« 5 Minute Writing: Gorgeous Orchid | Main | Chicago Nonfiction 2005 »
Do As We (Hypocritically) Say...
Remember: when Saddam used chemical weapons, it was a horrible, barbaric, unconscionable act which justified his ultimately being forcibly removed from power. Don't make us use force, Mr. Rumsfeld. Please depart quietly.
From the Center for American Progress:
IRAQ -- U.S. ADMITS TO USING CHEMICAL WEAPONS:
Reversing numerous prior denials, Pentagon officials said yesterday that white phosphorous was in fact "used as a weapon against insurgent strongholds during the battle of Fallujah last November." After first categorically denying any use of phosphorous, the Pentagon said months ago that the chemical was "fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night," but "not at enemy fighters."
But in the March 2005 edition of the Army's official Field Artillery Magazine, three Army artillerymen describe using phosphorous in Fallujah "for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE [high explosives]. We fired 'shake and bake' missions at the insurgents, using WP [white phosphorous] to flush them out and HE to take them out."
The use of phosphorous was uncovered in part by a new Italian documentary which depicts "a series of photographs from Fallujah of corpses with the flesh burnt off but clothes still intact," which is reportedly "consistent with the effects of white phosphorus on humans." Washington Post defense analyst William Arkin said yesterday, "What I'm sure of is that the use of white phosphorous is not just some insensitive act. It is not just bad P.R. It is the ill thought out and panicked use of a weapon in an illegitimate way. It is a representation of a losing strategy."
November 16, 2005 in Current Affairs | Permalink
Comments
Their mendacity is confounding, no? Mr. Rumsfeld strikes me as one incapable of recognizing a decent pate du canard.
Posted by: Brown Trout at Nov 16, 2005 10:11:26 PM
WP is not a chemical weapon. It is an incindiary. The chemcal action is called rapid oxidation. WP is not usually the weapon of choice to kill people as it isn't near as effective as a common artillery round. Rapid oxidation, by the way is better known as combustion. Gun powder and dynamite exploding is rapid oxidation. Paper burnining is another example. Rapid oxidation does not a chemical weapon make.
Offensively it usually used to flush out an enemy rather than to initially kill although it will do that if enough of it gets on you. Defensively, it is used to ward off heat seaking missiles, create smoke or to light up the sky as a flare. The smoke is not usually hazardous and can be passed through without gas masks. Our soldiers do it all the time.
WP does burn and it burns hot when exposed to air. Phosphorus burns at about 2400 degress f. It burns fairly quickly but it has no magical qualities. It will burn clothing. If it gets on you, it will burn through your clothes and keep on burniing until it burns out. It will not just burn flesh and leave your clothing alone.
Dead bodies left in the desert for a few days will burn in the sun and turn dark. Clothing will remain intact. That is the logical explanation to those photos. Again, WP burns just about anything it comes in contact with - clothes included. Ask a science teacher.
Real chemical weapons are usually mists or liquids that stay intact and will kill indiscriminantly over a wide area. WP has no such properties. It burns where it burns.
WP is not considered to be a chemical weapon by any treaty. We have used WP since WWII. Probably every Army in the world uses WP in some way.
VW
Posted by: Violence Worker at Nov 17, 2005 10:17:58 AM
Fine. So it's incendidary, not chemical. Semantics. Firing into a civilian area (even one loaded with insurgents) any substance which burns at 2400 degrees Fahrenheit and is capable of roasting skin clean off the bone, whether defined as "incendiary" or "chemical", is morally reprehensible. Especially since the Bush Adminstration has been claiming the moral high ground in all of its Iraq dealings.
Posted by: Pete at Nov 17, 2005 3:03:09 PM
Using white phosphorous directly against foreign combatants is not only immoral, but per the U.S. Army's own regulations, illegal:
"A section from an instruction manual used by the US Army Command and General Staff School (CGSC) at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, makes clear that white phosphorus (WP) can be used to produce a smoke screen. But it adds: 'It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.'"
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article327926.ece
I would like to think there will be court-martial proceedings against the commanders of the Fallujah offensive, but I'm not holding my breath.
Posted by: Pete at Nov 21, 2005 11:57:46 AM


