They were reporting it!

ok, lesse ...

enough nerve gas to make a few GI cough ...

hmmmm, if we had a "scratching my chin" smily i would use it right now.

over a year after we went to war with a country half around the globe because they were supposed to be a imminent danger to our very own country.

yeah, i can see how that could be the "smoking gun" we were looking for when we first got there.

i'm glad we didn't just spend a couple of hundred BILLION dollars to find that evil, evil little shell.

and i'm sure glad we didn't waste almost 800 US soldiers lives either.

have a good day ya' all ...
Andy

So between 3 and 4 liters of nerve gas does not seem like much to you? That would have been enough to kill hundreds of people if the shell had been delivered properly.

there is no doubt that chemical agents were used against the kurds and the ****es. after gpb abandonded the ****es after the first gulf war. as for the "shell", even a blind pig finds a truffle once in a while. that "shell" sures makes this whole disaster worth while.

kevin

aehm ...

it DID explode.

2 soldiers were treated for exposure and later released.
no mentioning of 3 or 4 liters.
no mentioning of enough to kill hundreds of people.


what are we doing in iraq?
why aren't we looking for the guy who admitted to be behind 9/11?
why do we spent so much lives and billions of dollars on "rebuilding" a country no one here gives a f**k about?


you tell me, please,
Andy

if you knew anything about truffles (or pigs), you would know that pigs find them using their sense of smell not their eyesight ...

Andy

I've just read the last couple pages of this thread and agree that Iraq is a disaster from top to bottom, but I happen to think that all of the "misfortunate" things that have been happening were predictable from the start. We have political leadership that is operating on misguidied principle and religious faith, as opposed to historical and/or "both sides" analysis, which very correctly predicted that invading Iraq would be a disaster from every possible angle. I considered it a disaster on the day that they pulled down Saddam's statue; nothing but a "feel-good", PR moment, like prancing around on the aircraft carrier shooting the campaign commercial, (that sure went sideways, huh?), that had absolutely nothing to do w/ real success for the Iraqi people or the region.

We are bringing democracy to Iraq? My ass we are. If free elections were held today, Saddam would win in a landslide on a platform of expelling and/or killing all Americans. We are occupying them at gunpoint, period. And the PR sucks at the moment, but don't worry, it's getting worse by the day. :rolleyes:

Bush and Co. repeat the same hollow words like robots, stick to the script no matter what. "Operation Iraqi Freedom", (never mind the torture), "War on Terrorism", (even if we are the terrorists in the eyes the people we are "liberating", hey, accidents happen), calling all Iraqis who are giving armed resistence to the occupation "terrorists", etc., etc.....

Total frikkin' propaganda. And they're not all that good at it, even the NASCAR crowd is waking up.

Iraqis actually have a much more reasoned response to dead civilians and children than we do. Sure, they want our blood, but we allowed an unbelievably stupid, corrupt, and cynical president to start conventional wars and invade uninvolved countries over our outrage at one terrorist attack. Anyone who believes that we are "preventing and/or fighting terrorism" in Iraq needs to avoid Las Vegas and Ebay at all costs, you will get your clock cleaned. :cool:

andy, the blind pig can't to see the open gate to get out of the pen.;) so he bangs into the fence repeatedly until he gets out. the moral is if you look hard enough and long enough you might get lucky. i know enough about truffles to know that i would not pay the exhorbitant price to eat a bit of fungus and that if you anger a sow with piglets you would rather face a military guard dog while handcuffed, naked, sitting on a prison floor.

Fint, where are you getting these numbers from? That would be one huge artillery shell.

of course the deteriarating huge chemical/biological storage facilities in the states are a good thing. do as we say not as we do.

For an artillery shell to be "delivered properly," one must use an artillery piece, not UPS. The shell requires the spinning action to mix the precursor chemicals. An IED exploding while being disarmed does not constitue proper deliver as the only mixing of the chemicals is accidental.

There were indeed 3 to 4 liters wihich is the typical load for a shell of this type.

It was released by DOD but not very well reported due to the same liberal media that put finding the shell on page 11. That is about the standard load for that size shell.

Here is one source:
http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,,2-10-1460_1529074,00.html

"not very well reported due to the same liberal media that put finding the shell on page 11."

Maybe because of what Rumsfeld and Kimmitt said about the find: ""The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found,"_Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt (search), the chief military spokesman in Iraq, told reporters in Baghdad. "The round had been rigged as an IED (improvised explosive device) which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy."

The round detonated before it would be rendered inoperable, Kimmitt said, which caused a "very small dispersal of agent."

However, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and said more analysis was needed. If confirmed, it would be the first finding of a banned weapon upon which the United States based its case for war."

So if Rummy isn't playing it up, why should the media? I would think the evil liberal media would be reporting the supposed efforts by CIA to plant WMDs in Iraq.

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/?page=story_12-8-2003_pg1_9

A 155 MM shell? I sure would like to know how one fits 5 liters of nerve agent into a 2 liter shell.

So much for military intelligence. Then again this is information being passed on by fox propaganda services.

"I sure would like to know how one fits 5 liters of nerve agent into a 2 liter shell"

Huh? Is not 155mm simply the guage or diameter?

Well, working on the basis it is 10cm in diameter inside (easy maths for me :D). 10cm x pi = 31cm. 31cm into 4,000cm cubed is 1.3 meters long, give or take. Internal diameters only.

That's a pretty long shell (in my mental picture - but then again, I've never seen a shell before :)).

Way up, Dan posted:

But somehow I still cling naively to the idea that the vast overwhelming majority of our troops are honorable men and women, serving their country as best as they know how. We're getting a colossally bad collection of random and pretty much unrelated mistakes right now. Is it because our military hasn't had the training and recruiting dollars that it should have had? Is this a problem in general American patriotism, in that our best and finest aren't going military? Is it a grand decision from Donnie and Vern to ruin the known universe? Tough to tell from here, really.

I think the vast majority of your servicemen and women are very honourable. However, the "problem" you are searching for is, as Denis says up a bit, that you never shoulda oughta gone there in the first place.

uh.. . Cam, (pi)×(dia) gives you circumference. . . .not area. Lets try (pi)×r² for area:

150/2 = Radius (r) =75mm

then (pi)×r² = 3.14×75² = 17670_mm² . ..or 176.7_cm²

with 5_liters = 5000_cm³

we have 5000_cm³/(176.7_cm²) = 28.3_cm (length) . ..(that's 11.14 inches . .so, go ahead, be impressed by "a pretty long shell;" Ted Nugent is) :cool:

btw, an aspect ratio of shell using twice it's diameter, for "payload" is not so hard to believe.

I found a good discussion on the topic of this shell:

http://www.command-post.org/2_archives/012332.html

Aurel

Man, some of those guys really know their stuff. But 350 says it'll only hold 2 liters? Who's right? I really wonder, no really:)

Although I know actual knowledge is anathema to some of the participants here, this is part of a Scott Ritter interview:

"...What gives away whether the shell had been fired is the base-bleed charge, which unlike the rest of the shell, will show evidence of being fired (or not). Iraq declared that it had produced 170 of these base-bleed sarin artillery shells as part of a research and development program that never led to production. Ten of these shells were tested using inert fill - oil and colored water. Ten others were tested in simulated firing using the sarin precursors. And 150 of these shells, filled with sarin precursors, were live-fired at an artillery range south of Baghdad. A 10 percent dud rate among artillery shells isn't unheard of - and even greater percentages can occur. So there's a good possibility that at least 15 of these sarin artillery shells failed and lie forgotten in the Iraq desert, waiting to be picked up by any unsuspecting insurgent looking for raw material from which to construct an IED..."