Sarin artillery shells = smoking gun; yea or nay

[Caribou Kid]

Is this the belated definitive proof needed to justify Operation Iraqi Freedom?

Can we maybe make a poll of this, mods?

This topic is clad in Nomex, so keep those flames at bay!

my $.02 worth:

Finding these shells after declaring there were none DOES reek of sleight-of-hand, but I am also cynical enough to suspect they could be leftovers from the iran-iraq conflict.

What does Hans Blix and Richard Butler have to say about all this, eh? Will they become humble and apologetic? Or does this vindicate them and their teams? Scott Ritter will probably have to eat crow pie, now, too...

A live nerve-gas shell is still a WMD, no matter how thinly you want to slice the pie of truth. Yes, it could be a dug-up UXO, or it could have come from the Iraqi state arsenals.

Having Saddam in custody will make this matter a great deal easier to manage, but it is still is a thorny issue to resolve. :|

Speaking of responsibility, as an aside, what if Saddam denies ownership or knowledge of said projectile? :cantbeli:

If Donald Rumsfeld can be the head of the Chain of Command for the U.S. Military (not including POTUS, of course) and not be held ultimately responsible for the shameful Abu Gharaib incident , then couldn't Saddam also claim he was not affiliated with this "rogue" element of his Military and disavow any responsibility for these actions? Both men are masters of passing the buck, and political maneuvering, as well as manipulating the media.

[Secret Squirrel]

my $.02 worth:

Finding these shells after declaring there were none DOES reek of sleight-of-hand, but I am also cynical enough to suspect they could be leftovers from the iran-iraq conflict.

They already knew there were some forms of chemical agents in Iraq. Weapons inspectors had already catalogued around 10 shells (?) with mustard gas but they didnt get around to destroying it. So this one shell on a road doesnt surprise me. But if Saddam knew it was there, and (in my opinion) knew he wasnt going to launch a chemical attack against the coalition, why would he keep it around? Doesnt make much sense.

[n4292936]

coulda been similar to the old shells that have already been found by the teams hunting WMDs - ie remnants of wars gone by.
could also be homebrewed sarin, its not he most difficult stuff to make (though I doubt very much this possibility)
FOUND IT: woot
An artillery shell containing a small amount of the nerve gas sarin has exploded in Iraq.
Brig Gen Mark Kimmitt said the blast had caused a small release of the substance and two people had been treated for exposure to the agent.

The substance was found in a shell inside a bag discovered by a US convoy a few days ago, he said.

It appears to be the first evidence of nerve gas existing in Iraq since the start of the US-led war last year.

The 155mm artillery round had been set up as a roadside bomb and it exploded before the US military were able to diffuse it.

Gen Kimmitt said the dispersal of the nerve agent from a device such as the homemade bomb was "limited".
"The former regime had declared all such rounds destroyed before the 1991 Gulf War," he said.
However, a senior coalition source has told the BBC the round does not signal the discovery of weapons of mass destruction or the escalation of insurgent activity.
He said the round dated back to the Iran-Iraq war and coalition officials were not sure whether the fighters even knew what it contained.
From the BBC

[OB Kenobi]

Is this the belated definitive proof
If Donald Rumsfeld can be the head of the Chain of Command for the U.S. Military (not including POTUS, of course) and not be held ultimately responsible for the shameful Abu Gharaib incident , then couldn't Saddam also claim he was not affiliated with this "rogue" element of his Military and disavow any responsibility for these actions?

How will they prove that this shell came from Iraqi stockpiles at all? How can we believe anything Bush claims when there is no independent verification? Bush doesn't exactly have a record of telling the truth.

[venture160]

nay, its one artillery shell. yes ONE SHELL. didn't we claim they had "thousands" of gallons of chemical weapons? and it predates 1991....... if you think this is a smoking gun... you need to re-adjust your thinking

[Kilgor]

How will they prove that this shell came from Iraqi stockpiles at all? How can we believe anything Bush claims when there is no independent verification? Bush doesn't exactly have a record of telling the truth.

