Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
US Troops used "Poison Gas" in Fallujah documentary claims
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, November 08, 2005

Have you heard this one? We allegedly used poison gas on Iraqi civilians in Fallujah according to a new documentary.

No, really, that's the story:
Powerful new evidence emerged yesterday that the United States dropped massive quantities of white phosphorus on the Iraqi city of Fallujah during the attack on the city in November 2004, killing insurgents and civilians with the appalling burns that are the signature of this weapon.

Ever since the assault, which went unreported by any Western journalists, rumours have swirled that the Americans used chemical weapons on the city.

On 10 November last year, the Islam Online website wrote: "US troops are reportedly using chemical weapons and poisonous gas in its large-scale offensive on the Iraqi resistance bastion of Fallujah, a grim reminder of Saddam Hussein's alleged gassing of the Kurds in 1988."

The website quoted insurgent sources as saying: "The US occupation troops are gassing resistance fighters and confronting them with internationally banned chemical weapons."
This was originally alleged in November of 2004 by "Islam Online.net"

The chemical? White Phosphorous, aka "Willy Pete". It's used as a visible marking round for artillery adjustment or an obscurant during combat operations and it is also used extensively in illumination rounds as well as marking rockets used by forward air controllers... all of which have been around and in use since at least WWII. It is also used to create casualties.

Emedicine gives you a little run down on WP.

So yes, if you're in the wrong place when a willy pete round lands, it'll kill you. And, yes, the smoke can be highly toxic with prolonged unprotected exposure. And yes, we will fire it at you, if you're firing at us from an entrenchment and we can't dislodge you any other way.

WP is not an "outlawed" weapon but our doctrine never calls for its use as a "poison gas". As noted, it is used to create casualties (although it is also noted that for planning purposes one should count WP to be half as effective as HE). It obviously may be the cause of some unintentional death, but why waste your time with WP when you have a target and DPICM? Artillery capabilities and munition lethality have changed significantly since the time when a situation might have made WP the round of choice.
"Some news accounts have claimed that US forces have used 'outlawed' phosphorus shells in Fallujah," the USinfo website said. "Phosphorus shells are not outlawed. US forces have used them very sparingly in Fallujah, for illumination purposes.

"They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters."
Of course they can't be talking about illum. Illumination rounds just don't do what's being claimed. What they're talking about is the use of White Phosphorus artillery rounds:
But now new information has surfaced, including hideous photographs and videos and interviews with American soldiers who took part in the Fallujah attack, which provides graphic proof that phosphorus shells were widely deployed in the city as a weapon.

In a documentary to be broadcast by RAI, the Italian state broadcaster, this morning, a former American soldier who fought at Fallujah says: "I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah. In military jargon it's known as Willy Pete.
Now that soldier's statement (if there was such a statement) could mean a number of things. The question is what form of WP was he being told to "pay attention" too?

There's not enough info in the article to determine that. Illum or WP rounds (although most soldiers wouldn't refer to an illum round as a "white phosphorous" round and if a WP round, most would say they were told to pay attention because they were going to use "willy pete")?

So again you have to ask: if WP was used why was it used?

As an obscurant to enable the movement of US troops during the battle of Fallujah (not likely—more likely to use conventional, non-lethal smoke rounds)? Was it used to drive combatants out of ditches and foxholes as perscribed by doctrine (more likely if used)?
WP can be effective in driving personnel out of foxholes where HE can be used.
That, btw, is the only time I can find WP listed as a round of choice for a particular job, and it is a proper and doctrinal use, but it is still used in conjunction with HE. It is also mentioned being mixed with HE on soft targets such as trucks and "light buildings" as well as being used as an obscurant.

So, doctrinally the allegation doesn't ring true and certainly not in terms of deliberate targeting of civilians. In fact, if we were sure of civilians in the area, we'd be less likely to use WP because the the possibility of such a thing happening. Bad guys though ... no such "Mr. Nice Guy".

If WP was used it would probably have been used deliberately in a scenario which doctrinally called for its use. And of course that scenario would provide context to this particular allegation which, of course, is completely missing. Naturally there is no context for possible use anywhere in the article, well, except to deliberately poison and kill civilians, that is.
"Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone ... I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 metres is done for."

Photographs on the website of RaiTG24, the broadcaster's 24-hours news channel, www.rainews24.it, show exactly what the former soldier means. Provided by the Studies Centre of Human Rights in Fallujah, dozens of high-quality, colour close-ups show bodies of Fallujah residents, some still in their beds, whose clothes remain largely intact but whose skin has been dissolved or caramelised or turned the consistency of leather by the shells.

A biologist in Fallujah, Mohamad Tareq, interviewed for the film, says: "A rain of fire fell on the city, the people struck by this multi-coloured substance started to burn, we found people dead with strange wounds, the bodies burned but the clothes intact."
Entirely possible. Were their weapons laying next to them or were they civilians? That is unclear.

However, WP doesn't appear to be "multicolored". It's white, thus the name. You'll see that when you read this excerpt from Everything2 which gives you an idea of what it looks like and what happens to exposed troops:
"...a snowstorm of small, white particles that floated down upon us. We looked in amazement, and eyes filled with instant terror. Where the particles landed on shirts and trousers they sizzled and burned. White phosphorus! We brushed our clothing frantically, pushed shirt collars up. If any of the stuff touched the skin, it could inflict a horrible burn, increasing in intensity as it burrowed into a man's flesh...

"Another shell. Another missile from hell. Fiery snow! I remember thinking that if the shelling kept up for long it would be more than most men could endure. There was nowhere to hide, no place that was safe." - Lt. Robert Weiss
One suspicious part of the description of some of the Iraqi dead jumped out at me. WP burns. You don't continue to lay in bed if your skin is being "carmaelised" by WP. Additionally, one way to protect yourself from being burned by WP is to go indoors.

Another allegation. The US used napalm in Fallujah:
The documentary, entitled Fallujah: the Hidden Massacre, also provides what it claims is clinching evidence that incendiary bombs known as Mark 77, a new, improved form of napalm, was used in the attack on Fallujah, in breach of the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons of 1980, which only allows its use against military targets.
Thus far all I've been able to find referencing the use of the Mark 77 is a use in 2003 against Iraqi military near the Kuwait border. This napalm allegation for Fallujah is an outgrowth, per the State Department (see below) of the misreading (a charitable way of saying they blew it) of the Islam Online.net story of Nov '04 by the NYT. If you read the Islam Online story, they don't allege use for Fallujah, but for the 2003 incident I mention above. So this is a new allegation and one that may have been made to fit the "misread" NYT article. If so, it will throw the credibility of the entire documentary into the sewer.

