You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Chemical Weapons Too Degraded to Use - Bigmouth CIA Source
2006-06-23
Iraq chemical weapons too old to use: US intelligence officials

Jun 22 3:12 PM US/Eastern

The chemical weapons that have been recovered by US forces in Iraq were all made before the 1991 Gulf War and were too degraded for their intended use, US intelligence officials said.

Republican lawmakers have cast the disclosure that about 500 chemical weapons have been found in Iraq as evidence that Saddam Hussein had a stockpile of the weapons before the March 2003 US invasion of Iraq.

But the intelligence officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, said the weapons were too degraded to have posed a threat to US forces in March 2003.

They said all chemical weapons found since 2003 were produced before the 1991 Gulf War and they had no evidence Saddam was producing or stockpiling chemical weapons after that.

"Generally they are in poor condition," one Clinton holdover official said.

"We assess that they are not in condition to be used as designed. And detailed analysis of the toxic agents shows they are degraded and represent a much lower hazard," he said.

The munitions have been tested and computer simulation models created to determine what effect they might have under a variety of scenarios, the officials said.

Although not suitable for their intended purposed, the officials said such weapons remain a potential hazard if obtained by insurgents and modified in ways they would not discuss.

The officials, however, said they had no evidence that any element of the Iraqi insurgency has possession of chemical weapons.

"I would simply say we have seen a degree of improvisation on the part of the insurgency with regard to conventional munitions," said an official.

"They might apply that same degree of improvisation if in fact they came in contact with these types of munitions. And again we have no evidence that they have," the official said.

The weapons were found "in small numbers over time" since 2003, an official said. They were recovered in one, two or three at a time -- not in large caches, the officials said.

"We would characterize these recovered munitions as being consistent with weapons that have been not maintained, that have not been part of an organized inventory," he said.

Senator Rick Santorum and Representative Peter Hoekstra, both Republicans, on Wednesday made public information from a classified report prepared in April on the subject by the National Ground Intelligence Center that said 500 chemical weapons have been recovered.

The intelligence officials said "key points" from the report were declassified at the request of Hoekstra, who chairs the House Intelligence Committee.

The "key points," however, ommitted the fact that the 500 weapons all were of a pre-1991 vintage. The officials indicated that the age of the weapons was not considered classified but were unable to explain why it was not included in the key points given to the senators.

New Democrat Arguement - The Bush Administration ignored the exiration date on the weapons, or ignored it - Dang those satellite images are good! - Ummmm what do the Dimwitocrats think these are ? Cartons of milk?
Posted by:Kim Jung-il

#22  Here in Micronesia leftover WW2 Japanese andor Amer munitions have killed many a local islander(s) - on Guam, the EOD teams have been called out several times within the last year. The BISMARCK and YAMATO BB classes - were both planned and mostly contructed before WW2 or Pearl Harbor - guess the BISMARCK, TIRPITZ, YAMATO and MUSASHI were no threat to anyone. WW2 for America began when the decadent imperialist Male Brute USS WARD sank an innocent Japanese midget sub on its attack mission towards Pearl Harbor and the US Fleet - and iff the HISTORY CHANNEL is any measure, it was SBD DAUNTLESSES and WILDCAT/HAWK etal. US attack planes that attacked Pearl Harbor anyways, correct!?
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2006-06-23 21:50  

#21  Stuff that can make you "do the kickin chicken" is nothing to play with, old or not.

One thing you ahve all overlooked: military effectiveness is not the same as terrorist effectiveness.

These munitions may have been degraded to where they would not be mililtarily effective, but still would induce symptoms and casualties in a general area when dispersed by terrorists for contamination by direct contact (instead of detonation and aerosol coverage). So not as wrapped up and easy as some would think. Then again the reporters seem to know precisely jack shit about military things, so I don't exepct accurate protrayals, nor rational reactions.
Posted by: Oldspook   2006-06-23 21:44  

#20  liberalhawk are YOU saying that you have evidence that these chem weapons are unusable or not deadly?
Posted by: RD   2006-06-23 21:06  

#19  If all you had to do to get rid of Sarin was bury it in the desert, we wouldn't have to spend so much money to VERY CAREFULLY incinerate it. Political dickhead!
Posted by: RWV   2006-06-23 20:22  

#18  Facts are facts. Chemical weapons have been found. That they are found is not something we want to advertise you our foes.