And you would believe sadam over bush ?

[n4292936]

Its not difficult to prove what stockpile weaponry is derived form. While Sarin and most other agents are prima facie identical there are trace signatures in all batches of this kinda stuff, same with nuclear materials - which is how cases are built to identify weapons proliferation. It doesnt matter that this was from an older stockpile because A: Sarin becomes largely inert after a period of time and B: older stockpiles were known to exist, and were known to be relatively inert ie nonweapons grade.
What the WMDs are searching is "an active program" and "maintained stockpiles" neither of which are remotely close to be proven to have existed by the discovery of this shell. Its a moot point really.

[cqbrdy]

guys,
saddam said he didnt have any, Bush said he did.
1 round landed which leads me to believe
theres more where that came from.

[Tane Angle]

"Where there is one human there is probably another and another and another." -Dr. Zaius.
http://apemania.com/AUTHENTIC_RESTORATIONS/ORANGS/DrZ.gif
I don't necessarily agree with that statement in regards to these shells, but I felt like quoting Planet of the Apes.

I'm not convinced that this is a smoking gun, but it is noteworthy. I still am not a big Bush fan, sorry. It's still too early to tell about these weapons.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[Sabre]

Difficult to say.

I haven't made my mind up on this one. I would like to see what becomes of it.

On the one hand, it could be true. This could be a shell that did contain sarin. After all, we know he had such weapons and it is not unlikely someone may have 'kept' one.

But why would you (as the prospective 'freedom fighter') want to use a sarin-laced 155mm round as an IED when a normal one would have done the same job? It would be like handing your enemy justification for coming to your country on a silver platter for no great advantage to yourself. It would make far more sense, if you had a few of these rounds, to fire them into a coalition compound or New Iraqi Army/Police centre. Then it would have the greatest effect, although I realise that I am speculating here as to the intentions/resources of the militia.

On the other hand, this is quite a low-key sort of find. It may be that this is a fabrication. There were no casualties and the 'device' was rather small. It would be much more 'acceptable' to fake something like this as clearly you could not, nor would you wish to, 'fake' a large-scale attack. It is all rather believable, which makes me sceptical (the cinic that I am!).

As I said, I've not made up my mind. It's rather interesting though...

[Kilgor]

From some of the articles ive read, the people who wired it up probably had no idea it was a special round and it may have been looted from a ammo dump in the chaos of end of the initial conflict

[Argyll]

Difficult to say.

I haven't made my mind up on this one. I would like to see what becomes of it.

On the one hand, it could be true. This could be a shell that did contain sarin. After all, we know he had such weapons and it is not unlikely someone may have 'kept' one.

But why would you (as the prospective 'freedom fighter') want to use a sarin-laced 155mm round as an IED when a normal one would have done the same job? It would be like handing your enemy justification for coming to your country on a silver platter for no great advantage to yourself. It would make far more sense, if you had a few of these rounds, to fire them into a coalition compound or New Iraqi Army/Police centre. Then it would have the greatest effect, although I realise that I am speculating here as to the intentions/resources of the militia.

On the other hand, this is quite a low-key sort of find. It may be that this is a fabrication. There were no casualties and the 'device' was rather small. It would be much more 'acceptable' to fake something like this as clearly you could not, nor would you wish to, 'fake' a large-scale attack. It is all rather believable, which makes me sceptical (the cinic that I am!).

As I said, I've not made up my mind. It's rather interesting though...

Interesting points Sabre.
But why fake something so very small,when there has been plenty of time to bring in and "plant" a "significant"stockpile of Munitions?

[Abbyy]

Hehe. I'm just interested how they figured out that it was sarin if shell exploded before they tested it. :)

Can someone shed some light here?

