Are you saying that these are shitty WMDs, or not WMDs?
What exactly constitutes the minimum for a WMD?
In this case it means the sarin (not mustard gas) has degraded to the point where it’s no longer lethal. The shells might have some minimum use purely for their explosive charges but they no longer have any ability to disperse a chemical payload. If you’ve been following this thread you should have learned that sarin shells have a shelf life of only a few months. These date back to the 80’s. Their chemical components have been expired for 20 years. Whether you could hypothetical kill anybody with the explosive charges alone is irrelevant and does not make them WMD.
No, you are just example #500 of extreme conservatives pretending that time or time lines don’t exist. The leaders of the republican party and Fox are expecting (looking at the gasbags of the right, I can say they are ordering now) that their base ignore how useles these catch of old chemical munitions were because of time and distance.
http://www.newshounds.us/2006/06/21/rick_santorum_announces_we_have_found_wmd_in_iraq.php
Shodan: The reality is that the whole truth is not reported as breathlessly as half of the truth FOX and other right wing sources report to mislead a good chunk of the American people. Sure, one “can” say (and that is stretching it) WMD were found, but they are not the ones that we were looking for this time, telling the American people just one part of the truth is the same as lying.
Every time I catch a source on the liberal media (not to be found on the mainstream) lying, I drop them from my sources of info or I verify elsewhere before daring to post here. I demand better from my sources. It is clear that it is not the SDMB that needs to be taken to task. You will ignore this advise, but since many others on the right that are reasonable will read it, I tell to them: demand to FOX and others to do better or drop them so as to keep your honesty.
Not WMD.
The ability of a weapon to discharge a nuclear, biological or chemical payload. These are degraded shells which no longer have any such ability.
Yes, coffee mugs. In The Chronicles of Riddick, a guy was killed with a coffee mug. Ooooooohhh! I have WMDs! 
Shodan, give it up. It;s ridiculous. At this point, you’re just proving the PIPA report, which stated that people will hold to their beliefs, no matter what the facts and evidence say to the contrary.
Well, I was talking about the Mustard gas. The stuff from WWI is still deadly. So, what does expired mean in that context?
Talking about Sarin though, I’ve read the efficacy half life is more like 5-7 years, not months. At any rate it’s instability is well known which is why it’s typically stored within a shell or weapon as two seperate stable components mixed on impact.
Are these shells that kind, or the kind that’s premixed?
Why do these mustard gas shells no longer work while old german ones from WWI still do?
What is it that you are supposing phosgene “degrades” into making it safe? Why do you suppose the explosive part of it no longer works?
Good question. Using my mad Organic Chemistry skills, I have found a synthesis and decomposition pathway for sarin. Apparently, sarin decomposes to methylphosphonic acid and monoisopropyl methylphosphonate (cite, there’s no synthesis in the link, but I guess if the mods are okay with it I can post it on demand).
Methylphosphonic acid–
MSDS for methylphosphonic acid
I wouldn’t drink it, but it doesn’t look too horrible… I play with chemicals with scarier MSDS on a daily basis.
Monoisopropyl methylphosphonate, a.k.a. (I think) Isopropyl methylphosphonic acid, a.k.a. IMPA–
So, Scylla, I wouldn’t bathe in the stuff, but assuming the sarin is degraded fully, it does not seem particularly dangerous. That may or may not be a safe assumption depending on whether or not these are binary shells, which Iraqi technicians apparently had never perfected (from the earlier Sarin link)…
Don’t mention it. That’s what I’m here for.
No problem, nameless. Now are those sarin shells premixed?
What about Mustard gas and phosgene?
Why are thes Iraqi ones “expired” while the WWI ones are still mustard gas?
Where does it say buried shells from WWI have deadly mustard gas in them?
Sarin, mustard gas and phosgene all degrade over time…
Sarin has a relatively short shelf life, and will degrade after a period of several weeks to several months. The shelf life may be greatly shortened by impurities in precursor materials. According to the CIA [1], in 1989 the Iraqis destroyed 40 or more tons of sarin that had decomposed, and that some Iraqi sarin had a shelf life of only a few weeks owing mostly to impure precursors.
Like other nerve agents, Sarin can be chemically deactivated with a strong alkali. Typically an 18 percent aqueous solution of sodium hydroxide is used to destroy Sarin.
* The shelf life of unitary (i.e., pure) sarin may be lengthened by increasing the purity of the precursor and intermediate chemicals and refining the production process.
* Incorporating a stabilizer chemical called tributylamine. Later this was replaced by diisopropylcarbodiimide (di-c-di), which allowed for GB nerve agent to be stored in aluminum casings.
