War Death Perspectives

[Hard-Deck]

Originally Posted by tshore

Why would the Bush admin, which claimed to have remarkably detailed knowledge of Iraq's WMDs prior to the war be so coy about saying what they found once we were in there?

These alleged weapons were described in detail by the Secretary of State in an address to the UN Security Council in a speech heard by the entire world. Now they have actually been found, you say, but it's all tippy-top secret. What changed? Why all the fanfare then, and secrecy now?

Now, I did recall reading a couple of years back that there had been uncovered several mustard-gas shells that had fallen into the hands of insurgents, evidently because we had failed to secure the ammo dumps after our invasion. The shells dated from before the first Gulf War, and from what I read had deteriorated and were not usable. The key thing was this - the shells were MADE IN THE USA. We had sold Saddam chemical weapons back in the 80's, and a few of these shells were still kicking around, although evidently they were not dangerous enough to warrant preventing insurgents from walking into ammo dumps and gathering them up.

So is that it? Were old chemical weapons found that we had sold to Saddam back when he was our buddy? And was their existance so embarrassing to the administration that they didn't dare let the public know?

Great comment and questions. The answer is found when a person understands how to and thinks like a General and not a politician.

[KFC911]

One could also argue that the answer is found when one thinks like a politician too .

[ronin]

Originally Posted by stevepaa

need to compare apples to apples
1992-1996 Clinton

Due to hostile action - 1
.

reeeally?? so what was Mogadishu? a kegger gone wrong?

[FOG]

Originally Posted by tshore

Now, I did recall reading a couple of years back that there had been uncovered several mustard-gas shells that had fallen into the hands of insurgents, evidently because we had failed to secure the ammo dumps after our invasion. The shells dated from before the first Gulf War, and from what I read had deteriorated and were not usable. The key thing was this - the shells were MADE IN THE USA. We had sold Saddam chemical weapons back in the 80's, and a few of these shells were still kicking around, although evidently they were not dangerous enough to warrant preventing insurgents from walking into ammo dumps and gathering them up.

So is that it? Were old chemical weapons found that we had sold to Saddam back when he was our buddy? And was their existance so embarrassing to the administration that they didn't dare let the public know?

Not quite accurate. I am in a similar situation as Snapper in having similar clearances, etc.

There media reports (2004). There mustard gas shells found, along with binary shells. None were of U.S. origin. Some were 1996 and some 1997 manufacture.

The reason for not loudly proclaiming the find should be obvious. The insurgents didn’t know what they had and used them for common IEDs with sub-optimal results. The Coalition obviously didn’t want to broadcast out “hey the munitions used at these particular IED attacks were chemical weapon (WMD) rounds”.

S/F, FOG

[tshore]

Originally Posted by FOG

Not quite accurate. I am in a similar situation as Snapper in having similar clearances, etc.

There media reports (2004). There mustard gas shells found, along with binary shells. None were of U.S. origin. Some were 1996 and some 1997 manufacture.

The reason for not loudly proclaiming the find should be obvious. The insurgents didn’t know what they had and used them for common IEDs with sub-optimal results. The Coalition obviously didn’t want to broadcast out “hey the munitions used at these particular IED attacks were chemical weapon (WMD) rounds”.

S/F, FOG

Ok, well that explanation at least makes sense.

But the question must be asked...if these shells were indeed the much-ballyhood WMDs, were they really all that dangerous? Mustard gas has been around since WWI. Assuming the shells were 155mm, the range would have been, what, 20 miles? And they would only be effective in near-ideal wind/weather conditions. And readily countered by use of gas masks, even if mounted on longer range delivery systems.

Can such weapons properly be lumped in with, say, nukes, and labelled as "WMD"? The potential lethality of even several hundred such shells would not come close to that of a single nuclear weapon.

If the WMD the Bush admin was looking for were really just mustard gas shells, the war cannot be justified on that basis, even if the shells in fact existed.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by tshore

Ok, well that explanation at least makes sense.