[Argyll]

Hehe. I'm just interested how they figured out that it was sarin if shell exploded before they tested it. :)

Can someone shed some light here?

Try the symptoms a nerve agent exposure for a start,the residue on their clothing etc.........what are you implying,or do you lack NBC warfare information?

[n4292936]

guys,
saddam said he didnt have any, Bush said he did.
1 round landed which leads me to believe
theres more where that came from.
Is there more than this almost certainly. Is this the first such round discovered... in a sense no, it is not. the WMD team has already unearthed a pile of buried warheads with degraded chemical agents in them. Are these degraded remnant stockpiles what the case for war in Iraq was built upon, no they are not. This discovery is therefore being alloted an undue amount of attention. It should surprise no one that leftover materials and weaponry form the Iran-Iraq war still exists. That is beside the point...

[Sabre]

Argyll wrote:
Interesting points Sabre.
But why fake something so very small,when there has been plenty of time to bring in and "plant" a "significant"stockpile of Munitions?

Well, I'm not trying to generate a conspiracy theory here. Maybe it is the precursor to such a find. Or perhaps they thought that this would be more believable. Perhaps a large 'miraculous' find that private Brown stumbled accross would be too suspicious.

They're only ideas. Please, nobody 'flame' me about the rights or wrongs of the war...etc etc...

(not referring to you Argyll)

[Fargin]

And you would believe sadam over bush ?

I'm gonna take the fifth on this one.

[Abbyy]

Hehe. I'm just interested how they figured out that it was sarin if shell exploded before they tested it. :)

Can someone shed some light here?

Try the symptoms a nerve agent exposure for a start,the residue on their clothing etc.........what are you implying,or do you lack NBC warfare information?

No. I'm just interested how they figured out that this is nerve agent. I didn't found any mentioning of sarin exposure symptoms found on soldiers.

[Pandy]

And you would believe sadam over bush ?

I'm gonna take the fifth on this one.

and I'll 6th on this one too.

[Argyll]

Hehe. I'm just interested how they figured out that it was sarin if shell exploded before they tested it. :)

Can someone shed some light here?

Try the symptoms a nerve agent exposure for a start,the residue on their clothing etc.........what are you implying,or do you lack NBC warfare information?

No. I'm just interested how they figured out that this is nerve agent. I didn't found any mentioning of sarin exposure symptoms found on soldiers.

Then you're not looking or listening :roll:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/iraq/main560449.shtml
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/militaryconnection/3313405/detail.html

[Abbyy]

Then you're not looking or listening :roll:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/iraq/main560449.shtml
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/militaryconnection/3313405/detail.html

I'm looking and listening but only local sources of my country :oops:

:)

[M1A2U2]

The gun doesnt smoke till you pull the trigger

[Argyll]

The gun doesnt smoke till you pull the trigger

The gun shouldn't smoke if you've cleaned the barrel properly ;)

Abbyy

No problems,the info is out there

[2Sheds_Jackson]

A chemical round is far different from an explosive round. Seems silly to say, but the chemical round isn't packed full of high explosives...it's full of chemicals (in this case a binary round - two containers of chem & a small explosive charge). Troops are trained to recognize the unique sound of a chem round...kind of a "thud". It would have immediately been evident that the round was not conventional & it would have been tested.

[crazyman]

seems kinda simple....after it explodes, chem troops go out and collect shrapnel, and test it....the lack of massive "bang" sound would be a giveaway.

as far as WMD's go....iraq is twice the size of idaho, and its mostly sand. saddam had literally years to hide his stash o' goodies in a few random bunkers, so we're probably never going to find it all.

[GrantT]

Does the fact that this round was built during the Iran Iraq war or that it was only one round really decrease the importance of this discovery? Of course it doesn't. Under UN resolutions Saddam had to give up all of his WMD and stop his development of WMD, the release of David Kay's report a few months ago proved the latter had not been done and this new development shows the former was also not done. Strange because I was led to believe by Saddam, France, Russia and the Liberals that he never had WMD or he had got rid of them all and now he was a reformed man, I’m afraid this shows that was complete and utter bollocks. :roll:

[weedman]

Is it by now confirmed, that it was a so-called binary warhead?

