Defense of Phosphorus Use Turns Into Damage Control

[cal04]

On Nov. 8, Italian public television showed a documentary renewing persistent charges that the United States had used white phosphorus rounds, incendiary munitions that the film incorrectly called chemical weapons, against Iraqis in Falluja last year. Many civilians died of burns, the report said. The half-hour film was riddled with errors and exaggerations, according to United States officials and independent military experts. But the State Department and Pentagon have so bungled their response - making and then withdrawing incorrect statements about what American troops really did when they fought a pitched battle against insurgents in the rebellious city - that the charges have produced dozens of stories in the foreign news media and on Web sites suggesting that the Americans used banned weapons and tried to cover it up.

The Iraqi government has announced an investigation, and a United Nations spokeswoman has expressed concern. "It's discredited the American military without any basis in fact," said John E. Pike, an expert on weapons who runs GlobalSecurity.org, an independent clearinghouse for military information. He said the "stupidity and incompetence" of official comments had fueled suspicions of a cover-up.

"The story most people around the world have is that the Americans are up to their old tricks - committing atrocities and lying about it," Mr. Pike said. "And that's completely incorrect." Daryl G. Kimball, director of the Arms Control Association, a nonprofit organization that researches nuclear issues, was more cautious. In light of the issues raised since the film was shown, he said, the Defense Department, and perhaps an independent body, should review whether American use of white phosphorus had been consistent with international weapons conventions.

"There are legitimate questions that need to be asked," Mr. Kimball said. Given the history of Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons in Iraq, he said, "we have to be extremely careful" to comply with treaties and the rules of war. At a time when opposition to the war is growing, the white phosphorus issue has reinforced the worst suspicions about American actions. The documentary was quickly posted as a video file on Web sites worldwide. Bloggers trumpeted its allegations. Foreign newspapers and television reported the charges and rebuttals, with headlines like "The Big White Lie" in The Independent of London. Officials now acknowledge that the government's initial response was sluggish and misinformed. "There's so much inaccurate information out there now that I'm not sure we can unscrew it," Lt. Col. Barry Venable, a Defense Department spokesman who has handled many inquiries about white phosphorus, said Friday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/21/international/21phosphorus.html

[DBoon]

1. People who try to deny the truth

often DO act like they are lying.

[Eugene]

2. The article is pure propaganda.

The author, Scott Shane, pounds on the flaws in the Italian
documentary while completly ignoring the real story that
the press and bloggers were able to dig up afterward.
Even the Pentagon admits that U.S. forces used
"shake and bake" as a weapon in Fallujah.

Shane insists that the WP fiasco is just a case of a bungled
PR response to anti-American propaganda. He obscures the
fact that the State Dept. and DoD got tripped up by the truth.
He trots out a parade of military experts to attack the WP story,
even pulling up a Saddam Hussein reference, and splits hairs
over whether WP is a chemical weapon. He leaves out the facts
that don't support his generalizations, however.

[wtmusic]

3. "Americans committing atrocities and lying about it...

is completely incorrect".

Well John E. Pike, the 91 countries who are signatory to the 1980 CCW Treaty, Protocol III, might disagree with you...they include:

Albania, Argentina, Australis, Austria, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina-Faso, Cambodia, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Colombia, Croatia, Cuba, Cypress, Czech Republic, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Holy See, Honduras, Hungary, India, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Lao Peoples' Democratic Republic, Latvia, Lesotho, Liberia, Lichtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Nauru, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Phillippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Senegal, Serbia and Montenegro, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, and Venezuela.

They seem to think that frying civilians alive with incendiaries like WP is a bad thing.

(On the other hand, we have heavyweights of human rights on our side like Egypt, Afghanistan, Sudan, and Morocco. And ten other countries.) :eyes:

http://disarmament.un.org/

[carincross]

4. the company lie

This article follows the Bush administration's biased view. Go look at some of the recent reports that Amy Goodman has broadcast on DemocracyNow! (http://www.democracynow.org) for a much fairer assessment.

[LeftHander]

5. My blog has been interesting for article on WP....

Some really good comments by people who are defending the use of WP but still seem to be missing the point. I've learned a lot about WP....and the initial shock of it's use has not worn off at all.

WP used against people is horrible.

Of course I "NEVER" use language to inflame the right wing defenders of the Iraq war....no never... :>)

hehe