And of course, the burden of proof lays with the documentary to show that a) napalm was used in Fallujah and b) if so, it wasn't used against a military target (which, if they consult Michael Moore, might easily be done with a little creativity).

Interestingly enough, the State Department addressed the Islam Online story in Dec 2004 (and updated in Jan 2005). In it they address the question of the use of WP:
Phosphorus shells are not outlawed. U.S. forces have used them very sparingly in Fallujah, for illumination purposes. They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters.

There is a great deal of misinformation feeding on itself about U.S. forces allegedly using "outlawed" weapons in Fallujah. The facts are that U.S. forces are not using any illegal weapons in Fallujah or anywhere else in Iraq.
Were only illumination rounds used in Fallujah? If so, then I'd have to agree with the DoS and state pretty categorically that illum rounds don't cause what is being alleged in Fallujah.

However, Wikipedia also claims, without attribution, that WP shells and grenades were used in Fallujah:
Reports by the Washington Post suggest that US armed forces used white phosphorus grenades and/or artillery shells, creating walls of fire in the city. Doctors working inside Fallujah report seeing melted corpses of suspected insurgents. The use of WP ammunition was confirmed from various independent sources, including US troops who had suffered WP burns due to 'friendly fire'.
If there were US troops with WP burns, that ought to be easy enough to track down.

So, if actual WP rounds were used, as alleged above, as an obscurant within the city to enable movement or targeted on some entrenched combatants, then the possiblity exists that exposed civilians could might been killed by it. Such is war, unfortunately. I doubt that civilians, however, were deliberately targted.

I also doubt the "laying in bed" scenario is at all true. Its inclusion in the claim (along with the napalm allegation) is one of the main reasons I'm very skeptical of the documentary's credibility as a whole.

But I will say one thing ... if we used WP, then we need to say we used WP, why we used it and put this all in an understandable context so the allegations aren't left to stand and be used against the US for propaganda purposes.

This will be an interesting one to watch unfold.

UPDATE: If you're interested in the "American soldier" who claims WP was used, here's his blog.

An excerpt or two:
While I was in the army I was labeled a problem simply because I did not believe in the war, and I was vocal about it. What I cannot fathom is the soldiers out there who not only cannot see the obvious truths of this war, but actually get angry when they know of one who disagrees with the military and government’s war-gospel. I never could understand how anyone involved with the Iraqi OCCUPATION could whole-heartedly support it. The foul machinations behind it should be crystal clear, but then again military brain washing is rampant and seems to affect everyone with a myopic scope of reality.

[...]

However, during a conversation I held with a Vietnam veteran who was hitchhiking, I was enlightened to an opinion that this fellow expressed to me in regards to what he felt needed to be done not only in his time, but also in mine. He told me that the most important thing to do now that I have returned home was to speak openly about the war any chance I could get. He told me to grab anyone I can get my hands on and tell that person about the war and make that person understand. The only way to end this vicious melee is to spread the awareness to the public, and only then will we as a people begin to take the power back. All this made perfect sense to me, and at that moment I realized that the veterans of the Iraq war have a huge responsibility to convey our experiences to those who are blinded, show them the truth of this ugly debacle and collectively end this war.

[..]

I have joined forces with the Veterans For Peace and Iraqi Veterans Against War and met with them at a conference in Dallas, Texas to discuss plans on how to strengthen the antiwar movement. We even went to Bush’s ranch in Crawford, Texas to help Cindy Sheehan establish a peace camp in hopes of meeting Bush, Jr. to ask him a few simple questions. The whole Texas experience was amazing and I really felt that not only did I meet a huge amount of brilliant minds, but also had the pleasure of joining forces with good people and great allies.
Wow ... wonder if he knows Jimmy Massey.

Last but not least:
I just grow more and more aggravated every day listening to George W. Bush spout out loads of propaganda bullshit convincing this country to live a life of absolute xenophobic fear, and using that word “TERRORISM” to do it. Just the word “TERRORISM” has become derogatory. Sure, terrorism does exist in our society, much like it has been prevalent throughout human history. However, to use this natural fear to control the masses of people is irresponsible and wrong. Because of the Bush Administration, we are now locked into a new “Red Scare”, where the draconian standards of the Patriot Act are absolute dogma and unchecked racism and bigotry can run amuck. A new era of McCarthyism is at the threshold of the freedoms and liberties that makes this country so great. The future is always uncertain, but in these menacing times, with an all-powerful fascist oligarch posing under the banner of Jesus and the American Way of Life, there seems to be little hope for a sane and rational tomorrow.
No agenda there. And of course, some real maturity on display.

UPDATE: Here's as close as I can get to verification of use. I'm still trying to trace the CNN and WaPo mentions. This comes from the International Labor Communications Association web site of the AFL/CIO:
Meanwhile, a Washington Post article provided more graphic—though sketchy—information about phosphorous. “Some artillery guns fired white phosphorous rounds that create a screen of fire that cannot be extinguished with water,” the Post explained more than 20 paragraphs into the story. “Insurgents reported being attacked with a substance that melted their skin, a reaction consistent with white phosphorous burns.”

The Post quoted hospital physician Kamal Hadeethi: “The corpses of the mujaheddin which we received were burned, and some corpses were
melted.”

But such melting of human flesh is an abstraction in U.S. media, as it is apt to be for holy warriors. On NBC’s “Today” show Nov. 9, a network correspondent in Baghdad mentioned phosphorous shells just long enough to say that they are “meant to burn through metal bunkers.”

Presumably a description of effects on human beings would not have gone well with viewers’ breakfasts.

A live report from a CNN correspondent in Fallujah, on Nov. 8, was similarly circumspect: “Tanks have been blasting away inside the city, and shells filled with phosphorous—shells to hide the movement of the Marines inside the city—have been exploding overhead.”
So we have "insurgents" and "mujahadeen" being killed by white phosphorus which is being reported to have been used to "hide the movement" of Marines.

WP is doctrinally used to cause casualties among the enemy (insurgents, mujahadeen) and as an obscurant (hide movement). If these are the uses being referenced in the story, then I have no problem with them. Said another way, if this is the incident, this is a non-story.

Oh and the bit about burning through metal bunkers? Uh, no, not the purpose of WP rounds at all. As a matter of fact, they are a short duration smoke round giving at best about a minute of good obscuration when they detonate. Additionally they are normally detonated as airbursts for best coverage.