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Yes - they confirmed it was 3 to 4 liters in a binary shell;


The munition found was a binary chemical shell, meaning it featured two chambers, each containing separate chemical compounds. Upon impact with the ground after the shell is fired, the barrier between the chambers is broken, the chemicals mix and sarin is created and dispersed.

Intelligence officials stressed that the compounds did not mix effectively on Saturday. Due to the detonation, burn-off and resulting spillage, it was not clear exactly how much harmful material was inside the shell.

A 155-mm shell can hold two to five liters of sarin; three to four liters is likely the right number, intelligence officials said.

Another shell filled with mustard gas (search), possibly also part of an improvised explosive device (IED) was discovered on May 2, Defense Dept. officials said.

The second shell was found by passing soldiers in a median on a thoroughfare west of Baghdad. It probably was simply left there by someone, officials said, and it was unclear whether it was meant to be used as a bomb.

A drop is deadly - as luck would have it, the guys who were exposed just had classic minor symptoms - dilated pupils, nausea etc.

Nice note about the mustard gas. "simply left there by someone"...for a place with no chemical weapons, they seem to be lying all over the place!

[Argyll]

3-4 litres!!
Fok me ,that's more than enough to take down an entire street is it not?

[Herrmannek]

Nice note about the mustard gas. "simply left there by someone"...for a place with no chemical weapons, they seem to be lying all over the place!

Same thought here. For no more than few(even one or two hundrets) forgoten/missacounted/lost c-shels for milions normal ones c-shels are found to often....

[Fox2]

Good discussion, guys. I've been getting sick recently of debate, but this seems like a (so far) flame-free thread.

So, I have a few questions for you lot.

First, I saw an interview on TV where it was said that in the case of binary shells like the one discovered, there has to be a sequence of triggers or actions done before the Sarin is fully mixed or somesuch? I didn't quite hear it all, wasn't paying that much attention, but can someone tell me if this is so? If true, doesn't that mean that the shell detonated with less potency than it would have were it used as designed (from an artillery piece)?

Second, if tomorrow a smoking gun was indeed found, how would that change your view of the situation? Would those who say there are none, try to deny it, or would it change the way they see things? Just as a note, this is not in referrence to the arty shell, but just a sort of "soul-searching" question. ;)

And finally, if George Bush is really being deceptive, and did not tell the truth about the weapons in the first place, then why hasn't he just "made them appear"? I mean, if he's bad enough to lie to the country about the reasons, surely he is bad enough to create his own evidence? If you agree, why has it not happened yet?

No offense intended to anyone and have a good one. :D

[GrantT]

I mean, if he's bad enough to lie to the country about the reasons, surely he is bad enough to create his own evidence?

Good point, I never thought of that.

[usa320]

Too many people are missing the point. It doesnt matter if Hussein had intended to use the rounds in 1989 or in 1998. The bottom line is he had them in his possesion and hid them from the UN, a violation of 17 UN resolutions.

[talib_killa34]

Too many people are missing the point. It doesnt matter if Hussein had intended to use the rounds in 1989 or in 1998. The bottom line is he had them in his possesion and hid them from the UN, a violation of 17 UN resolutions.


Yes, but really he was booted cuz he NEVER came clean and accounted for the missing tons of VX and so on.

Terms for the cease fire were violated and so....

12 years later he paid the price so BOO-YA!

Also, this one shell don't account to ****e.

Media, stop asking for the "smoking gun". Stop asking "what is the exit strategy?" No more "Vietnam quagmire" stories please. Do some reports on the benefits of a low-carb diet. American Idol was on last night too, better tell us who won.

What a farce.

