The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #58128   Message #920432
Posted By: Teribus
28-Mar-03 - 08:54 AM
Thread Name: BS: New Yorker article - Forged docs re Iraq
Subject: RE: BS: New Yorker article - Forged docs re Iraq
Forum - still waiting for your answer regard pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons?

Yes you still have the munitions - for weapons systems that disappeared from the US military inventories shortly after the Vietnam War. The exact numbers, types and calibres are all a matter of public record - as are the locations where they are stored - all audited and verified as part of the control process. They are currently being destroyed and, if the US military fulfils it's obligations under law to Congress, they will all be completely destroyed by the year 2007.

Since finding the Iraqi C/B suits on three different occasions US and UK senior personnel have been asked if the Iraqi's could have those suits to protect themselves from US/UK chemical or biological attack. On each occasion the response was the same - the US and UK do not have any C/B munitions in their inventories - that I could have told those reporters back in 1966 with equal certainty. As weapons systems they are unpredictable, unreliable, they are of extremely limited use - those of my generation had Grandfathers who could attest to that.

Nicole - I don't think Iraq doubts for a moment that Iran has chemical/biological weapons, for eight years they both threw them at each other - Iraq more so than Iran.

The US will have weaponised strains of anthrax and other weaponised forms of chemical/biological agents - they are required for chemical and biological protective research. This again is common knowledge, with exact details of the stocks and their locations known and checked.

Regarding the insecticides - they are not the weapon - they are a long way short of being the weapon - the insecticides are a precursor/precursor source that can be used in the process to manufacture chemical/biological agents - you then have to stabilise it and weaponise it.

Regarding the suits - to illustrate the point - you have two gangs of kids, playing soldiers, the game will be monitored by referees. You tell them that your "side" is all out the game if you get water on your shirt. The protection against this is provided in the form of plastic macs. It's a really hot sunny day, wearing these is uncomfortable and inhibits your ability to play the game. You further tell them that only one side will be armed with water pistols. As you wander round in your role as referee you notice that one "side" is either carrying their plastic coats all the time or are actually wearing them. The other "side" are not carrying them, in fact they have them stacked in a pile under a tree at the edge of their area - Which side has the water pistols?

You don't have "proof" but it serves as a damned good indication.

Here is another good indication - last night I saw, live on TV, an American 155mm Self-Propelled Gun "brew-up", no casualties. It appeared to be a hot gun or a breach failure - i.e. the reason it burst into flames and then exploded was not down to enemy counter battery fire. What I saw was the entire crew run from the vehicle, a gout of flame burst out from around the turret, a flash and an explosion. At no time did any of the gunners running from the gun make any attempt to don respirators or don their C/B suits. There were no shouts of Gas,Gas,Gas - indication - there were no C/B rounds in the vehicle, or near the vehicle.