In message , Chad Irby
writes
In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
One shell, apparently dated pre-1991 - this isn't a clear and present
danger. (The production facility for it would be - no signs so far)


Didn't the Iraqis claim they never had any Sarin at all? If that's
the case, doesn't the presence of even one shell prove they did not
abide by the 1991 agreement?

They supposedly only did "research" on binary sarin rounds, and that
*after* 1991.

"36. However, it was not possible to verify the full extent of several
R& D projects carried out by Iraq from 1989 to 1990, due to the absence
of sufficient data from documents and other verifiable evidence. Those
include the research on new chemical warfare agents, BZ and Soman. These
also include Iraq's efforts to develop new delivery means for CW-agents,
such as special warheads other than for Al-Hussein missiles, i.e. FROG
missile, and real binary artillery munitions and aerial bombs. Evidence
of such studies was found in the documents from the Haider farm. On the
other hand, the Commission did not find evidence that Iraq had reached
the stage of industrial production of these materials and items.

http://cns.miis.edu/research/iraq/ucreport/dis_chem.htm is the first
source to hand.


--
He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.
Julius Caesar I:2

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk