Oh, we all know who lost Iraq, it was Clinton.
History’s second biggest monster. 
Lay off of Bush. Don’t you know he’s bringing stability to the region?
I nominate Operation Grey Poupon.
Huh, I’m actually a little surprised it took so long for the rebels to start using Saddam’s special stash. God help us all if they’ve gotten into his Sarin or bio weapons; I can only hope the Coalition neutralized the really bad stuff.
It’s preliminary, but NPR just now categorized this morning’s attack as “weapons-grade.” At this point, it looks as if intervention, occupation and transformation was the correct prescription after all.
“Weapons grade” what? Chlorine? What the fuck is weapons grade chlorine? The stuff’s an element, a gas. It comes in pressure tanks.
What with the breathless yellow hypebole of the last few days, I can’t help but wonder if we blew up Iraq’s chlorine production facilities, so that the local water treatment plants have to buy it from Iran.
If so, we’ll soon see the headline:
Weapons Grade Chlorine Used in Dirty Bombs Linked to High Level Iranians
Doesn’t that just set your toes aquivering?!
You’re completely insane, aren’t you?
The Dems and the press are clearly to blame, for Undermining Our Resolve through printing bad news from Iraq, and voting for nonbinding anti-surge resolutions.
Fortunately, Mr. Moto is bravely trying to rescue the Dems from this fate. 
(Where’s the ‘putz’ smiley when you need it?)
Don’t tell me you’ve never read The An@rchist Cookbook. 
Regardless, in order to be an effective killing agent, chlorine must be properly concentrated, contained and released effectively. World War I shows us we’re not talking pool chemicals here.
Witnesses characterized it as a brownish-yellow cloud. Weaponized chlorine gas causes a green cloud. Maybe it was Yellow Cross.
All right then, so where did weapons-grade chemical bombs come from? Can we make a syllogistic leap and suggest they were bought on eBay or imported from Syria or (gulp) Iran? Or do we go with the sensible option – we do know Saddam had a penchant for potions. We’ll know soon enough, one way or the other once we’ve had a chance to trace these weapons.
Sure, and you’re passive-aggressive, but I’ll play along anyway. I take it you disagree with me?
C’mon now, we’re about due a 3,000-word, snooze-inducing quasi-droll/pithy treatise on some pop culture jerkoff topic or other. Why don’t you write it on how Saddam never had any chemical weapons! That would be grand.
I must confess I’m dumbstruck by the remarkable amount of sheer bullshit conveyed in El Cid Viscoso’s brief post concerning the NPR story. Fighting Ignorance, you bet. The first paragraph is sheer fantasy and frankly is not worthy of further comment. For the rest:
Then NPR has most likely got its facts wrong. I’m unware of any such thing as “weapons-grade” chlorine. Unless you mean it’s weapons-grade simply because it was used in a weapon, in which case we could, for example, talk about “weapons-grade” bolts and nuts in an improvised shrapnel bomb.
Lastly, I fail to see how intervention, occupation and transformation (whatever that is) could be considered correct if it has resulted in the use of chemical weapons that did not exist and were not in fact in use before the I, O and T (sorry, got tired of writing that out).
World war one showed us that chlorine is a *crappy * war gas. I’ve no doubt the insurgents are using it because it’s readily available and they can’t get their hands on any of the good stuff.
Tacitly then you contend Saddam didn’t possess and rather merrily deploy chemical/bio weapons. You must be one of those nuts who think the Pentagon wasn’t hit by a jetliner.
Look upthread, I already answered all that. Chlorine may have been used today, but Al Jazeera Television just reported a man on the street said the pavement was covered by what looked like brown blood, which again sounds like mustard.
Intervention to protect a people from genocide. Occupation to help restore order and sequester Iraq’s weapons, riches and identity. Transformation to make the authorities less corrupt, the people healthier and employed and the children educated at a First-World standard.
You’re grasping at straws. Ferric chloride solution is an orangey brown. Hell, Iraqi street mud is probably that color too.
Who was threatened with genocide in 2002/3?
How’s that working out, so far?
With what magic wand?