But the question must be asked...if these shells were indeed the much-ballyhood WMDs, were they really all that dangerous? Mustard gas has been around since WWI. Assuming the shells were 155mm, the range would have been, what, 20 miles? And they would only be effective in near-ideal wind/weather conditions. And readily countered by use of gas masks, even if mounted on longer range delivery systems.

Can such weapons properly be lumped in with, say, nukes, and labelled as "WMD"? The potential lethality of even several hundred such shells would not come close to that of a single nuclear weapon.

If the WMD the Bush admin was looking for were really just mustard gas shells, the war cannot be justified on that basis, even if the shells in fact existed.

The generally accepted definition of WMD is nuclear, biological or chemical weapons..so of course chemical weapons are WMD. The following article describes some of the weapons found:

Senator Santorum Makes Major Announcement Regarding Newly Declassified Information Concerning Chemical Weapons Discovered in Iraq
“This is critically important information that the world community needs to know” – Senator Santorum


June 21, 2006
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, joined Congressman Peter Hoekstra, (R-MI-2), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, today to make a major announcement regarding the release of newly declassified information that proves the existence of chemical munitions in Iraq since 2003. The information was released by the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, and contained an unclassified summary of analysis conducted by the National Ground Intelligence Center. In March, Senator Santorum began advocating for the release of these documents to the American public.

“The information released today proves that weapons of mass destruction are, in fact, in Iraq,” said Senator Santorum. “It is essential for the American people to understand that these weapons are in Iraq. I will continue to advocate for the complete declassification of this report so we can more fully understand the complete WMD picture inside Iraq.”

The following are the six key points contained in the unclassified overview:

• Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.

• Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.

• Pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the black market. Use of these weapons by terrorists or insurgent groups would have implications for Coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside Iraq cannot be ruled out.

• The most likely munitions remaining are sarin and mustard-filled projectiles.

• The purity of the agent inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal.

• It has been reported in open press that insurgents and Iraqi groups desire to acquire and use chemical weapons.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by tshore

... were they really all that dangerous? Mustard gas has been around since WWI. Assuming the shells were 155mm, the range would have been, what, 20 miles? And they would only be effective in near-ideal wind/weather conditions. And readily countered by use of gas masks, even if mounted on longer range delivery systems...

From an earlier thread regarding WMD http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=289641

"it is hard to know for sure since we do not know exactly what the 500 chemical shells are or their condition. It depends on their condition several years ago, not today. Age is not the only factor. Since we know that at least one binary shell (nerve gas) has been found, if a significant number were of that variety....they would likely still be quite potent. So significant casualties would be possible under the proper conditions (perfect storm/perfect planning…like on 9/11). Certainly not on the battlefield against a prepared enemy, but possibly under urban conditions. Chemical agent dispersal is highly dependant on atmospheric conditions (temperature, winds and humidity) and terrain (desert in this case). In the perfect scenario; attacking a dense population without defenses in a low lying area and proper wind conditions...maybe yes."

Attacking a typical undefensed Middle Eastern City with mild winds (making it a bit less effective than calm) with 500 Iraqi artillery shells with the typical Iraqi load of simple Sarin as used in the Iraq/Iran Wa would result (modeled) in approximately 10K fatalities and exposure symptoms of approximately 100K. Higher density or more favorable wind conditions would make it worse. So yes, you are correct if the weapons are all artillery shells and all the chemicals were used as such. Mustard gas would hold up well but be less lethal. Sarin (non-binary) worse...and less lethal over time"

"Results of the closest published modeled scenario (to my scenario and calculations) that I could find that I can post here is:

Ballistic Missile attack on Tel Aviv, Israel (March Winds) 225 kg of GB (Sarin) 3,000 Casualties; More than 31,000 Potentially Exposed

This alone is 6 times your estimate for 500 shells and only uses 75 artillery rounds. Each shell normally contains about 3 kg sarin...so to extrapolate (although you sacrifice a degree of accuracy), 500 shells would equate to around 1500 kg. or approx 6.67 times the casualties...or approx. 20,010 casualties"

[tshore]

My point is that it's misleading to lump chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons together as "WMD", implying that their lethality is of similar order. It is not. The concept of "WMD" is a flawed and misleading one. Nuclear weapons are WMD. The others are not - the possible exception being a smallpox weapon, which no one ever claimed Iraq had.

