US forces 'used chemical weapons in Fallujah'

I'm wondering if they'll use it anymore, now that news media is starting to get on their ass about it?
 
When you have enemy forces that are in covered positions that your high explosive artillery rounds are not having an impact on and you wish to get them out of those positions, one technique is to fire a white phosphorus round or rounds into the position because the combined effects of the fire and smoke - and in some case the terror brought about by the explosion on the ground - will drive them out of the holes so that you can kill them with high explosives," he said.
Click to expand...

So...they used the rounds to create fire and smoke in order to drive the enemy out into the high explosives. Sounds like a good tactic to me. If you notice...the second and third reports said it wasn't a chemical weapon if used for that purpose. So much for the Italian documentary...
 
catocom said:
I'm wondering if they'll use it anymore, now that news media is starting to get on their ass about it?
Click to expand...
Washington is not a signatory of an international treaty restricting the use of white phosphorus devices.
Click to expand...
 
The State Department, in response, initially denied that U.S. troops had used white phosphorus against enemy forces. "They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters."



The department later said its statement had been incorrect.
Click to expand...
So why did they lie about it?
 
because they knew they'd have to listen to a bunch of bitching by people who are against anything military.
 
It reminds me of an old radio ad I once heard for a diet supplement... "A diet without phosphorous is preposterous."
 
I know it is early
but has anyone mentioned to you
that
you are rather, odd?
icon10.gif
 
flavio said:
So why did they lie about it?
Click to expand...

Because civilians don't know shit about military operations. That's why. All the pictures in the world won't convey what happened. All the briefings in the world won't convey what happened, either...unless said civilian has had some kind of combat experience, which is extremely rare since the before Clinton days...
 
Gato_Solo said:
Because civilians don't know shit about military operations. That's why. All the pictures in the world won't convey what happened. All the briefings in the world won't convey what happened, either...unless said civilian has had some kind of combat experience, which is extremely rare since the before Clinton days...
Click to expand...
That's supposed to justify lies?
 
there were no 'lies'
Flav

there was no 'cover up'

this whole thing is another 'non-issue'

more typical Liberal crap

as Grotto said

and as the link I posted said

it is standard combat procedure
 
Winky said:
there were no 'lies'
Flav

there was no 'cover up'
Click to expand...
What's this then?

The State Department, in response, initially denied that U.S. troops had used white phosphorus against enemy forces. "They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters."



The department later said its statement had been incorrect.
Click to expand...
 
there you go

guess you didn't fly many missions in the 'Nam
as a FAC using Phosphor rockets to mark targets?

Who the Fuck cares? They also sez in that article
that they used the Phosphor to flush them out
to use the smoke to 'screen' the movement of our troops
and then after that they used 'HE' to blow them to Allah

WTF does it matter what chemical was used to kill them?

ded is ded


yep just another Libby attack on the Right thinking people of the werld
 
The UK Ministry of Defence said its use was permitted in battle in cases where there were no civilians near the target area.

But Professor Paul Rogers, of the University of Bradford's department of peace studies, said white phosphorus could be considered a chemical weapon if deliberately aimed at civilians.

He told the BBC: "It is not counted under the chemical weapons convention in its normal use but, although it is a matter of legal niceties, it probably does fall into the category of chemical weapons if it is used for this kind of purpose directly against people."
Click to expand...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4442156.stm


*edited to add http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4442988.stm
 
I really really think we should do something...like unc and gato said...
maybe blow up mecca or something to make it appear that we just
don't give a shit anymore....Somebody/Something is going to get fucked up Somewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top