Ah, yes, the “special stash”. The strategic reserve he oh-so-cleverly decided not to use during a full-fledged invasion, but instead - ehm - stash away so that insurgents could avenge his death after the invasion succeeded. A plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel.
Do we have to go through this every time? No fucking sign of either has been found. No physical evidence, no paperwork, no procedures, no sealed orders, no code books with orders for chemical attack, no elite units tasked with firing the stuff, no crack troops tasked with guarding the stuff, no political overseers making sure the commanders get creative ideas on their own. There’s no there there.
UNSCOM seem to have done a good job. The coalition currently trying to keep things together in Iraq found no sign of “really bad stuff”, as you may recall.
If I were to accept for second that this attack is due to the insurgents getting into a secret WMD cache - and frankly, I don’t - it would look as if “intervention, occupation and transformation” placed WMD directly into the hands of terrorists. That exact outcome was - as you may recall - what the entire pointless, wasteful exercise was supposed to prevent from happening. Mission fucking accomplished.
As luck would have it, my thinking is not clouded with having to thrash around for the slightest bit of justification for this useless, purposeless war, and so I suggest applying Occam’s razor: Chlorine is easily available. The insurgents most likely raided a water purification plant.
And I wouldn’t trust the average journalist journalist to know a battalion from a brigade, let alone recognize “weapons-grade chlorine”.
I’ve discussed this elsewhere, but effectively we were acting to prevent even the possibility of a genocide. Maybe the problem is some people prefer a genocide to occur before something is done about it. Seems a little backward.
As in any generous act, there are negative possibilities, “the road to hell” and all that. We are absorbing the blows so that their leaders can coalesce and embrace unity.
Good, hard-working Americans and Coalition partners. Think about this: we have a society capable of giving 150,000 of its best people in order to bring about radical change for the good of a distant country. You want a magic wand, one day, maybe, we’ll also have a rapid-deployment team of peacekeepers and civilian experts who can help with this kind of action. Unfortunately, our own Transformation has not gone as smoothly.
From here
A pickup with chlorine gas cylinders, a chlorine tanker and “all kinds of ordinary chemicals”. Doesn’t sound “weapons-grade” to me. So how’s that “special stash” hypothesis working out for you so far , El Cid?
And you must be one of those people who thinks that putting words in someone’s mouth somehow negates what that person has previously said in the same flippin’ thread. To wit: I have twice acknowledged that the Iraqi military used chemical agents in the late 1980s.
Meanwhile, you have singularly failed to show that any such agents were available for use by the Iraqi military at the time of the US invasion, that these non-existent weapons were hidden from the US military and later taken by insurgents, or that the chlorine in the crude devices exploded over the past week or two came from a military source of any kind.
Look, I understand that you are offended by criticism of the war and feel compelled to provide a balancing argument of some kind, but so far your assertions are rather lacking. To effectively argue a political point, there should be some hint, even if the merest whiff, of truth in it. Please feel free to try again when you have a factual rebuttal.
Then quote yourself. It’s easier for you to find what you’ve already said than it is for me to.
(a) I’d rather stop genocide first, but, um, DARFUR??? Maybe that should have been first?? (b) You’ve still talked your way around the question: who was threatened with genocide? If you can’t say who it was, then why should I believe such a threat existed?
You’re arguing that “it looks as if intervention, occupation and transformation was the correct prescription after all.” Now you’re suggesting that sometimes a generous act goes wrong.
Please settle the argument with yourself and get back to me, OK?
And again, how’s that working out?
The desire to transform isn’t the same as accomplishing transformation. As you admit:
No shit, Sherlock.
So if you can’t say who we were intervening on behalf of, and Occupation and Transformation have gone down “the road to hell” and haven’t gone smoothly, respectively, on what basis are you arguing that I/O/T was the right choice?
They did find SCUD type rockets modified for extra range (a violation in and of itself) where the warhead had been modified to accept chemical weapons.
Also Isreali inteillence monitored dozens of covered and sealed large semi-trucks sneaking into Syria.The Isrealis were pretty certain that WMD were in those trucks.
And only US Armed force (“no fly zone”) prevented Saddam from continuing his policy of genocide vs the Kurds.