[Breacher]

For those of you on 'Graves' distribution list then you already know.....

THIS ROUND DID NOT DETONATE... That's straight from the team that did the RSP.

EOD handled the situation and then came the 'OMFG!!! Where did this come from... where's the rest?!?!" As strange as it may sound, they usually manufacture more than one.

CNN, NBC, STAR and the rest of the media is wrong...if you can believe that. This is a couple days old, but nonetheless true.........

[Caribou Kid]

Breacher, I was also wondering about that aspect of this, too. Not much detail has been made available of the exposure symptoms of the techs who did the defusing, or how many shell(s) were in this particular IED.

The modus operandi of the resistance has typically been two or three 155mm shells, I think..but not always. (Were you hinting at this, Breacher?) You'd probably notice pretty quickly if all three shells went off, (duh!) but if only one went up, you might notice the smaller-than-expected blast (Remember, these troops are actively on the look out for devices such as this, okay, they are highly aware of what to be looking for, as 2Sheds_Jackson so kindly pointed out earlier in this thread) or perhaps the soldiers saw the un-detonated remaining Chem projectile at the point of detonation after the blast, oozing out viscous gooey stuff onto the dusty ground, and called for EOD. I guess we'll know in a couple of days. . .

Quick novice question: If a 40mm round from an m203 needs a couple of meters of spinning flight to arm itself, and the same goes for an RPG-7 warhead, does this also apply to Arty Chem shells? Does the binary shell ARM itself upon leaving the barrel, or does it only become active upon impact, when the two chambers housing the compounds rupture, like inside a cyalume chem-stick?

(This looks like a job for....SUPER-GazB...Look, Up in the Sky...It's a Bird...No, A plane.. p-) )

I get the impression it's a bit of both aspects(fuze primes shell upon firing, which then detonates another charge to help rupture casing walls upon impact) but I thought someone in here with a better knowledge of artillery could shed some light on the subject.

[rokus2595]

Is this the belated definitive proof needed to justify Operation Iraqi Freedom? No


What does Hans Blix and Richard Butler have to say about all this, eh? Will they become humble and apologetic? Or does this vindicate them and their teams?


Sarin not evidence of WMD: Blix
By Matt Moore in Sweden
18may04

FORMER chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix said that a shell containing sarin nerve gas used in an attack in Iraq was most likely a stray weapon possibly from the first Gulf War.

Blix said today that the discovery of the nerve agent was not a sign that Saddam Hussein's regime possessed weapons of mass destruction before the war last year.

The former Swedish foreign minister said the 155-mm shell used to attack a US military convoy Monday could have been part of a group of old, unused shells that were simply debris leftover from the war in 1991, adding the weapon could have been scavenged from a dump.

"It doesn't sound absurd at all. There can be debris from the past and that's a very different thing from having stockpiles and supplies," he said.

Saddam's regime was told to destroy any weapons of mass destruction under UN resolutions passed after the 1991 war. Blix reiterated that his inspectors found no such weapons in the run-up to the invasion.

"We found a dozen warheads that were intended for chemical weapons and they were empty," he said.

His inspectors also found four other shells that were designed to carry chemical weapons, including the sarin used in the attack Monday, but they were also empty.

US Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said in Baghdad that two soldiers were treated for minor exposure to sarin, but no serious injuries were reported. He said he believed that insurgents who planted the explosive didn't know it contained the nerve agent.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,9593577%255E1702,00.html

[rokus2595]

if tomorrow a smoking gun was indeed found, how would that change your view of the situation? You must start by defining what the smoking gun is..e.g WMD representing an immient danger to the US? Say more than Norh Korea or China? The burden of proof is not on Iraq,but the US. It was after all, the US that invaded Iraq. So the US has to prove that somehow Iraq was a real and imminent threat: say Iraq had elaborate plans to attack the US, or had a rapidly advancing chemical industry with the sole purpose to create WMD to then attack the US. Then yes, I would then think the US acted in self defense. Otherwise it is purely an act of aggression. Conduct that we often associate with tyrants like Saddam.



