare someone they can't do anything about it - you deserve the asswhipping of your life.

You feel sorry for Saddam all day long. You buy the liberal media BS. I'll support the men and women that allow me the freedom to drink beer and watch my Redskins. Don't think you can support them and not support the President either - what the hell go ahead! The fact of the matter is you can't do both simultaneously.

I feel sorry for people that don't get it - and if Kerry wins, things will hit home sooner than you think. Critical thinking and independent thought are assumed to be the sole property of the anti-war crowd. If that's the case, why do they need so much reassurance from the media.

55 Wake up!! The Clinton administration was quoted as saying that Iraq had WMD's I have been asked to go to Iraq and help sort out the 1000's buried in mass graves...how do you suppose they got there?? We he at Dover are holding our collective breaths that we don't get "contanminated"remains.

DEHog I do not envy you in the least. I worry for all of you guys. And that was what my post was about. Whether this is found now or later, it's still a major threat to our troops. God Bless you dude, for what you do! I hope he keeps you safe!

Scooter wrote:

I'll support the men and women that allow me the freedom to drink beer and watch my Redskins. Don't think you can support them and not support the President either - what the hell go ahead! The fact of the matter is you can't do both simultaneously.

Dang Scooter that was a really good post!!!!! I must admit that I agree fully with everything you said except for the support of President Bush. You see I support our troops over there as much as any American. But President Bush has really screwed some things up. I'll say the Economy for one. Heck, I've lost over 7k in money I had in stocks. THATS ALOT FOR ME. I put that money in there when the Economy was running excellent. But like an idiot I listened and trusted President Bush when he was saying that his tax cut will work and the signs of the market look good. I will also say that what about these freakin gas prices? Geez!!!! I remember several years ago when the gas prices rose to $1.75 a gallon for the ultimate gas. That was when Clinton was in there and the Republicans started to bash him for it. Now where up to $2.25 a gallon for the ultimate. That is freakin isane!!!!

There is more......I just don't feel like typing it all in right now. I think President Bush has handled Domestic Issues the worst I have seen them handled in my lifetime. International issues, I think he has handled them pretty good.

I don't see how you have to support both the President and the Troops to be supportive. I do support President Bush's choice to send the troops there. But I don't support his choices on the economy and other things. AND I WILL NEVER BECOME UNSUPPORTIVE OF THOSE TROOPS OVER THERE. I'M DRINKING A BEER RIGHT NOW AND TYPING ON A MESSAGE BOARD. I WON'T FORGET WHY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!