For example, there was a "WMD" attack in Japan in 1994, carried out by the cult Aum Shinrikyo using sarin gas in a subway. The attack killed 7 and injured 200. Bad, yes, but fewer people killed than in Columbine, and only 7 times as many as died in Ted Kennedy's car... Hardly the "mass destruction" implied by the term WMD.

Under "perfect storm" conditions, maybe a chemcial attack on a single city using many dozens of warheads could kill thousands, but then, under "ideal" conditions, so could attacks with warheads of conventional design. Or passnger airplanes.

There really is only one weapon of mass destruction: nuclear weapons. The widespread use of the term WMD, including weapons not remotely of the same destructive power, is done largely for propaganda purposes to justify actions the administration wants.

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by fintstone

June 21, 2006
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, joined Congressman Peter Hoekstra, (R-MI-2), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, today to make a major announcement regarding the release of newly declassified information that proves the existence of chemical munitions in Iraq since 2003. The information was released by the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, and contained an unclassified summary of analysis conducted by the National Ground Intelligence Center. In March, Senator Santorum began advocating for the release of these documents to the American public.

“The information released today proves (take my word on this, it PROVES!) that weapons of mass destruction are, (We have proof, just BELIEVE what I'm telling you, dammit!) in fact, in Iraq,” said Senator Santorum, whos has never exaggerated or lied in his entire life. “It is essential for the American people to understand (BELIEVE it, dammit!) that these weapons are in Iraq. I will continue to advocate for the complete declassification of this report so we can more fully understand the complete WMD picture inside Iraq. We can't say we fully understand the damn thing as of yet, but it's SCARY!”

The following are the six key points contained in the unclassified overview:

• Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.

• Despite many failed efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed (and you know damned straight that we have REAL GOOD ASSESORS!) to still exist. Can't find the damn things, but BELIEVE ME, they DO EXIST......DAMMIT!

• Pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the black market and possibly even in your local 7/11!. Use of these weapons that we can't find but are telling you DO EXIST!! by terrorists or insurgent groups would have implications, bad and SCARY implications!, for Coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside Iraq cannot be ruled out, no, no, no,CAN NOT be ruled out!.

• The most likely munitions remaining are sarin and mustard-filled projectiles. Sure wish we'd find some...we KNOW that they're there. dammit!

• The purity of the agent inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal. Let that scary little science lesson sink in....and be VERRY AFRAID!

• It has been reported in open press that insurgents and Iraqi groups desire to acquire and use chemical weapons. SHOCKING!! WE GOTTA GO TO WAR AND QUICK!!!

..

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by tshore

My point is that it's misleading to lump chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons together as "WMD", implying that their lethality is of similar order. It is not. The concept of "WMD" is a flawed and misleading one. Nuclear weapons are WMD. The others are not - the possible exception being a smallpox weapon, which no one ever claimed Iraq had.

For example, there was a "WMD" attack in Japan in 1994, carried out by the cult Aum Shinrikyo using sarin gas in a subway. The attack killed 7 and injured 200. Bad, yes, but fewer people killed than in Columbine, and only 7 times as many as died in Ted Kennedy's car... Hardly the "mass destruction" implied by the term WMD.

Under "perfect storm" conditions, maybe a chemcial attack on a single city using many dozens of warheads could kill thousands, but then, under "ideal" conditions, so could attacks with warheads of conventional design. Or passnger airplanes.

There really is only one weapon of mass destruction: nuclear weapons. The widespread use of the term WMD, including weapons not remotely of the same destructive power, is done largely for propaganda purposes to justify actions the administration wants.