if George Bush is really being deceptive, and did not tell the truth about the weapons in the first place, then why hasn't he just "made them appear"? how would he make them appear? who would manufacture them? they can't just simply appear out of thin air, something must have produced them; obviously the Iraqis just didn't have that capability in 2003.


if he's bad enough to lie to the country about the reasons, surely he is bad enough to create his own evidence? I would think that if he could do it without getting caught he probably would, but then we wouldn't be having this conversation right?. He is not 'creating' the evidence simply because every other country would see it for what it is: a lie

[Caribou Kid]

Hey, nice post, rokus2595.

I was hoping Dr. Blix would have something definitive to say on this subject; this info should add some more fuel for thought.
Thanks for the helpful link!

:)

[budanski]

Well, Blix also acknowledged that Iraq had failed for years to comply with its post-Gulf War (1991) obligation to destroy its WMD (http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040319-082104-9642r.htm)... 1441 anyone?

[catdat]

The thing that I "don't get" about this story is the fact that it's been reported that this was a Binary 155mm round. It's my understanding that this type of round was identified in Iraq by UNSCOM and they destroyed about 30 warheads. Iraq had identified about 45 more that they were supposed to destroy on their own (infidel suckers!).
In UNSCOM defense, they had warned that it was believed that there were more that Iraq hadn't declared. That said there are thought to be less than 100 of these shells unaccounted for.

These rounds were probably based on the American M687 projectile. In this there are two seperate containers that contain non-volatile liquid that when mixxed together become GB (or in some cases, but not this one, GF & VX). Note that this "mixxing" is not immediate - you need to mix it a lot to form the agent. Spinning through the air on target would be sufficient. A binary artillery shell has a lot less explosive than an HE shell - about 2 lb.s Vs. 15 lb.s.

UNSCOM reports that the 122mm and 155mm binary shells it found at the Al Muthana Facility in 1996 were not marked. Al Muthana is just north of Baghdad.

What I "don't get" is this: if the reporting is accurate how then were people "exposed"?

[Fox2]

What I "don't get" is this: if the reporting is accurate how then were people "exposed"?

Perhaps they were not exposed at all? (re: Breacher's post).

[Merik]

Yes I believe it is the smoking gun. Where there is one there are more to follow and obviously there must have been a stockpile or something where insurgents found them because now they know what they have.

Did you know that it was a 155mm Artillery shell that belongs to a French 155mm gun? That means that the chemical shell was made in France. Just a note.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Did you know that it was a 155mm Artillery shell that belongs to a French 155mm gun? That means that the chemical shell was made in France. Just a note.
Come up with some proof on this little chestnut Merik if you can though I doubt you will. :roll:

[catdat]

Merik wrote:

Did you know that it was a 155mm Artillery shell that belongs to a French 155mm gun? That means that the chemical shell was made in France. Just a note.

It's pretty common knowledge that we (the US) supplied Saddam with 155mm self propelled and there are plenty of NATO countries that manufacture their own towed or propelled guns.

UNSCOM has documented before that these Binary 155mm rounds were manufactured in Iraq. The US didn't start converting their own stockpiles to Binary until the eighties so I doubt this Binary shell is left over from the Iran Irag war (my apologies to the "experts").

Here's part of a Fox report that indicates there was some degree of exposure:

The soldiers displayed "classic" symptoms of sarin exposure, most notably dilated pupils and nausea, officials said. The symptoms ran their course fairly quickly, however, and as of Tuesday the two had returned to duty.
The munition found was a binary chemical shell, meaning it featured two chambers, each containing separate chemical compounds. Upon impact with the ground after the shell is fired, the barrier between the chambers is broken, the chemicals mix and sarin is created and dispersed.
Intelligence officials stressed that the compounds did not mix effectively on Saturday. Due to*the detonation, burn-off*and resulting spillage, it was not clear exactly how much harmful material was inside the shell.

source:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120268,00.html

[Merik]

Merik wrote:

Did you know that it was a 155mm Artillery shell that belongs to a French 155mm gun? That means that the chemical shell was made in France. Just a note.

