originally posted by: diggindirt
originally posted by: crazyewok
originally posted by: ausername
a reply to: crazyewok
Some of this stuff is in projectiles bombs and warheads, that may survive the initial bombing meant to destroy them and could be blown out into the open leaking the contents as they go...
I agree though the risks are probably not that great one way or the other. Especially given the age of the agents involved.. Only one way to really find out eh?
Remember thess are not new warhead, they have been sitting in storage since 1991.
By now they are so degraded you would lucky to find trace amounts of the original nerve agents.
Nerve gas does not keep for long peroids.
If your statement about nerve gas like sarin and VX were true then the Bluegrass Army Depot would have closed many, many years ago. (see here: en.wikipedia.org...) If these agents "degrade" as quickly as you seem to think, we wouldn't still have masses of them stored in various spots around the US awaiting disposal. At the end of the wiki article is a list of the reported leaks at that facility. If the degradation of these agents is as rapid and complete as you seem to believe, why have we spent literally billions of dollars to construct facilities to contain and destroy them? Why not just seal them into bunkers and let them die their natural death? I can tell you from personal experience, the residents of Richmond, KY don't share your view that "old" chemical weapons are nothing to be concerned about.
As Reuters reports, insurgents in Iraq have seized nuclear materials used for scientific research at a university in the country's north, Iraq told the United Nations in a letter appealing for help to "stave off the threat of their use by terrorists in Iraq or abroad."
Nearly 40 kilograms (88 pounds) of uranium compounds were kept at Mosul University, Iraq's U.N. Ambassador Mohamed Ali Alhakim told U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in the July 8 letter obtained by Reuters on Wednesday.
"Terrorist groups have seized control of nuclear material at the sites that came out of the control of the state," Alhakim wrote, adding that such materials "can be used in manufacturing weapons of mass destruction."
"These nuclear materials, despite the limited amounts mentioned, can enable terrorist groups, with the availability of the required expertise, to use it separate or in combination with other materials in its terrorist acts," said Alhakim.
originally posted by: texasyeti
a reply to: tommyjo
I really don't see America Leaving that there as we left. Just sounds stupid.
Iraq ratified the convention on January 13, 2009 and it entered into force a month later. Iraq possesses an unknown quantity of chemical agents stored in Bunkers 13 and 41 at the Muthanna State Establishment. Bunker 13 is the main concern, and may contain up to 15,000 liters of Sarin in different munitions in various states of decay. Bombing in the Gulf War (1990 to 1991) significantly damaged the bunker, making it too dangerous for U.N. inspectors to enter after the war. A second bunker, Number 41, was used to store chemical munitions left over after the post-war destruction effort. Due to the dangerous state of these two facilities, they were concreted over by Iraqi personnel working under the supervision of U.N. personnel. The chemical agents will have decayed in the past 16 years since being secured, but still present a formidable hazard and disposal challenge.
Because Iraq signed the convention more than ten years after the treaty came into force in 1997, it is not bound by the April 29, 2012 deadline. According to paragraph 8, article IV, Iraq must destroy its stockpiles “as soon as possible.” The nature of the stockpiles, including leaked chemical agents and possibly instable explosive charges means that destruction may take some time. The OPCW, Iraqi government and U.S. met in early 2010 to look at disposal options.