When the Bush administration...or any other person who knows the definition of WMD...they refer to any or all of the three: chemical, biological, or nuclear. Your example in Japan is only due to scale...a few drops of chemical agent obnviously are not the equivalent to a nuclear detonation...but when employed on a large scale...just as deadly...and much simpler to make and use. The artillery scales discussed above are really some of the the simplest and least effective ways to dispense chem or bio weapons and were only used in the example becvause that those are the weapons that we found. Used appropriately, one could just as easily kill millions with chemical weapons...even worse with bioweapons. Chemical and biological weapons are the perfect weapon for the terrorist...

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by fintstone

When the Bush administration......

Hey, was that report ever completely declassified and made available to the citizens (I know that you must be very careful wht you reveal to the citizens)?

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by DARISC

....(Can't find the damn things, but BELIEVE ME, they DO EXIST......DAMMIT!)...

...Sure wish we'd find some...we KNOW that they're there. dammit! ...

SHOCKING!! WE GOTTA GO TO WAR AND QUICK!!!

Too late! The article that you responded to (dated June 2006) reported that WMD had already been found.

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by fintstone

Too late! The article that you responded to (dated June 2006) reported that WMD had already been found.

???? Where did it say that? It said that it was "assessed....", but as you've correctly noted, I do tend to miss things sometimes.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by DARISC

???? Where did it say that? It said that it was "assessed....", but as you've correctly noted, I do tend to miss things sometimes.

June 21, 2006
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, joined Congressman Peter Hoekstra, (R-MI-2), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, today to make a major announcement regarding the release of newly declassified information that proves the existence of chemical munitions in Iraq since 2003. The information was released by the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, and contained an unclassified summary of analysis conducted by the National Ground Intelligence Center. In March, Senator Santorum began advocating for the release of these documents to the American public.

“The information released today proves that weapons of mass destruction are, in fact, in Iraq,” said Senator Santorum. “It is essential for the American people to understand that these weapons are in Iraq. I will continue to advocate for the complete declassification of this report so we can more fully understand the complete WMD picture inside Iraq.”

The following are the six key points contained in the unclassified overview:

• Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.

• Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.

• Pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the black market. Use of these weapons by terrorists or insurgent groups would have implications for Coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside Iraq cannot be ruled out.

• The most likely munitions remaining are sarin and mustard-filled projectiles.

• The purity of the agent inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal.

• It has been reported in open press that insurgents and Iraqi groups desire to acquire and use chemical weapons.

[DARISC]

'The information released today proves that weapons of mass destruction are, in fact, in Iraq.", said Santorum. What is that info that "proved" it?

"Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent."

Whether that falls under the WMD definition that gave us justification to attack is contentious.

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by DARISC

Which head wears your helmet when you hit the rack?

I take my helmet off (LOL)

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by Danimal16

I take my helmet off (LOL)

Hey, Dan! Good to hear from you. You probably know that my question has its very real roots in history. In WWII, many G.I.s in the trenches slept with their helmets protecting that which they most feared losing!

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by Rikao4

May you sleep in your own bed soon ,
you need anything ?
Rika

Rika,

Thanks for the offer. Only one thing that we have trouble with in our unit is the mail. I haven't seen my mail in 7 weeks. Just our unit for some reason not a theater thing but it is irritating.

As for what I need? Just more time to stay engaged on this thread. FOG has hit on some great points and I am involved directly in infrastructure. So you guys are hitting some essential points at least from where I sit. Many of the thoughts and experiences expressed on this board I see as well. The "kinetic" phase of this war (That is the new term for head knocking) is actually for the most part over. This is not to say that engagements are going on, but the nature of those engagements are, at least in my opinion, related to the politics of Iraq and the region as they currently are at this time.

Many discussions center around the "phase four" part of the conflict. This is the part of the war that is for our exit. I have, and much to my dismay, come to the conclusion that this plan is nonexistent. That is not to say that we, the US and Iraq are not moving in the right direction, but the big push is to do the deliberate planning as we are executing the plan. The alignment of effort that is currently going on is moving in the right direction but it has been due in large part to the hard work of many folks, Iraqi and CF, to do the heavy lifting. The lack of that plan just means the recovery phase of the Iraqi economy will take longer than it should have, had we had a plan. This phase of the war is an engineer's war but it also is the rule of law (stability) and the economists as well.

I also believe after being here two months that the agriculture is very very essential in the immediate next phase for putting the country back on its feet. This is something that I did not expect or even imagine, but reality has a way of screaming at you and the obvious is sometimes as simple as listening and looking at things for what they are, not what we preconceive. The engineered facilities here are equal to that of the west. The many years of war and economic sanctions have taken a heavy heavy tole. It is sad as the systems at least in the water area are well thought out but so much in disrepair. The economic sanctions have inflicted such a heavy tole on Iraq's ability to sustain itself. I have personally seen these systems and met the operators and engineers and am very impressed. The Tigres and Euphrates river works, when you look at them in schematic are impressive. The one thing that really stuck out in my mind is that the are nearly identical in many ways to the State Water Project in California.

Well I have much to share and a large part is in response to DARSIC's earlier post so I will save them for that. These exchanges are stimulating but some of the reality I have experienced as compared to what in retrospect could have been have caused me some disappointment in what I would expect from our nation. But do not, I implore you, take my disappointment as condemnation of our nation, but rather as lessons learned for us all on listening to the Iraq experience and shaping our resolve and strategic planning in a manner that is complete. I still think we are NOW doing the right thing but as far as going to war, hell I think it was inevitable just based on the threat to the world and Iraq's location of the center of gravity as it comes to the GWOT. But we need to be more realistic about the conflict the world faces at this time, and there is a threat and there are operations going on by our enemies who know full well they are at war with us. The shift in our thought is to get rid of the cold war mentality and plan for the war as it is and not as we think it is. This is happening but as usual the timing has been behind.

Anyway let me read on and enjoy all of your thoughts.

SEABEES can do

Dan

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by Snapper33

The recent book, "Engame" by Thomas McInerney spells out the issues most of you are needing information/answers on.

Here's the key: Think like a General, not a politician and you'll understand Iraq.

Sounds like another I need to get. Generally I approach much of the written works as just a part of the entire picture but have a reserved apprehension that any one work is the single answer. But that said I look at things very differently based on an appreciation for the writings coming out.

[Danimal16]

Originally Posted by Rikao4

I don't see a stable Iraq or region in my lifetime..
good genes here, I just need the luck to go with.

Dan, do you serve with Iraqi soldiers..
do you trust them further than you can shoot...
And while I trust my Lab. to run free,
the Rott's. stay on the leash,
It seem's Iraqi's do best on a spiked choke collar .
Rika

Rika,

My experience with IA (Iraqi Army) is limited. But the GCE (Ground Combat Element) that our engineering cell works with have generally optimism at least as they relay to me. The security forces seem to be sorting themselves out the police are still in there infancy. We have seen this directly. SO what does this mean? Time will tell. In some of our operations we are seeing an eagerness for the IA to engage, but that is second hand.

Let me express some observations on the recent uprising in Basra. I don't want to go into how this happened, at least how the situation was allowed to fester but in a nut shell this was due to some stupid policy by the CF based on politics.

Some interesting observations is first, the IA engaged in the main fighting. Yes you have heard the stories regarding some IA units that are said to refuse to go in and take the fight to the enemy, but the vast majority of the IA fully engaged. Now think about who sought the cease fire? It was the Mahdi forces not the IA. This is cause for contemplation. First of all it is usually the side getting the shellacking that presses for the ceasefire. So I think and this is my opinion at this time is there is a high probability that the IA was kicking the crap out of the Mahdi Shia Forces.

The other take away is that this was Shia vs. Shia. This leads me to consider that the message in this is that both Maliki and Mahdi desire an Iraq. They are both Iraqi. Otherwise Mahdi would be pressing Iran to take over the south. Just food for thought, time will tell. But it does illustrate the complexity of the situations for westerners to understand.