It's pretty common knowledge that we (the US) supplied Saddam with 155mm self propelled and there are plenty of NATO countries that manufacture their own towed or propelled guns.

UNSCOM has documented before that these Binary 155mm rounds were manufactured in Iraq. The US didn't start converting their own stockpiles to Binary until the eighties so I doubt this Binary shell is left over from the Iran Irag war (my apologies to the "experts").

Here's part of a Fox report that indicates there was some degree of exposure:

The soldiers displayed "classic" symptoms of sarin exposure, most notably dilated pupils and nausea, officials said. The symptoms ran their course fairly quickly, however, and as of Tuesday the two had returned to duty.
The munition found was a binary chemical shell, meaning it featured two chambers, each containing separate chemical compounds. Upon impact with the ground after the shell is fired, the barrier between the chambers is broken, the chemicals mix and sarin is created and dispersed.
Intelligence officials stressed that the compounds did not mix effectively on Saturday. Due to*the detonation, burn-off*and resulting spillage, it was not clear exactly how much harmful material was inside the shell.

source:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120268,00.html

Well I heard the information from a WMD expert on Fox News yesterday so since you mentioned Fox news, I had to as well.

[Merik]

Did you know that it was a 155mm Artillery shell that belongs to a French 155mm gun? That means that the chemical shell was made in France. Just a note.
Come up with some proof on this little chestnut Merik if you can though I doubt you will. :roll:

If its a French gun then its a French shell genius.

[Michael RVR]

Think for two seconds, then speak. Last time i fired 40mm HEDP they came out of a crate from germany. Oh no, my M203 is made in the US ! **** it wont be able to fire them!? :p

Besides the fact that they could have come from anywhere, i'd be surprised if the Iraqi's were NOT capable of producing 155mm shells themselves ;)

[catdat]

Merik I only used that quote from Fox because it reported that there were two people "exposed". Looking at the rest of the quote the entire explanation is wrong. So much for the "experts" at Fox.


upon impact with the ground after the shell is fired, the barrier between the chambers is broken, the chemicals mix and sarin is created and dispersed.
In a word: No.

The two chambers are ruptured when the round is fired. The mixture then forms the chemical compound in flight. Most rounds have a proximity (or height-triggered) fuse and explode in the air while descending on the target. Ground bursts would be very counter-productive.


Anyway the 155mm rounds were manufactured in Iraq.

[Breacher]

As far as mixing of binary agents goes, it would be typical and most effective to have these mixed while centrifugal force is still being applied as the projo goes through the air..as stated. The fuze/ setting will determine the HOB. And if so equipped, the Mech Time fuze will have a SQ PD backup....just to be sure somehing happens

Now as far as the EOD techs...they were treated for mild exposure to a 'G' agent.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Did you know that it was a 155mm Artillery shell that belongs to a French 155mm gun? That means that the chemical shell was made in France. Just a note.
Come up with some proof on this little chestnut Merik if you can though I doubt you will. :roll:

If its a French gun then its a French shell genius.
All chemical agent shells no matter what gun they were fired from were made in Iraq, 155mm is a fairly common round and the Iraqi's had bought tooling to manufacture this round from Austria and the UK.

[Ratamacue]

Did you know that it was a 155mm Artillery shell that belongs to a French 155mm gun? That means that the chemical shell was made in France. Just a note.
Come up with some proof on this little chestnut Merik if you can though I doubt you will. :roll:

If its a French gun then its a French shell genius.

That's like saying that because someone is firing an American-manufactured M16, the 5.56 ammo must have been made in the US.