"The report said that the purity of the chemical agents -- and thus their potency -- depends on "many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, and environmental storage conditions." "While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal," it said.

Asked just how dangerous the weapons are, Hoekstra said: "One or two of these shells, the materials inside of these, transferred outside of the country, can be very, very deadly."

Expired for years? So we can just open that stuff and sniff it then right?

Again, I thought the UN had said there were no WMD's in Iraq?

This is certainly significant, but what they're talking about is old munitions left over from, presumably, before the first Gulf War. This doesn't appear to constitute evidence that Saddam's regime had continued to manufacture chemical weapons in more recent years. What it does demonstrate is that the picture with respect to Iraq's WMDs is much more nuanced than the usual "he didn't have any" mantra. There is no doubt about the fact that Saddam had, and used, chemical and biological weapons. Nor is there any doubt about the fact that he eagerly pursued nuclear weapons. Further, the Iraq Survey Group report says that he had every intention of resuming his programs as soon as the coast was clear and the U.N. sanctions were behind him. Add to that the fact that hundreds of chemical weapons, at a minimum, were secreted in various locations around Iraq--as also shown by this document--and it is reasonable to conclude that, even though the CIA and nearly all other observers over-estimated Iraq's WMD capabilities, the fear that Saddam might use such weapons, or slip them to a terrorist group, was well-founded.​

Heh ... what a credible news site! You might as well link stories from moveon.org. Didn't know "moderates" read these type of sites.:wink:

G'head. But sane people understand that unstable substances still present dangers well after their half-life, just to a much smaller number of subjects. Re-read the language of the quote you cited. It's very careful so as not to make any guarantees. If this was as breaking as you'd like it to be, it'd be a much bigger deal. But, it's old news...over 2 years old, in fact.

The documents were just declassified.....and not the full doc mind you. No one had ever said we have found hundreds of WMD devices. That's why it's new.

I'm not going to argue with you Red. Characterize this as an "Obsolete, empty chemical artillery rounds are junkers" if you want to. But I'll take the Pentagon's words for it.........

"The report said that the purity of the chemical agents -- and thus their potency -- depends on "many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, and environmental storage conditions." "While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal," it said.

Asked just how dangerous the weapons are, Hoekstra said: "One or two of these shells, the materials inside of these, transferred outside of the country, can be very, very deadly."

The UN and Iraq Survey didn't leave these there because they were obsolete. They left them because they didn't even know they existed.

Again the left backed themselves into a corner with this "no WMD's existed" mantra. Now they can try and rewrite history if they want to.

logic is not required.