The left will never believe the facts because like all communists and socialists they have "faith" in their meme. Facts are not required.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom   2006-06-23 20:19  

#17  Now we know why the Bush Admin are less than eager to share these details. A great deal of headwind from the loony left because it doesn't support their bullshit argument.
Posted by: Captain America   2006-06-23 20:08  

#16  If these are so harmless Mr. Anonymous Official may we store them in your office?
Posted by: GK   2006-06-23 18:52  

#15  It does (or at least should) raise the question of why Mister Magoo Hans Blix didn't find them before the war. Remember he and his team went around Iraq and found nothing? And recently he's been mouthing off telling everyone that Saddam had no WMD. Guess he's wrong, huh.

Posted by: Steve White   2006-06-23 18:44  

#14  Check out the Austin Bay thread on this. Especially comment #67.
Posted by: Glomogum Shogum2997   2006-06-23 18:22  

#13  Does that mean you'd be only kinda dead if they were used on you?
Posted by: bigjim-ky   2006-06-23 17:40  

#12  The Upyourass Club of New York will commence firing the degraded rounds at the Times Building in Manhattan tonight. Anybody else want in ? Yo, ABC....
Posted by: Satan66   2006-06-23 17:37  

#11  So they are only a little deadly?
Posted by: Slomose Threagum8719   2006-06-23 17:36  

#10  The word "officials" should be striked and replaced by bureaucrats.
Posted by: Snise Grogum7151   2006-06-23 17:35  

#9  now the question raised in the first comment substantively is interesting. Could they have removed the new stuff to Syria, and left the old stuff? Maybe. Theres a lot more thats not clear.

I dont mean to be closed minded on this. Im just reacting to the reaction here to the CIA guy saying what appears to be the truth about this - the implication seems to be that theres something treasonous about a leak that undermines what GOP congressmen are saying, equivalent to say the NYT leaking a valuable intell gathering tool - well its not the same folks.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-06-23 17:30  

#8  "The Bush Administration ignored the exiration date on the weapons, or ignored it "

No. The Bush admin did not RELEASE the report, so they were under no obligation to clarify that the weapons were old leftovers, and apparently useless. Thats probably WHY they didnt release it, cause they are smart enough to know that bringing up stuff like this doesnt help, and is embarassing. Its Santorum and Hoekstra who are responsible for releasing the report, and a buncha bloggers who thinks ita big deal.

Theres an indication they could be made into something dangerous by insurgents - but then thats true of lots of chemicals, and it isnt really what we were talking about in 2002-2003, AFAICT.

Now dont get me wrong. I think the sanctions regime was falling apart, and that when it ended Saddam certainly was going to try to get WMD's. I also am not sure some WMDs didnt get smuggled to Syria. And to the extent there were intell failures on WMD, i think they were reasonable, given that we were dealing with a totalitarian regime where info was hard to come by, and given the desire not to take chances, post 9/11. And I also believe that WMDs were not the only reason to go to war.

But, having said, that, I think the focus on these old weapons is more likely to embarass Santorum et al. I could be wrong, but thats my strong sense.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2006-06-23 17:25  

#7  They really need to track down these leakers and skin them alive. Then tack their hides up on the wall as a warning to others.

They are putting us all at risk of getting hit again, hard.
Posted by: DarthVader   2006-06-23 16:24  

#6  "..And if the way to make them dangerous was known to the press, the Islamic Crusaders would also know..."

Gee, why do I think the NYT is working on this as I type..
Posted by: Anon   2006-06-23 16:22  

#5  I want to know when we are going to see some of these blabbermouths hang from a rope, and I am NOT kidding.
Posted by: crosspatch   2006-06-23 16:20  

#4  so they don't mind we store it in their house until, you know, the Congressional hearings on the subject.
Posted by: Thomoque Angereque3714   2006-06-23 16:19  

#3  Although not suitable for their intended purposed, the officials said such weapons remain a potential hazard if obtained by insurgents and modified in ways they would not discuss.

And if the way to make them dangerous was known to the press, the Islamic Crusaders would also know.
Posted by: Bobby   2006-06-23 16:15  

#2  The chemical weapons that have been recovered by US forces in Iraq were all made before the 1991 Gulf War and were too degraded for their intended use

Which is not at all the same as saying they are too degraded for the purposes of the terrorists.
Posted by: trailing wife   2006-06-23 16:00  

#1  BS! The Dems want us to believe that he kept the old stuff but got rid of the new stuff? How frikkin delusional is that? But then we're talkin' about Dhimmicrats. They're still carpin' about the 2001 election.

Damn, that KooAid's good!
Posted by: Rex Mundi   2006-06-23 15:58  

00:00