Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

WMDs in Iraq
NorthShoreJournal ^ | 9/22/07

Posted on 09/23/2007 4:01:12 PM PDT by enough_idiocy

July 13-16: The 329th Chemical Platoon worked in conjunction with Marines from Multi-National Force-West and Soldiers from Multi-National Division-Center to secure approxomately 40,000 gallons of nitric acid that was found in a cache in Fallujah, Iraq, for disposal. The 329th Chemical Platoon is support reserve unit for Task Force Phantom, Multi-National Corps-Iraq. HQ is Winter Park, Florida. (U.S. Army/Spc. Fernando Gonzalez)

(Excerpt) Read more at northshorejournal.org ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: demlies; falsealarm; iraq; iraw; nitricacidaintwmd; wmd; wmds; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last
To: UKTory

“Nitric acid is a dual use precursor chemical”


21 posted on 09/23/2007 4:59:38 PM PDT by enough_idiocy (www.daypo.net/test-iraq-war.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge

Big deal, can you believe what Britney like did last night OMFG?

Yes! Yes I did! She got arrested for hit and run and driving with an invalid license! Can you believe it!!!!!!!

Now, back to the dreary business of this thread. Sigh. ;^)


22 posted on 09/23/2007 5:03:16 PM PDT by saganite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Busywhiskers

Nitric acid, mixed carefully with glycerin, makes nitroglycerin. I’m sure there are chemists on FR that can elaborate even further on the use of nitric acid in the creation of explosives.


23 posted on 09/23/2007 5:11:45 PM PDT by Hardastarboard (DemocraticUnderground.com is an internet hate site.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hardastarboard

Just because it isn’t a WMD yet doesn’t mean it doesn’t have the capability of becoming a WMD if scientists (like Saddam had plenty of) manipulate it enough. Also, there were those chemicals from Iraq they found at the UN. They were WMDs, weren’t they?


24 posted on 09/23/2007 5:23:40 PM PDT by FFranco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: vetsvette

or in Syria either...cough cough


25 posted on 09/23/2007 5:24:36 PM PDT by donnab
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: enough_idiocy

There have been and always will be WMDs in Iraq!

We will keep finding them.


26 posted on 09/23/2007 5:33:02 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: UKTory

I suppose it depends on the defition used and how broadly you interpret it.

This definition is from US law, 18 U.S.C. Section 2332a and the referenced 18 USC 921:
(1) Any explosive, incendiary, poison gas, bomb, grenade, or rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces [113 g], missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce [7 g], or mine or device similar to the above. (2) Poison gas. (3) Any weapon involving a disease organism. (4) Any weapon that is designed to release radiation at a level dangerous to human life.

“Indictments and convictions for possession and use of WMD such as truck bombs, pipe bombs, shoe bombs, cactus needles coated with botulin toxin, etc. have been obtained under 18 USC 2332a.”

“The US FBI also considers conventional weapons (i.e. bombs) as WMD: ‘A weapon crosses the WMD threshold when the consequences of its release overwhelm local responders’”

The plain language of the phrase suggests it maybe shouldn’t be included since it perhaps can’t cause mass causalties, or can it?

“The sodium cyanide was found inside an ammunition canister, next to hydrochloric, nitric and acetic acids and formulas for making bombs. If acid were mixed with the sodium cyanide, an analysis showed, it would create a bomb powerful enough to kill everyone inside a 30,000-square-foot facility, investigators said.”

As in April 1915, with the first uses of chlorine gas on the Western Front in World War I, these explosions sowed widespread panic, underlining — as the bombers no doubt intended — the inability of the Americans to protect potential allies in al-Anbar Province, the heartland of the Sunni insurgency. (The recent discovery of stocks of chlorine and nitric acid in a Sunni neighborhood of west Baghdad will hardly assuage those fears.)
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/49871/

“Chemical weapons expert Gert G. Harigel considers only nuclear weapons true weapons of mass destruction, because ‘only nuclear weapons are completely indiscriminate by their explosive power, heat radiation and radioactivity, and only they should therefore be called a weapon of mass destruction’ He prefers to call chemical and biological weapons ‘weapons of terror’ when aimed against civilians and “weapons of intimidation” for soldiers.”

“Nitric acid can be used to make conventional explosives, but could have chemical weapon applications as well. ‘It’s an acid and causes chemical burns to the skin and burns the lungs and esophagus if it is inhaled,’”
http://nti.org/d_newswire/issues/2007/4/16/b99bcffa-b841-48dc-9e76-e5e1cedc9a29.html

You may be right about the timing though, but not necessarily.

Al Qa-Qa State Establishment
Other Names: Latifiyah Double Base Propellant Plant; Latifiyah SSM Equipment Production Facility, Al Qa-Qa Establishment Salah Al-Din Plant; Salah Al-Din Powder Factory, Khaled Plant, Al Qa-Qa Ammo and Explosives Plant
Location: Baghdad, Latifiyah, approximately 60km south of Baghdad
Subordinate to: Military Industrialization Commission
Primary Function: Production of double-base propellants, NITRIC ACID, explosives.
The site contained five main production sub-areas, including those for double-base propellants, explosives, and nitric acids as well as smaller facilities for warhead filling, isomer separation, engine static testing, storage, etc. The agreement to build the nitric acid plant was reached with a Yugoslav firm in 1974 but much of the equipment was bought from Germany.
http://nti.org/e_research/profiles/iraq/missile/2967_3018.html

January 2, 2003
A UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) chemical team travelled 280 kilometres (175 miles) northwest from Baghdad to inspect the Al-Hadar State Co., formerly known as Ash Sharqat Uranium Enrichment Facility, a chemical plant that produces nitric acid and ammonium nitrate
http://www.comw.org/pda/fulltext/030104inspectiraq.html

memo number 384 on 3/10/2002
1. Name of material: Nitric Acid. Unit: Liter. Quantity: 600. Origin: Iraqi.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1637240/posts

see also post 23.

Based on the above, and this good counter-point: http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/10535.html, I think it depends on how you define WMDs.

“Nitric acid was monitored by the UNMOVIC and UNSCOM (particularly IRFNA) because it is an essential element of missile fuel (like the SCUD, NO DONG and GHAURI) restricted by the UN resolutions and a violation UN res 687 and others”

I think this sort of thing, “Acid truck bomb,” would case mass destruction.
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?D=2007-04-18&ID=186087&TINDEX=1

In sum, you’re a bit too quick to dismiss.


27 posted on 09/23/2007 5:34:35 PM PDT by enough_idiocy (www.daypo.net/test-iraq-war.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Busywhiskers
So what is the significance of a bunch of nitric acid in terms of WMD’s. I know a lot of conventional explosives are nitrogen based, but I’m wondering if Nitric acid is used to make nerve, blood or blister agents etc as well.

HN03 is used for making Nitrogen Mustard gas..a very nasty blister agent which targets mucous membranes. Eyes, nose, throat, lungs, etc..

28 posted on 09/23/2007 5:40:27 PM PDT by Mogollon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: pnh102
I will never understand why Bush won't go to Iraq when these things are found and proclaim to the media that yes, there were indeed WMDs in Iraq, and here they are.

I have heard it explained more than once on this forum that there were WMDs, but the administration was embarrassed that many WMDs were stolen out from under the noses of the military. Accordingly, the administration was content to take the bad wrap in exchange for no investigation on how our military managed to lose them all to scavengers and other opportunists ready to make a buck selling them on the black market.

29 posted on 09/23/2007 5:53:14 PM PDT by Rockitz (This isn't rocket science- Follow the money and you'll find the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: vetsvette
Of course, some of this is the President’s own fault. Early in the war when they started to find various caches of WMD’s the White House said that those weren’t the WMD’s they were talking about before the war. I expect that it was because they didn’t want to open up that discussion again, but it was still pretty dumb.

It was a very dumb move--and now, most of the media believes that there was never any evidence of WMD in Iraq. The fact of the matter is that we have found substantial evidence of WMD in Iraq. I'll give two examples, just to start off:

1) Polish military officials were able to buy chemical weapons warheads from so-called Iraqi insurgents, for about five-thousand dollars a piece in 2004, per the BBC ("Troops 'foil Iraq nerve gas bid,'"BBC News, July, 2004).

2) In 2004, we managed to seize 1.77 metric tons of highly enriched, weapons grade uranium from a facility in Iraq. ("US reveals nuclear operations," BBC News, 7 July, 2004.)

There are several other incidents, from around the same time--June to November of 2004--in which evidence of WMDs was found. Timing is a funny thing, especially during an election cycle.
30 posted on 09/23/2007 6:14:46 PM PDT by governmentstillsucks (Are there any American nationalists left?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: governmentstillsucks
2) In 2004, we managed to seize 1.77 metric tons of highly enriched, weapons grade uranium from a facility in Iraq. ("US reveals nuclear operations," BBC News, 7 July, 2004.)

Should be, "US reveals Iraq nuclear operation".

31 posted on 09/23/2007 6:23:31 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: governmentstillsucks
2) In 2004, we managed to seize 1.77 metric tons of highly enriched, weapons grade uranium from a facility in Iraq. ("US reveals nuclear operations," BBC News, 7 July, 2004.)

