Use of chem weapons on Iraqi civilians

[ClubMed]

Italian News Org. To Broadcast Evidence Of US Use Of Chemical Weapons On Iraqi Civilians...

In soldier slang they call it Willy Pete. The technical name is white phosphorus. In theory its purpose is to illumine enemy positions in the dark. In practice, it was used as a chemical weapon in the rebel stronghold of Fallujah. And it was used not only against enemy combatants and guerrillas, but again innocent civilians. The Americans are responsible for a massacre using unconventional weapons, the identical charge for which Saddam Hussein stands accused. An investigation by RAI News 24, the all-news Italian satellite television channel, has pulled the veil from one of the most carefully concealed mysteries from the front in the entire US military campaign in Iraq.

A US veteran of the Iraq war told RAI New correspondent Sigfrido Ranucci this: I received the order use caution because we had used white phosphorus on Fallujah. In military slag it is called 'Willy Pete'. Phosphorus burns the human body on contact--it even melts it right down to the bone.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/1...a_n_10254.html

Vdie Link 1:
http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/in...llujah_ING.wmv

Video Link 2:
http://www.informationclearinghouse....ticle10907.htm

[John Prophet]

yep....but remember....this is America...we are the "good guys"....if you dont believe it you need to watch more Fox News

when we use Napalm or White Phosporous or MK77 it is ok......when we use them it is not chem warfare

when we beat prisoners to death and pour chemicals on them and rape them it is ok because we are Americans and we are the "good guys"

[sharder8]

WP is a conventional weapon and can be used for illum, smoke, ARMORED OBJECTS, AND HARD TARGETS per the Geneva Convention. Not to defend or justify, but my best guess would be that they were being fired at hard targets and/or for concealing smoke. Any personnel that were injured would probably be considered collateral damaged and therefore the military personnel would have tried to minimize its use and injuries to personnel/civilians.

Once again CM, you served and should know the legal aspects of WP use. If you're not sure, go re-read the GC.

My take on your posting this thread is to mis-lead the unknowing and sensationalize in an attempt to discredit the U.S. military and Americans in general.

Harder

[sharder8]

yep....but remember....this is America...we are the "good guys"....if you dont believe it you need to watch more Fox News

when we use Napalm or White Phosporous or MK77 it is ok......when we use them it is not chem warfare

when we beat prisoners to death and pour chemicals on them and rape them it is ok because we are Americans and we are the "good guys"

JP --

Quit talking out yer' south 40 and read the GC. WP is a conventional weapon when used against armored or hard targets, for illumination purposes, or for smoke generation for quick concealment. (edit: it can also legally be used for marking and spotting, such as marking a Helo pickup point or marking an area/safety for aircraft fire.

Napalm also has legal uses according to the GC.

The key is that neither weapon can be purposely targeted againt personnel. FYI, the .50 M2 or 12.7mm fits in the same catagory as napalm and WP against personnel according to the GC.

Harder

[Creatures]

napalm is allowed Oo OMG
this is something i cant believe sry^^ maybe the gc has nothing against it but there are sure other things that wont allow such a thing

ABC attacks shouldnt be allowed in wars they always hit the innocents too

Creatures

[Atomic Rooster]

I have never seen CM stoop so low as to reference a website by Arianna Huffington.

[McFrenchy]

so I'm guessing that all the chemical weapons that Saddam "had" are not on the list of approved weapons?

the GC may allow some CW, but if you're aiming at a hard target and it kills civilians, is that cause for charges? just curious

[originel]

What was the death toll? Other than you calling it a massacre, i never saw any mention. Besides...a massacre implies the intentional killing of a bunch of people who are defenseless...this was collateral damage from engaging opponents who were not defenseless. It definitely sucks, but until I get more information I fail to see anything illegal.

I read the article and started watching the first video, but it just showed a bunch of vietnam stuff and I don't have time to sit through a 30 minute meeting.

[sharder8]

so I'm guessing that all the chemical weapons that Saddam "had" are not on the list of approved weapons?