And you have to take a lot of this with a grain of salt as well. Remember, in March of this year, this was also being reported as "true":
Dr Khalid ash-Shaykhli, a representative of the so-called "Iraqi ministry of health" who was authorized to assess the health conditions in Fallujah after the end of the major battles there, announced that the surveys and studies that a medical team did in Fallujah and then reported to the "ministry" confirm that US forces used substances that are internationally prohibited, including mustard gas, nerve gas, and other burning chemicals in the course of its attacks on the city.
Yup ... mustard and nerve gas.

Unfortunately the linked website shut down yesterday (seriously, I know you think I'm joking but I'm not. Thank goodness for archived stuff, huh?).

UPDATE: More here at "The Daily Ablution". Worth reading. It puts "end" to the "it burns your skin but not your clothes" meme:
Here's more, from the Emergency War Surgery NATO Handbook:

"Many antipersonnel weapons employed in modern warfare contain white phosphorus. Fragments of this metal, which ignite upon contact with the air, may be driven into the soft tissues; however, most of the cutaneous injury resulting from phosphorus burns is due to the ignition of clothing, and is treated as conventional thermal injury."
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Well, if rumors were swirling on an anonymous Islamic website, of course they should be reported.

Wonder if they’ll report on this unsourced rumor that Dan Rather eats aborted fetuses.

Or the rumor that Prince Charles and Prince William were caught in a love triangle with Jayson Blair.

Or the one about my being romantically linked with Jessica Biel, Elle McPherson, and Daniela Pestova.
 
Written By: A fine scotch
URL: http://
Or the one about my being romantically linked with Jessica Biel, Elle McPherson, and Daniela Pestova.

Actually Johnny, all the others have a shot. This one ... uh, no.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
"Such is war"

My thoughts exactly. The words "chemical weapons" sure caught some attention though didn’t it?
 
Written By: mark m
URL: http://
This is an obvious propaganda story; read it and you will note several earmarks:
“…which went unreported by any Western journalists..”
Right. They would miss this story. See Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, etc.
“…a grim reminder of Saddam Hussein’s alleged [my emphasis] gassing of the Kurds in 1988.”
“The website quoted insurgent sources…”
Note to lefties: Weave this into your storyline between the beheading of hostages and… oh, wait a minute, that isn’t in your storyline, is it? Well, put it in the same section as Saddam’s plastics shredder. You know, same subject, man’s inhumanity to …Oh, that isn’t there either? No rape rooms? Well, put it in with the other tales of the horrors perpetrated by US forces, although it will just get lost there – I know! Put it where the SSgt Jimmy Massey stuff used to be. Oh, ...it’s still there? With no asterisk. I see. Well, I guess under a system like that I don’t know where it logically goes. One place is as good as another, I suppose.
 
Written By: notherbob2
URL: http://
55 years after the fact, I am a war criminal. In august of 1950 I fired a Willie Peter [not Pete] round. It failed to detonate because Red Mazor was an inept loader, but that’s another story.
Illumination was generally with magnesium star shells, not phosphorous. WP was an anti-personnel weapon and an obscurant.
The best defense against WP or napalm is to not make war on the United States.
 
Written By: Walter E. Wallis
URL: http://
Correct me if i’m wrong but didn’t we burn down Berlin or some other German town with WP????. Sticks in my mind that we did.
 
Written By: mark m
URL: http://
Illumination was generally with magnesium star shells, not phosphorous.

Yeah, I wasn’t clear on that ... if I’m not mistaken, phosphorus is the igniter.

This is an obvious propaganda story; read it and you will note several earmarks:

Sure it is ... the question is, do you let it lay there or do you say something. And, if there is any truth to the use of WP, doesn’t it make sense to tell the story from your side rather than letting someone unfriendly to you do it from theirs ala Michael Moore?

Correct me if i’m wrong but didn’t we burn down Berlin or some other German town with WP????

Dresden ... incindiary bomb attack. Tokyo got it too. In fact we did more damage by incindiary attacks during WWII that the total damage from both atomic bombs.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Seems as though you are on the Bush payroll to try to counter the reports. Also when the American soldiers are claiming it is true, is this weaved Propoganda? Get a real job...
 
Written By: karalla
URL: http://
Also, the writing and comments sound as though you are one person, are you trying to say that there is a huge mass of people out there with an IQ less than 100???
 
Written By: karalla
URL: http://
Seems as though you are on the Bush payroll to try to counter the reports.

Really? Well I wish he’s send a check then.

Also when the American soldiers are claiming it is true, is this weaved Propoganda?

"... weaved Propaganda". Boy that’s a new one on me. BTW, ever hear of Jimmy Massey? He too was an "American soldier" (ok, Marine, but you get my point) who said lots of things like that and now we find out he lied.

All I’m looking for is some corroboration, and, btw, you must have missed the part where I said that if we did use WP we ought to admit it and put its use in context.

Get a real job...

Only if you promise to take a course in critical thinking.

Deal?
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Off topic BUT.........GOP pushback at the CIA and press???

From Drudge:

Sources tell Drudge that early this afternoon House Speaker Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Frist will announce a bicameral investigation into the leak of classified information to the WASHINGTON POST regarding the “black sites” where high value al Qaeda terrorists are being held and interrogated.

MORE

Said one Hill source: “Talk about a leak that damaged national security! How will we ever get our allies to cooperate if they fear that their people will be targeted by al Qaeda.”

According to sources, the WASHINGTON POST story by Dana Priest (Wednesday November 2), revealed highly classified information that has already done significant damage to US efforts in the War on Terror.

Developing...

My my my...
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
I say it’s 50%-50%. Whatever was used wasn’t deliberately aimed at people but a few civilians became exposed to it....the ’usual’ collateral damage.

I don’t justify it, but it seems doctrinally acceptable to Americans the fact that innocent people could die as a result of military action.

I think it’s not just propaganda because the Italian journalist working in Fallujah that had gathered some reports on the WP, was first kidnapped [no one really knows who’s being the kidnapping of journalists] and almost killed when released [and the investigation is still very much up in the air on that front].

The DoS can’t just hide behind simple statements claiming that a certain weapon wasn’t ’aimed’ at people: some weapons shoulnd’t be used even if there’s a 1% possibility of causing harm to people not involved in the conflict.
 
Written By: Anonymous
URL: http://
You know, I was absolutely sure that all of the European and Islamic allegations of torture were bogus. Its been American military doctrine for as long as there has been a military doctrine not to torture prisoners so that the enemy will give up rather than fight to the last man. It makes no sense to torture someone. They only say what they think it will take to stop the torture. It made no sense for us to do it. It just wasn’t possible.


I was wrong. We did it. It looks like we are still doing it.


On the face of it this sounds bogus too. It no longer a sure thing that we will behave like the good guys anymore. We are clearly the better guys but there are mad men amongst us. I’m not sure of anything anymore.


I’m just waiting for the first major outbreak of bird flu to be in Bagdad.

 
Written By: cindy
URL: http://
karalla and cindy, sometimes, as now with you, I am honestly shocked a poster has enough brainstem to draw breath.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
McQ,

The reports didn’t say that I was linked with them all at once (although that would be fun).
 
Written By: A fine scotch
URL: http://
Calling white phosphorus a "chemical weapon" is like calling a bullet a chemical weapon. Both use a chemical reaction to function, so technically it’s not incorrect usage. However, the term ’chemical weapon’ has an entirely different accepted meaning:

The Department of Defense defines a chemical weapon as "a munition or device, specifically designed to cause death or other harm through toxic properties" of that chemical.

Weapons that rely on their explosive, kinetic, or incendiary properties for effect are not ’chemical’ weapons!
 
Written By: J
URL: http://
To ’J’: Phosphorous is a chemical element having toxic properties.

Moreover, by citing the "Department of Defense" definition of chemical weapon, then you’re implying that they [DoD] are the only one that can establish what is a chemical weapon and what is not. So if tomorrow they definition changes, and say makes nervines no longer a chemical weapong, what do you do?

I don’t think WP is a chemical weapon in the same category as other agents, but certainly is different than saying than considering it just like a bullet......If I’m walking on the street carring groceries and some Phosphorous falls on my head, carried by the wind, it’s not like I’ve been hit by a bullet that someone AIMED at me....quite different. In that scenario should we create a new category of weapons? Or just call it ’collateral damage’?
 
Written By: Anonymous
URL: http://
Do the Iraqis want the US military out of Iraq because they ’hate freedom’ or is it because of the behaviour and actions of that military.

It never fails to amaze me that Americans will continue to support their leaders despite all of the evidence they are shown of what is done in their name. While many of the posters here are making up excuses for the actions of their controllers or are in outright denial the rest of the world is aware of the truth. There is a worldwide boycott of American made goods underway which is gaining momentum, check the financial pages. Hopefully a peaceful boycott will stop the machine before it is too late.
 
Written By: Alan111
URL: http://
If I’m walking on the street carring [sic] groceries and some Phosphorous [sic] falls on my head, carried by the wind, it’s not like I’ve been hit by a bullet that someone AIMED at me.

And what exactly is this supposed to prove? By your logic then, if you get hit by a piece of shrapnel from a mortar round that wasn’t "aimed at you" that makes it a chemical weapon? Like it or not collateral damage is a part of war. And you better believe that our soldiers and Marines go to painstaking lengths to avoid civilian deaths and collateral damage.

I quoted the doctrinal US DOD definition of chemical weapon because I tend to think of it as slightly more of an authority on the matter than a left-wing European tabloid.
 
Written By: J
URL: http://
I don’t justify it, but it seems doctrinally acceptable to Americans the fact that innocent people could die as a result of military action.

LMAO.

Yeah, that make the US military unique in the world. Where, exactly, is the rock under which you live?

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
Alan111: Dude... Break the pills in half. Nice e-mail address by the way. I think you’d make a great human shield, why don’t you swing by Fallujah as a volunteer? At least that way you’d show you have the gonads to stand up for one of the sides.
 
Written By: J
URL: http://
Its been American military doctrine for as long as there has been a military doctrine not to torture prisoners so that the enemy will give up rather than fight to the last man. It makes no sense to torture someone.

Are you confusing the CIA with someone else?

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
I don’t think WP is a chemical weapon in the same category as other agents, but certainly is different than saying than considering it just like a bullet......If I’m walking on the street carring groceries and some Phosphorous falls on my head, carried by the wind, it’s not like I’ve been hit by a bullet that someone AIMED at me....quite different.

How many angles can dance on the head of a pin?

Do you think that you can’t be hit by a stray bullet? How many bullets do you think are aimed at individuals in a firefight?

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/inchiesta/video/fallujah_ING.wmv
 
Written By: fyi
URL: http://
On the face of it this sounds bogus too. It no longer a sure thing that we will behave like the good guys anymore.

That’s kind of the point of this whole post, Cindy.

Is this a case of behaving like a ’bad guy’ or is it a case of using the tools of war properly and unfortunate things happening (which would be what a ’good guy’ is likely to see happen)?

You seem ready to pitch up your hands and agree with the documentary. I’m simply saying there’s a lot more that needs to come out before anyone can make that sort of judgement, because the entire context of the use of WP, if it was used, is missing from this story at this point.

 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Shark says:
From Drudge:

Sources tell Drudge that early this afternoon House Speaker Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Frist will announce a bicameral investigation into the leak of classified information to the WASHINGTON POST regarding the “black sites” where high value al Qaeda terrorists are being held and interrogated.

MORE

Said one Hill source: “Talk about a leak that damaged national security! How will we ever get our allies to cooperate if they fear that their people will be targeted by al Qaeda.”

According to sources, the WASHINGTON POST story by Dana Priest (Wednesday November 2), revealed highly classified information that has already done significant damage to US efforts in the War on Terror.

Developing...

My my my...
Trent Lott says it was a Republican Senator or an aide, or both.

Funny, don’t see Drudge’s little siren out there. Any guesses why, Shark? I would say Hagel or McCain.

The Grand Old Party is fast becoming the Donner Party.

My my my ....
 
Written By: mkultra
URL: http://
It never fails to amaze me that Americans will continue to support their leaders despite all of the evidence they are shown of what is done in their name.

Huh ... well that makes us even, since I’ve long quit being amazed at the people elsewhere who’ll immediately believe a story if it reflects poorly on Americans.

What I normally find out is they don’t know Americans that well and they’re usually abysmally ignorant about the subject at hand.

This is a discussion about the points of a story. My experience within the military for 28 years finds things which don’t quite add up. Somehow that is warped into me continuing to "support" my "leaders".

An amazing conclusion given the fact that I state categorically at the end that if we did indeed use WP we need to admit it and give the use some context.

But I’m sure that like most who let their preconceived notion of what this post is all about blind them, you quit reading well before then.

That, sir, is not my problem.

I mean ... look at this sentence:

While many of the posters here are making up excuses for the actions of their controllers or are in outright denial the rest of the world is aware of the truth.

How do you discuss anything with those who are the only one’s privy to the "absolute truth?"

Heh ...
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
The Grand Old Party is fast becoming the Donner Party.

LOL!

Ok, I have to admit it: That’s a great line.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
The Grand Old Party is fast becoming the Donner Party.

Ah MK, you don’t get it.

The point isn’t to nail McCain or Hegel (of course, if it happened as a side effect I’d have a good laugh) but to nail the Dems and NYTimes the minute they start making hypocritical noises (which they surely will)

Anyway, McCain is on the menu? LETS EAT!
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
MK wrote:
"The Grand Old Party is fast becoming the Donner Party."

And if it’s McCain of the CFR bill, all I need to know is, "How many minutes do you need to boil a RINO per pound?"

Yours, Tom Perkins, ml, msl, & pfpp
 
Written By: Tom Perkins
URL: http://
If a soldier was told to "pay attention" because white phosphorous was going to be used, then that soldier was probably either an ammo tech or a mortarman. WP mortar rounds have to be stored/loaded standing up, as the stuff tends to settle inside the rounds if they’re stored on their sides.

In theory, white phosphorous can be used to illuminate an area, but in practice (as, at various times, an 81mm mortar ammo man, assistant gunner, gunner, squad leader, section leader and fire direction center chief) I don’t ever remember it being done. Perhaps there’s a WP artillery round for that purpose?

With mortars, WP is usually used for one of two things: Marking targets for aircraft to hit, or adding some "oomph" to blowing shit up.

We were taught (at Infantry Training School and elsewhere) that it’s against the law of land warfare to use it on people ... but it’s okay to use it on equipment, and if those idiots insist on staying with their uniforms, canteens, helmets, etc., that’s their problem. In training (I never employed a mortar in combat), we often practiced a mission colloquially known as "shake’n’bake"—make the enemy stop moving and get down (or button up in BMPs, etc.) with some HE, then follow up with a mix of HE and WP to roast his immobilized ass.

Was WP employed in the Rape of Fallujah? Who cares? When you blow bridges and set up roadblocks to herd fleeing civilians back into town, close the hospitals, then proceed to destroy the place, the manner in which you murdered those civilians is only marginally relevant compared to the fact that you did murder those civilians.

Tom Knapp
 
Written By: Kn@ppster
URL: http://knappster.blogspot.com
Anyway, McCain is on the menu? LETS EAT!

LOL!

OK you guys are killing me.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Provided by the Studies Centre of Human Rights in Fallujah, dozens of high-quality, colour close-ups show bodies of Fallujah residents, some still in their beds, whose clothes remain largely intact but whose skin has been dissolved or caramelised or turned the consistency of leather by the shells.
Doesn’t sound much like WP. WP burns EVERYTHING combustible, not just flesh. Maybe they were bitten by the giant spiders that the "insurgent sources" told us drove the American soldiers out of Fallujah the first time?

Also, if there were WP artillery shells big enough to have a 300 meter kill none in use in Fallujah, then the whole freaking city would have burned down to the ground.

This fewmet smells.
 
Written By: Terry
URL: http://
That’s "kill zone," not "kill none"
 
Written By: Terry
URL: http://
In theory, white phosphorous can be used to illuminate an area

Actually it can’t. WP produces a dense white cloud when exposed to air, not light. That’s why it is normally used as an obscurant.

All illumination rounds I’m familiar with, to include 81mm, are magnesium based with a phosphorus (since phosphorous ignites when exposed to air and is a hot burn) or explosive igniter .

My familiarity comes from being a weapons platoon leader with the 82nd Abn Div and having a section of 81’s under my command. WP is a "smoke" round for 81s.

We were taught (at Infantry Training School and elsewhere) that it’s against the law of land warfare to use it on people.

No we weren’t. I can attest to that having graduated from the Infantry Officer’s Basic Course, the Infantry Officer’s Advanced Course and having been an Infantry AIT Company Commander as well as having served in the Department of Instruction at the US Army Infantry School and having some responsibility for the POI. I’m also a graduate of the US Artillery Officer’s advanced course.

What we were taught is it has doctrinal uses against an enemy, (obscuration, incendiary and casualties) some of which include causing casualites. See above.

One use it doesn’t have is as a "poison gas" or to be dropped indiscriminantly on civilian populations.

And that is the point of this article.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Was WP employed in the Rape of Fallujah? Who cares? When you blow bridges and set up roadblocks to herd fleeing civilians back into town, close the hospitals, then proceed to destroy the place, the manner in which you murdered those civilians is only marginally relevant compared to the fact that you did murder those civilians.

Which mass-murder of civilians is this, again?

Funny, that description doesn’t match my recollection of the accounts of Second Fallujah (or First, for that matter), especially not the "destroying the place", as if it was leveled, carpet-bombed, or otherwise made rubble.

(And to compare Fallujah to the Rape of Nanking is despicable, in that it cheapens the horror of the actions of the Imperial Japanese Army. Or are you suggesting a deliberate campaign of individual torture, murder, and mass rape?)
 
Written By: Sigivald
URL: http://
Funny, that description doesn’t match my recollection of the accounts of Second Fallujah (or First, for that matter),

Nor mine ... I’d love to have the paper concession which sold to those in our military who were producing and dropping leaflets on the place telling the inhabitants to leave.

That said, it is entirely possible we used WP in Fallujah ... but its use might also have been entirely doctrinal and proper. We just don’t know. But to assume, as some here have, it was used indiscriminatly and to kill civilians also cheapens the professionalism of those I know who lead our military ... that’s not how they operate, and its also not how they would let those who work for them operate either.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
To ’J’: Phosphorous is a chemical element having toxic properties.

So is lead. When I shoot an enemy with 5.56mm ball, my intent is not that he die at a later date of saturnism.
 
Written By: J
URL: http://
Dear ’J’ the amount of lead in a bullet has no toxic properties if gracefully lands on my skin. The same of Phosphorous, instead it’s harmful.

BTW, for the point of the article, I don’t anyone believes that the WP or whatever it was was used indiscriminately on civilians. Whomever says that maybe should explain why, but I don’t think anyone can ascertain that. The word indiscriminately it’s very strong.

 
Written By: Anonymous
URL: http://
Quoth McQ:

——-
[ME] In theory, white phosphorous can be used to illuminate an area

[McQ] Actually it can’t. WP produces a dense white cloud when exposed to air, not light. That’s why it is normally used as an obscurant.

I’ve fired WP at night. It illuminates the target area pretty well. I’ve never seen it used for the purpose of illuminating an area—the smoke, as you mention, acts as an obscurant—but there’s no question that it can be used to illuminate an area.

——-
All illumination rounds I’m familiar with, to include 81mm, are magnesium based with a phosphorus (since phosphorous ignites when exposed to air and is a hot burn) or explosive igniter .
——-

I didn’t say the WP is an "illumination round." It isn’t—it’s labeled as a "smoke round." That doesn’t mean it doesn’t produce light. It does. It also starts fires, which also produce light.

——-
My familiarity comes from being a weapons platoon leader with the 82nd Abn Div and having a section of 81’s under my command. WP is a "smoke" round for 81s.
——-

Apparently Airborne is different—in the Marine Corps, a line company’s weapons platoon mounts 60mm, not 81mm, mortars.

——-
We were taught (at Infantry Training School and elsewhere) that it’s against the law of land warfare to use it on people.

No we weren’t. I can attest to that having graduated from the Infantry Officer’s Basic Course, the Infantry Officer’s Advanced Course and having been an Infantry AIT Company Commander as well as having served in the Department of Instruction at the US Army Infantry School and having some responsibility for the POI. I’m also a graduate of the US Artillery Officer’s advanced course.
——-

Okay, so you’ve rattled off a bunch of schools, none of which is the one I mentioned. I was referring to Infantry Training School, specifically Infantry Training School, Alpha Company, Weapons Platoon, Class 10-86, San Onofre, MCB Camp Pendleton. If you weren’t there, then don’t say "we" and don’t assume you know what was or was not taught.

——-
One use it doesn’t have is as a "poison gas" or to be dropped indiscriminantly on civilian populations.
——-

You’re correct. It’s not a poison gas. As far as whether or not it is dropped indiscriminately on civilian populations, that’s a function of who’s doing the dropping and where they aim their weapons, not of the round itself.

Tom Knapp
 
Written By: Kn@ppster
URL: http://knappster.blogspot.com
Well Mr Knapp, the fcct that you seem to be bending over backwards to believe specious propaganda from an enemy web site shows what sort of marine you were.

nice. What happened to Semper Fi?
 
Written By: jack splatt
URL: http://
I’ve fired WP at night. It illuminates the target area pretty well.

No, it doesn’t. It obscures it. That’s its job.

I’ve fired it at night as well ... to mask an area and deny visibility to the enemy. I’ve then fired illum right behind it.

Illum illuminates target areas real well. That’s its job.

I didn’t say the WP is an "illumination round." It isn’t—it’s labeled as a "smoke round." That doesn’t mean it doesn’t produce light. It does. It also starts fires, which also produce light.

Now you’re waffling. It’s a smoke round and smoke rounds don’t "produce light", the produce smoke. They’re obscurants.

Apparently Airborne is different—in the Marine Corps, a line company’s weapons platoon mounts 60mm, not 81mm, mortars.

It’s that way in the army now, too, but when I was a platoon leader, companies had 81s and battalions had 4.2" mortars. Hell I even had 106 recoiless rifles.

Okay, so you’ve rattled off a bunch of schools, none of which is the one I mentioned.

Heh ... irritating isn’t it? Just a little reaction to your "We were taught (at Infantry Training School ...", etc.

If you weren’t there, then don’t say "we" and don’t assume you know what was or was not taught.

You used the "imperial" we, like all of us out here were taught that. I just pointed out that I went to infantry schools too and they didn’t teach that at all.

And btw, I used to teach the law of landwarfare way back when and we did’t teach "that it’s against the law of land warfare to use it on people", because it’s not. Never has been. I don’t know who your instructor was, but he got it wrong.

You’re correct. It’s not a poison gas. As far as whether or not it is dropped indiscriminately on civilian populations, that’s a function of who’s doing the dropping and where they aim their weapons, not of the round itself.

No one said it was ... if you read the post more carefully you’ll note I was talking about doctrine.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
My experience and training, although not as extensive as McQ’s, supports his remarks. If you want to illuminate something, use an illumination round. That’s why they give them to you. It lasts longer, provides more light, and lights a larger area. If you want to kill or break something, use HE. It’s more efficient. That’s why they give lots of them to you. If you want to mark a target or a point of reference, use WP. It stands out and is easy to see. That is why FAC’s use it, in addition to artillery, mortars, and grenades.
Trip flares, illumination rounds, incendiaries are magnesium. More light and heat, less smoke. Personally, I would bet that WP was used at Fallujah and everywhere else. So what’s new?
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Interesting reading. Warrants a close review by a US news source. The war, etc. in the middle-east and the building of permanent military bases in Iraq are not food for a trusting relationship and the prisoner abuses feed many stories. The problem is many of the stories have happened. Sooo the one way to gain trust is to be open and report on the tactics of war. You would have thought that any weapon the US used even "gel fuel" bombs would not be used given the "reason" the US decided to take over a foreign country.

PS: of course, any knowledge of the history of Iraq and the pre-2000 election war foreign policy make many of the events make sense.
 
Written By: john cook
URL: http://
The problem is many of the stories have happened. Sooo the one way to gain trust is to be open and report on the tactics of war.

I agree .. which is one of the purposes of the post.

We use WP. We use it doctrinally for particular reasons. If we’re going to use it doctrinally and see the need for its use, then we shouldn’t be shy when we use it and should acknowledge it’s use and the reasons for its use.

I see nothing to apologize for in that regard.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Isn’t this funny - a bomb that spreads out in the form of a powder and burns the body is fine. The same in the form of a gas that kills is ’chemical’?? The guys who made this classification - do they grow brains at all?

Looks like the entire world is lying to make Bush look bad. I hope atleast deep down the Bush supporters know that Bush is lying through his #$se on everything.....powerful nations and their people dont have to accept truth, not alteast immediately. After all, Germans didnt have to face the truth till WW2 ended...
 
Written By: Kram
URL: http://
Bush dont need no help to look bad, he is a fucking moron.

"It’s used to light artillery". BS

It was dropped from helicopters on top of a city full of people.

I saw the footage last year on the BBC.

Bush is going to hang, and he is going to take a large portion of the US military with him.

 
Written By: phosphorus pete
URL: http://
This from (Balloon Juice) pretty much says it all:
I’m a combat veteran of Iraq. Mostly Ramadi. I’m an infantry officer.

I have got to tell you guys that the knuckleheads who are tearing their hair out about WP being an illegal chemical weapon are some of the stupidest, most ill-informed, hysterical people on the planet right now. You guys are making idiots of yourselves.

Yes, I’ve seen the pictures. And I’ve seen similar effects in real life.

Not from WP, but from good old fashioned HE, which can “caramelize skin” and “leatherize skin” and cause severe flash burns.

I saw their effects because I saw what happened to Iraqi civilians after HE IEDs went off. Sometimes it happened to the guys who were setting them up.

Doctrinally, WP is used as a marking round. You pop off one or two WP rounds on the target, and then you call the air to fire up the WP round with whatever ordnance is appropriate.

