Next article: Church of Nigeria: The Episcopal Church compared to “a cancerous lump”
Previous article: Vigil
Over 500 — the exact number is still classified — weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, and the search continues.
“These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes … they do constitute weapons of mass destruction,” Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee.
The Chemical Weapons Convention is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. It was signed in 1993 and entered into force in 1997.
The munitions found contain sarin and mustard gases, Army Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said. Sarin attacks the neurological system and is potentially lethal.
“Mustard is a blister agent (that) actually produces burning of any area (where) an individual may come in contact with the agent,” he said. It also is potentially fatal if it gets into a person’s lungs.
The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added.
While that’s reassuring, the agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said. “We’re talking chemical agents here that could be packaged in a different format and have a great effect,” he said, referencing the sarin-gas attack on a Japanese subway in the mid-1990s.
According to the press release from Armed Forces Press Service, it is believed that the deposed Iraqi regime had poor maintenance records, which have made it difficult to locate the chemical weapons remaining. Lt. Gen. Chu indicated that he did not believe all the chemical weapons had been found.
Read more: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria
The URL to trackback this post is:
http://kevinbasil.com/2006/07/06/500-wmds-and-counting/trackback/
Copyright © 2002–2011 Kevin Robert (Basil) Fritts, all rights reserved.
July 12th, 2006 at 11:30 pm
Uh, degraded to the point that most people have worse stuff under their sinks was the term used.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/22/AR2006062201475.html
More crap. Nothing to see here, move on.
July 14th, 2006 at 6:37 pm
“The” term used by David Kay, according to the linked article, who apparently hasn’t seen the reports in question:
And the AP article you linked to ends by noting: