Army to Delay Ala. Chemical Weapons Burn

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON -- The Army has agreed to postpone Wednesday's burning of chemical weapons at an incinerator in Anniston, Ala., until a federal judge can consider an environmental group's request for a restraining order.

On Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson set a hearing for Friday morning to consider a motion by the Chemical Weapons Working Group for a temporary restraining order blocking startup of the incinerator. The Army had planned to begin operations Wednesday morning.

Army officials released a statement Tuesday afternoon announcing the decision but expressing confidence the judge would quickly reject the motion without further delay.

snip>

It is expected to take seven years to destroy the 2,254 tons of Cold War-era chemical weapons housed at Anniston Army Depot. That represents just about 7 percent of the 31,000 tons the United States has agreed to destroy by 2007 under an international treaty.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-chemical-weapons-disposal,0,2728897.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

[MHS Chips]

1. Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

OK, we agreed to destroy them, so years ago the Army tried to move them to a remote location for destruction & was stopped by various & sundry concerned groups. So then they fought various & sundry concerned groups to build an incinerator next door to the storage site. Then they fought various & sundry concerned groups to get permission to fire-up the incinerator, move the chemical munitions to the incinerator, etc etc etc. Nobody has a better idea--just stopping progress.

[oneighty]

2. Should not have made them

in the first place! Woe is us!

180

[MHS Chips]

3. That genie left the bottle 50 years ago. Time to deal with it.

The longer that stuff sits around the more the containers can rust or degrade and the more dangerous it gets.

[Rose Siding]

4. Have they ever sat down with the

various and sundry groups and tried to work out a program of mutual approval? I don't imagine any of the groups opposing the Army's method for destruction actually want the junk hanging around.

[Skip Intro]

5. You're nowhere near Anniston, AL, right?

Just guessing.

[MHS Chips]

7. Was, not any more. Know an engineer working on the project

Says its like talking to Luddites. And yeah, there's been town halls and comment periods and briefings and open houses. The earth is flat and they don't want to fall off the edge.

[Eloriel]

8. Perhaps you're not aware

that some of the stuff stored there is the same kind of stuff that got burned in the desert in the first Gulf War, where some of our troops picked up a little thing referred to as Gulf War Syndrome.

I happen to live downwind of Anniston. I thank you for your concern for my well-being.

Eloriel

[MHS Chips]

10. OK, let's ignore that the stuff in the Gulf War was blown up

and burned haphazardly by accident while the stuff upwind from you is going into an incinerator specially designed and tested to break the chemicals down into known and verifiably harmless components. So, ignoring that, what do you suggest they do with it as an alternative?

[Rose Siding]

9. What are the specific problems of the "Luddites"?

People don't usually spend their own time and money to fight the US Army without some science behind their position.

"The earth is flat and they don't want to fall off the edge", implies the people that oppose the Army's plan are pedestrian and uninformed. Yet frequently, of late, the govt has placed little value on the welfare of the people or the environment.

[MHS Chips]

11. See post #8 above for an example. And the government

with the Army as the executive agent has been trying to make this happen since well back into the last administration. Remember, even if you somehow believe the folks working on this project just don't care about other people, they themselves as well as their families & friends live there and would be exposed to any problems as well.

[Rose Siding]

12. She seems to have a valid concern

And I know she's no Luddite. Why do you suppose the safety of this project can't be communicated?

The military does have a less than stellar record on environmental issues and it is prudent to question something this serious.

[MHS Chips]

13. Well, I guess its pretty tough to make a Luddite accusation

stick to anyone using a computer! But what she's doing is typical of much of the opposition. Her Desert Storm example was one in which various chemical munitions had been blown up and incompletely burned--all accidentally. It is utterly different from what is taking place at Anniston, yet somehow she believes she is in danger of some type of Gulf War Syndrome--it just does not make sense.

[nomatrix]

16. Goodbye MHS Chips

But what she's doing is typical of much of the opposition.

I got a friend who's an engineer....good for you. May he be an example for you to do something good with your life.
Maybe to read up on the subject.

[oneighty]

6. Oh! I am well aware of that.

It is just that nobody wants that "Kinda Stuff" in their back yard, unless they can make money on it. Similar thing going on where I live. We used to protest it, to no avail, now "They" will be cleaning up their mess for the next hundred years or so.

Woe is us! "They did not care then, I do not care now.

180

[NickB79]

14. I'm surprised no one mentioned anything about the highlighted portion

"It is expected to take seven years to destroy the 2,254 tons of Cold War-era chemical weapons." Weren't there some Freepers that were saying Saddam destroyed all of his thousands of tons of chemical weapons right before the war began, which is why we couldn't find them now? Oh wait, that Freeper was Rumsfeld himself! Stupid, very stupid.

[tlb]

15. If freeper Rumsfield's speculation is correct

doesn't all that say is that Saddam didn't have to spend years dealing with Friends of the Earth lawsuits ?