It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: theantediluvian
Dirty bombs? Are you insinuating that chemical weapon components are radioactive material? That doesn't even make sense.
Seriously shameful that comment EVEN has to be explained.
Chemical agents dispersed by explosive materials.
The chemical equivalent to a dirty bomb.
You're literally just going through the Bush administration playbook. Next you'll be warning that the smoking gun could be a "mushroom cloud." I'm not a munitions expert but chemical agents are a lot more readily available than radioactive material and have been for the better part of a century and though terrorists have used chemical agents in attacks, I have yet to hear of any using thermal dispersion. It stands to reason that it's an inherently flawed method of delivery since a large portion of the agent is likely to be incinerated.
If you'd like to provide some evidence that this is a realistic threat, I'd love to see it.
Five men have been arrested in Iraq and three makeshift laboratories, allegedly designed to produce sarin and mustard gas, have been uncovered.
originally posted by: Brotherman
a reply to: JJRichey
Also wanted to remind you (not that these are pleasent to remember)
Do you remember all the chlorine bombs that guerillas used to use in ramadi and fallujah? Those are chemical weapons too are they not? I mean granted they are not exactly military manufactured but still none the less are chemical in nature and highly lethal and those are apparently easily made with materials in high abundance just laying around.
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: DeadSeraph
Still trolling I see.
I said the current administration didn't see it coming.
But hey nice trolling there.
Since all those events happened under it's watch.
Syria,Libya,Iraq.
Left Iraq, and it thought it would be all rainbows and unicorns.
originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Swills
True of false:
Have terrorists used WMD ?
Do terrorists want WMD ?
Did Bush and company NOT say they would ?
All of the above is TRUE.
BOTH
Syria, and Iraq PROVE it.
So who the hell 'lied' ?
originally posted by: buster2010
The OP seemed to have forgot this little part from the article.
Although declared, the bunkers contents have yet to be confirmed.
So nobody really knows what was in those bunkers for all we know they could have been the CW's that Rumsfeld sold to Hussein. Now the question is why did Bush and his cronies not destroy these chemical plants before he signed the paperwork that made us cut and run from Iraq?
a reply to: neo96
During the early years of the war they were said to have been moved to Syria.
And that is where ISIS went from IRaq.