You can also use WP if you desire lethal effect but a smaller blast radius. For example, if there is a structure nearby you don’t want to damage. It’s conceivable to use WP in order to minimize collateral damage, while still getting steel on the target.

It’s standard to use WP as the initial part of a smoke obscuration, and even as a navigational aid (though that’s unlikely in Iraq thanks to GPS.)

WP can also be used to force the enemy to abandon a ditch, to escape the burning bits of phosphorus. He can then be engaged with direct fires or DPICM.

There is nothing prohibiting a commander from using WP rounds against an armed enemy in the field, nor should there be. This idea that DPICM is somehow more humane than WP is a feel-good illusion propogated by people who lead sheltered lives.

Others are simply reaching for any argument, no matter how outlandish, with which to slander our troops with vile and ill-informed accusations in order to score cheap political points.

The fact is that Sherman was right: War is Hell, and you cannot refine it. The best you can do is put your head down and get the nightmare over with quickly.
 
Written By: J
URL: http://
"
Not from WP, but from good old fashioned HE, which can “caramelize skin” and “leatherize skin” and cause severe flash burns.
"

Well, fine. And what about the FACT that CLOTHES WEREN’t burned?
 
Written By: fyi
URL: http://
The invocation of Massey’s name brings up an interesting point;

Isn’t it interesting how quickly this lie showed up, after Massey was debunked?
Almost as if this is plan B.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com
Well, fine. And what about the FACT that CLOTHES WEREN’t burned?

The fact that the clothes weren’t burned actually argues against WP. Each particle of WP will provide a very hot spot of burning material, which would burn the clothing.

Perhaps the skin effects were caused by burning body hair. If the cloths weren’t burned, you’d be pretty much left with head, face, and hands as the only skin that you’d see.

 
Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://
It was dropped from helicopters on top of a city full of people.

Dropped from helicopters? Were they black?

Geez ... first we have no helicopter delivery means for WP (beside the fact that it would be 100 times more dangeous to deliver it that way), and second there is no need to deliver it that way when you have plenty of shells which can be delivered extremely accurately from artillery.

I saw the footage last year on the BBC.

Uh huh ... whatever that means (well, except "I saw it on TV so it has to be true".
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
fyi
Regarding the CLAIM that clothes weren’t burned while flesh was;
Flashburns from HE are a well known hazard on naval vessels. Protective measures include smearing anti-flash cream on exposed skin surfaces, and covering as much as possible by such measures as wearing long sleeved shirts and/or wearing flash hoods. Try this experiment at home; get a propane torch, light it, and pass the flame quickly over a piece of cloth. Did it ignite? No. Now think about doing the same to your bare skin(you can think, can’t you?), DO NOT ACTUALLY DO IT. Better yet, why do you think that "oven mitts" were invented? Assuming you can cook, how do you handle hot pans?
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Well, fine. And what about the FACT that CLOTHES WEREN’t burned?

As Mark says, that actually argues against WP:

Note the warning about WP:
These weapons are particularly nasty because white phosphorus continues to burn until it disappears. If service members are hit by pieces of white phosphorus, it could burn right down to the bone. Remove quickly all clothing affected by phosphorus to prevent phosphorus burning through to skin. If this is impossible, plunge skin or clothing affected by phosphorus in cold water or moisten strongly to extinguish or prevent fire. Then immediately remove affected clothing and rinse affected skin areas with cold sodium bicarbonate solution or with cold water.
Also note this in the same article so you can note it when you read contrary claims:
White phosphorus is not banned by any treaty.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/
Just the word "TERRORISM" has become derogatory.
Anyone else find this amazing? Huh, imagine that... the word ’terrorism’ is derogatory. Who’d a thunk it?
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
Quoth "jack splatt" —

——-
Well Mr Knapp, the fcct that you seem to be bending over backwards to believe specious propaganda from an enemy web site shows what sort of marine you were.

nice. What happened to Semper Fi?
——-

Where and how am I "bending over backward to believe specious propaganda from an enemy web site?"

I thought I made it clear that I don’t think whether or not WP was used in Fallujah is a big deal. There are numerous tactical applications for which its use would have been perfectly natural (marking targets for air, clearing an area or suppressing enemy activity in an area while doing less damage to non-flammable structures, and masking US troop movements, to name three).

As far as "what kind of Marine I was," the answer is "a reasonably good one." I served for ten years, I voluntarily returned from IRR to fight in the 1991 war and went with my old unit instead of waiting to be called up and put on guard duty at a stateside armory, I sought out billets that challenged me and allowed to contribute more than someone of my rank was expected to, and I left with an honorable discharge and a few medals, ribbons, letters and certificates of appreciation and meritorious masts.

Whether or not WP was used in Fallujah, and my opinion on whether or not WP was used in Fallujah, has nothing to do with whether or not I was a good Marine.

I still regard "Semper Fidelis" as a binding obligation, which is why I’ve worked to end the abuse of the Marine Corps and the other armed forces which the Bush administration has committed with its ill-advised adventure in Iraq. Marines’ lives are worth a lot to me and it is my opinion that those lives should not be wasted in efforts which damage, rather than enhance, the security of the United States.

Tom Knapp
 
Written By: Kn@ppster
URL: http://knappster.blogspot.com
Avenger Red 6 discusses a use of white phosphorus in Fallujah...

“Pop smoke when you’re ready.” I called over the platoon net to SSG Terry and the Bradleys.
“Everybody get down in your turrets and close your hatches.” He called back. SSG Terry had explained how dangerous firing smoke grenades can be. For one, the grenades are white phosphorous, which possess their own inherent dangers. For another, the launchers are pretty indiscriminate. There is no real aim to them. You just punch the Salvo buttons from inside the tank commander’s control panel, and the grenades launch up and out. As a safety measure, you get down in your turret; the safest place to be during a launch. But there was no way in hell I was missing this show.

I looked to my left at the alley we had just come out of. The dismounts were stacking up against the wall, waiting for our smoke screen. I looked right to my tank and Bradleys. POP-POP-POP-POP…

The smoke grenades lobbed up into the sky pretty high. As they came down, they seemed to send out little meteorites. Trails of white wispy smoke followed behind as they dropped to the ground. The grenades landed about thirty meters in front of us. They started pouring out thick white smoke. Even the meteorites gave off their own smoke. The clouds thickened as they continued to burn and the whole screen was slowly moving east. Oh man this is perfect, whatever undetectable breeze there was, was moving the screen towards the dismounts. Not all of SSG Terry’s grenades had launched. There were still several grenades still sitting in his launcher. But that didn’t take away from the mission. After ten minutes, everything in front of us was obscured. I couldn’t see the houses on the other side.