It was low-enriched Uranium, not remotely "weapons-grade" that had been under IAEA seal, regularly inspected before the war, everbody was aware of it, and was left in Iraq with the permission of the IAEA and did not violate any UN sanctions.

The danger of that uranium would be pretty much limited to someone dropping some of it on your head from a window.

32 posted on 09/23/2007 6:27:55 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes
Should be, "US reveals Iraq nuclear operation".

Should be, but isn't. It seems no one ever bothered to read the Duelfer report, let alone Hans Brix's UNMOVIC report to the U.N. less than three months prior to the invasion of Iraq.
33 posted on 09/23/2007 6:28:05 PM PDT by governmentstillsucks (Are there any American nationalists left?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
It was low-enriched Uranium, not remotely "weapons-grade" that had been under IAEA seal, regularly inspected before the war, everbody was aware of it, and was left in Iraq with the permission of the IAEA and did not violate any UN sanctions.

Good to know. What's the source on that?
34 posted on 09/23/2007 6:29:36 PM PDT by governmentstillsucks (Are there any American nationalists left?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes
No, the BBC article was about a US operation to remove it from Iraq. Like I said the uranium in question had been declared and monitored since GWI. It wasn't discovered by the US in any way, shape, or form.

The whole story has been unfortunately twisted in the repeating by people that desperately want the facts to be different.

35 posted on 09/23/2007 6:29:50 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: governmentstillsucks

This is from 2003.

http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/MediaAdvisory/2003/ma_iraq_0606.shtml

IAEA Media Advisory 2003/0606 (16 June 2003)

IAEA Safeguards Inspectors begin inventory of nuclear material in Iraq

For full coverage, see the pages on IAEA and Iraq.

6 June 2003 — On 7 June 2003, a team of seven IAEA safeguards inspectors will begin taking an inventory and securing nuclear material at the nuclear material storage site at the Tuwaitha nuclear complex. The nuclear material - 1.8 tonnes of low enriched uranium and 500 tonnes of natural uranium - had been under IAEA seal since 1991. It was last visited by IAEA inspectors in February 2003.


36 posted on 09/23/2007 6:32:17 PM PDT by Strategerist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
This is the original 2004 article:



Wednesday, 7 July, 2004, 04:39 GMT 05:39 UK

US reveals Iraq nuclear operation

The US has revealed that it removed more than 1.7 metric tons of radioactive material from Iraq in a secret operation last month. 'This operation was a major achievement,' said US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham in a statement.

He said it would keep 'potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists'.

Along with 1.77 tons of enriched uranium, about 1,000 "highly radioactive sources" were also removed.

The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility on 23 June, after being packaged by 20 experts from the US Energy Department's secret laboratories.

It was flown out of the country aboard a military plane in a joint operation with the Department of Defense, and is being stored temporarily at a Department of Energy facility.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog - the International Atomic Energy Agency - and Iraqi officials were informed ahead of the operation, which happened ahead of the 28 June handover of sovereignty.

'Dirty bomb'?

The explosion of a so-called 'dirty bomb' in a city by a terrorist group is a major concern of Western intelligence agencies.

Rather than causing a nuclear explosion, a 'dirty bomb' would see radioactive material combined with a conventional explosive - probably causing widespread panic and requiring a large clean-up operation.

Uranium would not be suitable for fashioning such a device, though appropriate material may have been among the other unidentified 'sources'.

Mr Abraham added that the operation had also prevented the material falling into the hands 'of countries that may seek to develop their own nuclear weapons'.

The 1,000 'sources' evacuated in the Iraqi operation included a 'huge range' of radioactive items used for medical purposes and industrial purposes, a spokesman for the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration told AP news agency.

Bryan Wilkes said much of the material was 'in powdered form, which is easily dispersed.'

The IAEA has been among organisations which have warned that many countries have lost track of radioactive material."

37 posted on 09/23/2007 6:43:33 PM PDT by governmentstillsucks (Are there any American nationalists left?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mogollon; enough_idiocy

Nitric acid is NOT a WMD.

Neither is chlorine, amonia, or sulfuric acid.

Don’t dilute the definition to suit your wishes.

There is a great difference between WMD and TIC (Toxic Industrial Chemicals) which maybe weaponized but are not WMD.


38 posted on 09/23/2007 6:49:09 PM PDT by Eagle Eye (If you agree with Democrats you agree with America's enemies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist
US Reveals Iraq Nuclear Operation

In any case, this is the BBC article dated July 7, 2004.

39 posted on 09/23/2007 6:51:27 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: roaddog727

Is it this type of acid that Saddam used to have his enemies dunked into or was that sulfuric acid?


40 posted on 09/23/2007 6:51:38 PM PDT by Former MSM Viewer ("We will hunt the terrorists in every dark corner of the earth. We will be relentless." W 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson