U.S. Lies About Use of Chemical Weapons

englishmajor wrote:

Published on Wednesday, November 23, 2005 by the Independent / UK
US Intelligence Classified White Phosphorus as 'Chemical Weapon'

They were lying. It was anti-Saddam propaganda.

Classification is arbitrary and subject to misinformation in any case.

All that is of real import here is that the reality of the effects of the compound on human tissue be well understood AND WELL PUBLICIZED.

oralloy wrote:

englishmajor wrote:

Published on Wednesday, November 23, 2005 by the Independent / UK
US Intelligence Classified White Phosphorus as 'Chemical Weapon'

They were lying. It was anti-Saddam propaganda.

Or maybe they're lying now in claiming that WP is not a chemical weapon.

The point is, when it's used against people it becomes a weapon.

joefromchicago wrote:

Or maybe they're lying now in claiming that WP is not a chemical weapon.

No, WP is a smoke device with mild incendiary side effects.

Article II
Definitions and Criteria
For the purposes of this Convention:

1. "Chemical Weapons" means the following, together or separately:

(a) Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes;

[...]

2. "Toxic Chemical" means:

Any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. This includes all such chemicals, regardless of their origin or of their method of production, and regardless of whether they are produced in facilities, in munitions or elsewhere.

oralloy wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:

Or maybe they're lying now in claiming that WP is not a chemical weapon.

No, WP is a smoke device with mild incendiary side effects.

Let's have another look at the Chemical Weapons Convention:

Quote:

Article II
Definitions and Criteria
For the purposes of this Convention:

1. "Chemical Weapons" means the following, together or separately:

(a) Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes;

[...]

2. "Toxic Chemical" means:

Any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. This includes all such chemicals, regardless of their origin or of their method of production, and regardless of whether they are produced in facilities, in munitions or elsewhere.

We all know, by now, that WP has not been classified as a chemical weapon.

You allege that WP therefore isn't a chemical weapon. You imply that white phophorus through its chemical action on life processes cannot cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals.

I find this a bit strange. In denial of reality, actually.

WP IS well undersoood (been around since WWII, right?)

oralloy wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:

Or maybe they're lying now in claiming that WP is not a chemical weapon.

No, WP is a smoke device with mild incendiary side effects.

Let's have another look at the Chemical Weapons Convention:

Quote:

Article II
Definitions and Criteria
For the purposes of this Convention:

1. "Chemical Weapons" means the following, together or separately:

(a) Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes;

[...]

2. "Toxic Chemical" means:

Any chemical which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals. This includes all such chemicals, regardless of their origin or of their method of production, and regardless of whether they are produced in facilities, in munitions or elsewhere.

We all know, by now, that WP has not been classified as a chemical weapon.

You allege that WP therefore isn't a chemical weapon. You imply that white phophorus through its chemical action on life processes cannot cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals.

Especially in view of all of the evidence presented by various sources. Which he/she fail to acknowledge. I find a lot of Americans on this forum in complete denial. Might ruin the Christmas season for them to actually have to admit to such actions.

No, WP is a smoke device with mild incendiary side effects.

The GI's in Iraq hate the stuff because they know what it can do, and they don't want any WP on their precious body parts.

Mild?

Incandescent particles of WP may produce extensive burns. Phosphorus burns on the skin are deep and painful; a firm eschar is produced and is surrounded by vesiculation. The burns usually are multiple, deep, and variable in size. The solid in the eye produces severe injury. The particles continue to burn unless deprived of atmospheric oxygen. Contact with these particles can cause local burns. 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. Burns usually are limited to areas of exposed skin (upper extremities, face). Burns frequently are second and third degree because of the rapid ignition and highly lipophilic properties of white phosphorus.

Source.

The GI's in Iraq hate the stuff because they know what it can do, and they don't want any WP on their precious body parts.

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004/04/11/military/iraq/19_30_504_10_04.txt

Bogert is a mortar team leader who directed his men to fire round after round of high explosives and white phosphorus charges into the city Friday and Saturday, never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused.

"We had all this SASO (security and stabilization operations) training back home," he said. "And then this turns into a real goddamned war."

Just as his team started to eat a breakfast of packaged rations Saturday, Bogert got a fire mission over the radio.

"Stand by!" he yelled, sending Lance Cpls. Jonathan Alexander and Jonathan Millikin scrambling to their feet.

Shake 'n' bake

Joking and rousting each other like boys just seconds before, the men were instantly all business. With fellow Marines between them and their targets, a lot was at stake.

Bogert received coordinates of the target, plotted them on a map and called out the settings for the gun they call "Sarah Lee."

Millikin, 21, from Reno, Nev., and Alexander, 23, from Wetumpka, Ala., quickly made the adjustments. They are good at what they do.

"Gun up!" Millikin yelled when they finished a few seconds later, grabbing a white phosphorus round from a nearby ammo can and holding it over the tube.

"Fire!" Bogert yelled, as Millikin dropped it.

The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call "shake 'n' bake" into a cluster of buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week.

They say they have never seen what they've hit, nor did they talk about it as they dusted off their breakfast and continued their hilarious routine of personal insults and name-calling.

Say 'cheese'

Every day since they started firing rounds into the city, other Marines have stopped by the mortar pit to take a turn dropping mortars into the tube and firing at some unseen target.

Like tourists at some macabre carnival, some bring cameras and have other troops snap photos of their combat shot. Even the battalion surgeon fired a few Saturday, just for sport.

Everyone wants to "get some," the troops explain, some joking that Fallujah is like a live-fire range.

Oralloy, keep the blinders on.

The facts speak for themselves.

I suppose you deny that the US uses torture as well?

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1322866

3. The Belly Slap: A hard open-handed slap to the stomach. The aim is to cause pain, but not internal injury. Doctors consulted advised against using a punch, which could cause lasting internal damage.

4. Long Time Standing: This technique is described as among the most effective. Prisoners are forced to stand, handcuffed and with their feet shackled to an eye bolt in the floor for more than 40 hours. Exhaustion and sleep deprivation are effective in yielding confessions.

5. The Cold Cell: The prisoner is left to stand naked in a cell kept near 50 degrees. Throughout the time in the cell the prisoner is doused with cold water.

6. Water Boarding: The prisoner is bound to an inclined board, feet raised and head slightly below the feet. Cellophane is wrapped over the prisoner's face and water is poured over him. Unavoidably, the gag reflex kicks in and a terrifying fear of drowning leads to almost instant pleas to bring the treatment to a halt.

According to the sources, CIA officers who subjected themselves to the water boarding technique lasted an average of 14 seconds before caving in. They said al Qaeda's toughest prisoner, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, won the admiration of interrogators when he was able to last between two and two-and-a-half minutes before begging to confess.

If you ever have to choose between being hit with WP or napalm or thermate, choose the WP.