|
Post by Naselus on Nov 16, 2005 9:12:39 GMT
The US has turned around and admitted using white phosphorus in the battle of Falluja last year, after lengthy denials for the past year.
White phosphorus is not used by most armed forces, as it's a brutal incendary. It burns until thoroughly smothered, and will burn on the surface of water. And, more importantly, the US has been denying it used it.
It's a chemical weapon, and it's usage is prohibited near civilian targets (by a protocal the US refused to sign...), meaning it could be considered an illegal munition in the case of Falluja.
The usage was revealed by an Italian documentary on the 8th, and the US military finally confirmed it today. This is almost as much of a PR disaster as the British jailbreak.
So could there be any clearer indictation that the Coalition of the willing has nothing but contempt for the Iraqi people? How long before the civil war is made official?
[EDIT] Oh, and the US military also denies that it constitutes a 'banned chemical weapon'. It's only a chemical agent in a weaponised form, the use of which has been outlawed in the specific conditions of the Falluja theatre of operations. So that's all right, then.
|
|
|
Post by HStorm on Nov 16, 2005 12:01:05 GMT
"White phosphorus is an incendiary weapon, not a chemical weapon." Col Barry Venable, Pentagon spokesman.
Firstly, chemical weapons and incendiary weapons are not necessarily different.
Secondly, whether it's an incendiary, chemical, or both, does not change the fact that it's banned under Protocol III - and even if the USA isn't a signatory to that, it's interesting how it insists countries round the rest of the world follow rules that they haven't necessarily agreed to, but feels it can ignore any rules it finds inconvenient.
Thirdly, if usage of the phosphorus is really above board, why did they bother for all this time with the preposterous claims that they only used the weapon for 'illumination'? (On that matter, what would have been wrong with using flares?)
|
|