* Developing binary chemical weapons, where the two precursor chemicals are stored separately in the same shell, and mixed to form the agent immediately before or when the shell is in flight. This approach has the dual benefit of making the issue of shelf life irrelevant and greatly increasing the safety of sarin munitions.
http://www.dcfp.navy.mil/library/messages/101718ZMAY05.htm
NSN: 6665-01-010-7965
ITEM: TUBE, PHOSGENE
SHELF LIFE: 2 YEARS, NON-EXTENDIBLE
I couldn’t find anything worth quoting for mustard gas, as to the shelf life. It seems it will last several years (6? 7? more???). I just don’t know what the actual stoarge lfe is, but it seems to be the most “durable”. To me, it also looks like the nastiest and most painful.
I don’t know, I’m not an expert but that’s what the reports all say. Weapons inspector David Kay says this:
Where are you getting “phosgene” from? I haven’t seen any reports that the munitions included phosgene. A Google news search on “phosgene Iraq” turns up two hits, neither of the related to this story. What phosgene are you referring to?
I never said they wouldn’t. I said the explosive chages were ALL that might work. They might blow up but they can’t disperse any lethal gas.
No idea about the sarin shells, though it would appear binary sarin shells would be extremely rare. Until more information is available, I don’t know what kinds of shells this article is referring to.
Mustard gas is apparently somewhat stable–
–as is phosgene–
I wish I had better citations, though.
Rarrgh! Cite War!
The Wikipedia (I can’t quit you!) entry says they still dig up WWI mustard shells and need to dispose of them, but it doesn’t indicate if the shells actually contain anything like a weapons-grade, or even truly dangerous, agent. It would appear sulfur mustard, when wet at least, polymerises, and while the gelatinous product can still be deadly, it certainly seems as if it would be less easy to disperse than the original volatile liquid. I wonder if a typical degraded shell contains too much polymerised stuff to be any good as a weapon. Maybe it would hurt or kill you if you got smeared with some, but that’s not how mustard agents are usually delivered, I don’t think.
DTC:
I agree that Sarin gas made in the 1980s probably isn’t still Sarin gas. A shell though that mixed the two precursors would still contain the two precursors and when they are mixed upon detonation it would produce Sarin gas.
Are the shells that were found premixed, or do they contain and mix the precursors upon detonation?
You seem to concede that the explosive part could still work. Do you also think the binary shells of Sarin gas (that mix on impact would still work?)
Let’s forget about the phosgene, that was my mistake. I thought I’d read it was there, but I’m mistaken. The mustard gas however is still mustard gas. It is very stable, lasts many decades and you seem to concede that the explosive part could still work, so how is that not a WMD?
My position is that the mustard gas shells are definitely WMDs. That seems pretty much a given, and it looks like you beleive it, too.
If they’re “degraded” how can they still qualify as a weapon of any kind? They may still present considerable hazards as waste, but there’s a big difference than dumping some chemical waste on someone’s tent and lobbing a functioning gas bomb at them.
Mmmm.
I think my position is reasonable. Any binary type shells of Sarin are probably able to qualify as a WMD. Any mustard gas shells that are intact would probably also qualify.
So, they are WMDs.
I’m on the side of the debate that thinks Iraq was a justified war. I think that these are WMDs. I don’t think that these justify the war. All seem to agree that these are leftover shells and don’t represent a major threat or buildup of capacity.
I realize that some people may be prone to making a big deal about these shells and claiming that they prove something dramatic.
I’m not one of those people.
Still, I think pooh-poohing a mustard gas shell and pretending it’s not what it is, is kind of silly. I think assuming the Sarin isn’t binary or dangerous is also silly.
A wise person once said the surest way to lose an argument is to overstate it. The dange with this issue goes both ways.
Insisting that these shells prove something in terms of justifying the war is stupid. Saying these shells aren’t WMDs or incredibly dangerous is also stupid.
Does that sound reasonable?
At any rate, that’s what I beleive.
Assuming the mustard gas shell was intact, it would still be a functioning gas bomb to the best of my reasoning. Same goes for a binary Sarin shell.
I think that everybody pretty much beleived that there were some of these things lying around in Iraq, and I don’t think there presence justifies anything that is unjustifiable without them.
I see no reason to act like a lot of these things still aren’t as dangerous as the day they were made. Likely a lot of them are. The ones with premixed sarin probably aren’t but the rest still likely are.
From the sarin website I cited earlier–
Note: apparently binary shells were produced during the Iran/Iraq war. Whether or not any functional ones remain is uncertain.
Mustard gas appears to be much more stable than sarin, but I am unaware of anything like a storage window of “many decades.” Where’d you see that?