Correct, unless you're referring to weapons that have authorized dual purpose uses such as stated, (ie. 12.7mm HMG, WP, ect.).

the GC may allow some CW, but if you're aiming at a hard target and it kills civilians, is that cause for charges? just curious

Short answer is . . . yes, it can be. It would require an investigation and if it is determined to be intentional, charges could be filed.

Harder

[GroundZero3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_p...rus_incendiary

Weapons

Use of white phosphorus is not banned by any treaty.

wa wa try again

[Epidemic]

Conventional weapon.

Unless you think chemical weapons refer to anything which uses chemical reaction.

Burning paper could be considered a chemical weapon by your defintion used here.

[Gomer]

Conventional weapon.

Unless you think chemical weapons refer to anything which uses chemical reaction.

Burning paper could be considered a chemical weapon by your defintion used here.

I remember it was big news back in August when they found a site in Iraq with 1500 gallons of Glycerin, Sodium Hydroxide, and Ethanol Sulfate. Those were chemicals, so they must have been chemical weapons.
http://www.techimo.com/forum/t149429.html

[mr.jiggyfly]

The video claims that WP was peppered all over Fallujah, confirmation?

It really doesn't matter if it is conventional or not, or if it was banned in some treaty, the matter at hand is if it was used indiscriminately against civilians.

[GiPilot12]

It doent matter if it is legal or not, the point is that INNOCENTS are dying. It doenst matter if they are killed by bullets or WP

[cyphen]

Wrongo -GiPilot..

innocents always die in war. the insurgents put them further in harms way, however, by hiding among innocents and firing.

I'm not saying it's good that innocents die - it isn't. But when it comes to kill or be killed, and the enemy is so cowardly as to hide among innocent civilians, minimize casualties, but take 'em out!

In the history of history, not a single war was fought in which innocent civilians weren't killed, and until very recently, they were considered viable targets in warfare. Nobody goes further out of their way in armed conflict to avoid civilian casualties than Americans.

Nobody goes further out of their way to cause civilian casualties than islamofacist terrorists and "insurgents"...

[GiPilot12]

Of course innocents die durring war. But if you are peppering an entire city with WP then the killing of innocents is not right. If they are killed by cross fire or grenades etc then the killing is somewhat justifyed. If you incinerate EVERYONE then it is not in any way justified. If you give me that BS of "we have to protect our troops" then remember that our army is a PROFESSIONAL army. They choose whether or not to join. The army's first priority is to protect the people of that country. Isnt that why we went in in the first place? I definatly am against this war. Too many people are dying, our troops and thier civilians.

[Gomer]

In three days of battles in Husayba, American and Iraqi troops have killed 36 people believed to be insurgents, the military said. It said it had received no reports of civilian casualties. Almost all Husayba's estimated 20,000 residents fled in the face of the American assault.

At least they are wising up and getting the hell out of dodge when the US Armed Forces roll up. On the downside it probably makes it easier for the insurgents to blend into the exodus.

[filipino]

yep....but remember....this is America...we are the "good guys"....if you dont believe it you need to watch more Fox News

when we use Napalm or White Phosporous or MK77 it is ok......when we use them it is not chem warfare

when we beat prisoners to death and pour chemicals on them and rape them it is ok because we are Americans and we are the "good guys"

yeah right!

[Toadman]

If you give me that BS of "we have to protect our troops" then remember that our army is a PROFESSIONAL army. They choose whether or not to join. The army's first priority is to protect the people of that country. Isnt that why we went in in the first place?

Huh? wow....

[Vagabond]

I read these posts and i do have to laugh at some things. basically if anything good is posted (linked to) that supports the US or something then certain people immediately say oh that is biased and a lie. Then some people (sometimes the same people who just cried foul) post links from obviously bias sources and take what is written as law, no questions asked, just because it is anti-American in some way.

ok i guess i don’t laugh i just shake my head for most of these people seem intelligent...

Now i must also say I have also observed this in the other direction…