News Australia accused of lying about Iraq

[Adam]

"We believed on the basis of the intelligence advice we had at the time that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Intelligence available to the entire world (such as the IAEA's report) cleared Iraq of the baseless accusations.

"I might point out to my critics that at the time of the military operation there was near unanimous agreement around the world that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction."

There was no such unanimous agreement around the world.

 

[studentx]

Intelligence available to the entire world (such as the IAEA's report) cleared Iraq of the baseless accusations.

Could you show me this intelligence dating from before the war, that proves Saddam had no WMD?

There was no such unanimous agreement around the world.

Cant you read at all? He says "NEAR unanimous", not unanimous. Why was half the middle east wearing gas masks when the war began? Plz provide proof that the majority of this planet believed Saddam had no WMD.

 

[Hurkyl]

Why was half the middle east wearing gas masks when the war began?

I haven't heard this; you have a reference?

 

[russ_watters]

People tend to forget that the purpose of the UN inspectors' 12 year mission was to find and destroy the CNB weapons that were known to exist after the 1991 Gulf War. The problem/question faced by the inspectors was where have the weapons gone? Their existence in 1991 was not in question - heck, he used the chemical weapons on a number of occasions prior to 1991.

Fast forward to 2002 - the UN gave Iraq the chance to show documentation on what happened to these weapons. Iraq provided a 12,000 page document that didn't say anything. Based on this and the attitude toward the inspectors for those 12 years, it was logical to assume that the weapons were being hidden.

So, where did they go? Were they destroyed? Not likely - destruction leaves evidence, and why would Iraq want to hide their compliance with UN demands? Moved? Good possbility - there were some rumors (unsubstantiated) that some were moved to Syra. Some could have gotten to Iran as well.

Though I don't consider the question essential to justifying the war, the question of where the weapons went is nevertheless an important one.

 

[Adam]

Russ, chemical agents have a limited shelf life.

 

[JohnDubYa]

As I understand it from reading the Web, Sarin is not made and then stored. Usually the mixing of the two necessary chemicals is done shortly before the sarin is released as a weapon, or during the release. Both chemicals are more stable than sarin. One is perfectly stable.

How does the roadside bomb containing sarin fit into this discussion?

 

[selfAdjoint]

As I understand it from reading the Web, Sarin is not made and then stored. Usually the mixing of the two necessary chemicals is done shortly before the sarin is released as a weapon, or during the release. Both chemicals are more stable than sarin. One is perfectly stable.

If this is so, then it explains why no WMD were ever found in Iraq. After all, poison gas was the only mass weapon he was demonstrated to have, whatever wannabe projects he initiated. And if you can't keep the best poison gas, there wouldn't be anything stored.

 

[JohnDubYa]

True, but the main point is that poison gas would be readily available when needed. So when someone says that a country is stockpiling sarin, that is not entirely accurate -- rather the country is stockpiling the agents necessary to create the gas.

Keep in mind that factories are not required to make sarin from its constituents. A simple mixing is all that is necessary. In fact, the mixing of sarin takes place inside the artillery shell during flight. So the shelf-life of sarin is completely meaningless.

 

[Adam]

Russ, chemical agents have a limited shelf life.

Apparently I need to repeat.

 

[Hurkyl]

Apparently I need to repeat.

No, you need to elaborate.

 

[JohnDubYa]

For those that don't quite understand my argument, I thought of a fairly relevant analogy.

Epoxy is formed by taking two different chemicals and mixing them together. The reason the glue isn't pre-mixed is obvious: The shelf-life of epoxy is measured in mere minutes (the glue would harden inside the tube). The shelf life of the two constituent chemicals is measured in months or years.

So if you are wanting to find out if a hardware store stocks epoxy, you don't look for epoxy itself, you look for the individual tubes containing its constituent chemicals.

This is why the shelf-life of sarin is IRRELEVANT. Sarin is typicaly not made and then stored, just like epoxy is not mixed then stored. Instead the constituent chemicals are mixed during the release of the weapon, just like epoxy is mixed shortly before application.

This issue is one reason why Scott Ritter cannot be trusted. He should have known that his statements about the shelf life of sarin were completely irrelevant and misleading. He made them anyway, and I think we know why.