"Simon Robbins" wrote in message
...
"The CO" wrote in message
...
Scale. Look up the definition of "Weapon of Mass Destruction"

Considering we're talking about battlefield weapons I don't think the term
"Mass" Destruction necessarily applies, and has in fact been largely
mis-used throughout the past year with reference to Iraq capability (or
lack
thereof.)

I see your point, but I suggest to you that even relatively old chemical
agents like
mustard are persistent and contaminate vegetation and the like. Nasty
stuff.

A mortar shell containing blister agents for example is certainly not a
WMD
in the truest sense, but would certainly fall within our leaders'
definitions.

I'd suspect that some of the things they had were rather nastier than
mustard.
I personally think that whatever they had went to Syria. We're probably a
bit
lucky Saddam thought he had rather more capability than he really did.

Not that I give a ****. He's history and good riddance.

The CO