“This is fucking awesome. I can see everything,” SGT P exclaimed. “I can see all the houses with the thermals. Check it out, Sir.”

I bent down and looked in the GPSE. All of the houses showed up in crystal clear resolution. Of course, everything was green-colored because of the thermal imagery. But there was no trace of smoke anywhere.

“Man I can’t believe how awesome this shit works.” SGT P said. He was pumped as hell at the miracle of technology. So was I. It was our first time sitting directly in front of a smoke screen. Our advantage was almost unfair. It was like a superpower.

“Can you imagine the bad guys sitting on the other side of this screen? They can’t see us. And if they had the balls to come out, thinking just because they can’t see us, we must not be able to see them. As they move about, all of a sudden, precision 7.62mm and red tracers come shooting out of the smoke. How fucking scary would that be?” I asked my crew. We just laughed at the absurdity of that scenario. Unfortunately, we made such an assault on the kill zone when we came in; it was now as silent as a tomb in the clearing.
So here, the US troops are using WP to create a smokescreen between themselves and the bad guys. Now the bad guys can’t see through it, but our guys, blessed with IR equipment, can see right through it like it wasn’t there. Best kind of smokescreen there is, one which blocks their vision and not yours.
 
Written By: Anonymous Coward
URL: http://
Good post, but so long that you’ll lose their attention span after the first paragraph or so.

I’m coming to the conclusion that the easiest way to deal with these idiots is just "Claim: BS. Here’s why. NEEEEEEEEEEXT."
 
Written By: Cutler
URL: http://yankeestation.blogspot.com
Well you want to know why the administration won’t simply announce the exact uses and purpose of WP. Comments from your own board sort of show you the only possible response from the loony left. Call them on their lies over a major media channel and they will scream loudly about their freedom of dissent being silenced (or something similarly cheap and pointless, but attention grabbing). Explain how WP has a legit use in war on your blog and people show up to accuse the military of being monsterous war criminals and accuse you of being paid off by the GOP.

I would also like the government and military to simply explain clearly and plainly why they did nothing wrong, but considering the only likely response from their target audience, I don’t blame them for not bothering. People who are that disingenuous do not deserve a response.
 
Written By: Jso
URL: http://
Let’s take this seriously and start an investigation right away to see if we cannot punish the war criminals who used WP shells.

Let’s see, these guys fired off 62,797 WP shells.

http://www.4point2.org/84cmb.htm

Let’s get them to the ICC court at the Hague ASAP.

These guys fired 40,000 plus WP rounds. I see they still walk free and have reunions. Friggin’ fascists.

http://www.4point2.org/3cmb.htm

"Firing a total of 47,561 rounds of mortar ammunition during the period August 24 to September 19th, the actual dates of the Brest Crozon peninsula fighting, this battalion supplied an extremely high volume of accurate close-in supporting fire, and contributed materially to the fall of Brest and the capture of the Crozon peninsula. It was here that German prisoners of war nicknamed our WP (White Phosphorous) shell "Whispering Death.""

http://www.private-art.com/archive/1944/aug/note2.html

During the Battle of the Ardennes, the battalion proved its capabilities and fighting qualities, assisting in holding the enemy from penetrating our left flank. Time after time, desperate forces of Nazi tanks and fanatical infantry rolled toward our lines. Each time our mortars belched their "Whispering Song of Death." White phosphorus blinded and burned the Nazis, tank drivers lost their sense of direction and charged crazily into trees, off roads into ditches, into men, and into each other. German foot troops became panicky and vainly sought cover. Finally the enemy offensive lost momentum and began retreating.

and even admit to using a blinding agent.

http://home.cinci.rr.com/chemvets/history.html

FDR was as bad as Saddam!
 
Written By: Harun
URL: http://
"It was dropped from helicopters on top of a city full of people."

Do you even know what the hell you’re talking about? I don’t think you do. In fact, I don’t even think you know what WP is.

Either way, it’s a darn good thing you saw it on the news. It almost slipped by the rest of the mainstream media. You should really call CNN and/or Michael Moore. I’m sure both of them would pay a lot for the story.

I mean, we’re talking about a large scale chemical attack here. A whole city?

Wow.





Time for a new batch of kooooooooolaid.
 
Written By: Derek
URL: http://
Perhaps its gonna take a PhD to end this argument - "is it or isn’t it" - or is WP a chemical weapon?

A report by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry [US Gov] concludes that White Phosphorus achieves its effects mainly through non-thermal energy. It must be concluded that White Phosphorus is considered a CW [chemical weapon] agent, and would violate the Geneva Protocol since its use causes indiscriminate and extreme injuries especially when deployed in an Urban area such as downtown Falluja, Iraq.

Few studies have investigated the degree of tissue destruction associated with white phosphorus injuries. In the experimental animal model, most tissue destruction appears to be secondary to the heat generated by oxidation. "

[Ref. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). 1997. Toxicological Profile for white phosphorus. Atlanta, GA: U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp103.html ]

The use of white phosphorus "violates the Geneva Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare.

Fact:
White Phosphorus is a Chemical Weapon since it causes tissue destruction (injury) mostly through non-themal energy.

 
Written By: Willy Pete
URL: http://
Willy Pete
Fact;
A rifle bullet is a chemical weapon since it causes tissue destruction(injury) mostly through non-thermal energy.

 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
It depends on the definition of "XYZ".
Lives of civilians unfortunately don’t depend on the definition.

Then if you just want to debate about the category into which put Mk-77, or Mk-81, or other...there are enough roosters that it will never be dawn.

Since the full reportage however included mention of strange marks found on the Imham of the community [suggesting some strange holes due to torture] which might have been difficult to grasp given the fact that the report was not written in English.
So if you need English texts to be less biased, then get a hold of parliamentary motions moved by a simple lady in the British Govmnt. She actually received a formal reply from the British Ministry of Defence in which they confirm the use of Mk-77 that caused death to civilians [not human shields].

Again, it has nothing to do with what is a chemical and what is not.
 
Written By: Anonymous
URL: http://
Chemical Weapon Definition

There seems to be a little debate over what chemical weapons are and who is the authority to dictate...

Try this link http://www.opcw.org/

The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was founded and signed off by the UN. They regulate all Chemical Weapons in the world and dictate what is or isn’t.

There definition of chemical weapons however is slightly longer than one paragraph.

And no WP is not a chartered chemical.

Sorry Left Wing...
 
Written By: Guy Fawkes
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider