Outcry Erupts Over Reports That Israel Used Phosphorus Arms on Gazans

[DogPoundPup]

Source: N.Y.T.

In early January, a week into Israel’s war in Gaza, the home of Sabah Abu Halima was hit by an Israeli shell. Ms. Abu Halima, the matriarch of a farming family in the northern Gaza area of Beit Lahiya, was caught in an inferno that burned her husband and four of their nine children to death.

But as she lay in a bed on the third floor of an annex to Shifa Hospital here on Wednesday, bandaged all over and in terrible pain, it was less the magnitude of her loss than the source of the fire that was drawing attention, not only from her doctors but also from human rights organizations and even the Israeli military.

Though there has been no independent confirmation, Palestinian officials say her family was hit by white phosphorus, a weapon that militaries use widely to obscure the battlefield but that is also limited under an international convention that bans targeting civilians with it.

The Israeli military issued a short statement on Wednesday, saying it was investigating whether its use of phosphorous weapons was improper and reiterating that it was “obligated to international law” in the matter. Early in the war, Israeli officials would not confirm whether the military was using white phosphorus at all, but said only that it was using weapons in legal ways.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/world/middleeast/22ph...

[whistle]

1. Correct and BushCo gave those weapons to Israel and said to go ahead

...and use them. That makes all Americans guilty

[Rage for Order]

2. You can't be series

and

[Trajan]

5. All Americans are guilty when Israel uses inhumane methods?

Wow .....

Sorry ... I reject that thesis: I never approved of Israel's use of ANY weapon, let alone such awful weapons like this .... and no matter HOW many other Americans might support them, we are NOT stained by this guilt simply be being in the same country ....

[whistle]

14. Who attempted to stop this most recent carnage in Gaza by Israel?

...Was there any action on the part of America beyond a scattering of protests and journalists to hold anyone in the Bush Administration, the Pentagon or the American industries which manufactured and supplied these WMDs which Israel used on Gaza residents? Actions, not intentions! Shoulder shrugs and head shaking doesn't count as actions.

[Trajan]

15. Lazy and imprecise use of language ....

will always lead to 'verbal disputes' ...

You said "ALL Americans are guilty" in the first post ...

Then you said "beyond a scattering of protests" ....

So, you first say 'NONE', and then you admit 'some' ....

IF I recall .... The protests AGAINST the Israeli incursion were actually quite active, in many cities, in America, and across the world ....

I refuse to accept that WHOLE populations are 'guilty', even if they do speak out ....

Whenever we see statements that condemn or praise whole segments of humanity, we are almost always seeing fallacious assertions ....

This is just a lazy composition ....

[GoesTo11]

20. Hooray for precise language

[EFerrari]

13. That is correct. n/t

[The Magistrate]

19. Claims Of Collective Responsibility, Sir, Are The First Step Towards Collective Punishment....

[Duer 157099]

3. Wait. There were threads here, on DU, talking about this

with photos.

But lots of people said it wasn't happening.

[Jefferson23]

4. I've said it before and I'll say it again, are you still sleeping well

US Senators and Congressman?...with a few exceptions that is.

[Indenturedebtor]

6. If some soldiers go nutso and use it improperly

that doesn't mean that the government ordered or condones it. If it was indeed used intentionally on civilians.

Let's not let our prejudices guide our thinking.

[bemildred]

7. The government and the military are responsible for what their forces do.

It's not an arguable point. Incompetence is not a defense, particularly when the offense if repeated many times.

[Pastiche423]

8. I am predjudice against white phosphorus being used

on civilians!

But I bet that's not what you were trying to imply. The Israelis have ALREADY admitting to using it.

[Jefferson23]

9. What prejudice would that be? My statement refers to the complicity

of my government and the consequences of their actions, I hold them accountable. What restraint did they even request? There was none.

http://www.aipac.org/Publications/SourceMaterialsCongre...

[Idealism]

11. There was an IDF ranking officer being interviewed, boasting about using WP

He was a General, I believe. He claimed it was only used as 'smokescreens' for troop movements. Sure, pal.

[babylonsister]

10. Outcries now? I read about this weeks ago. Pshaw. nt

[alofarabia]

12. The primary use of white phosphorus...

is to provide light on a target. It does this by a shell containing WP being air detonated over the target. The white phsophorus burns quite brilliantly and lights up the surrounding area for a period of time. I doubt that it is being intentionally used on civilians but I don't doubt that if civilians are underneath where the shell explodes that they could get burned. Also, if the fuse of a shell doesn't work properly the shell would not airburst but would instead hit the ground and probably explode (I'm not sure of the workings of this specific fuse). In this case it would certainly be possible that civilians could be hurt.

[subsuelo]

16. Why would you doubt it is being intentionally used on civilians?

Because Israel is so wonderful and so moral?

[azurnoir]

17. The arguments by some here are starting to remind me

of Bart and Lisa Simpson "if I make a windmill with my arms" "if I kick the air" and you just happen to get in the way...........

However when it comes to the Gaza situation the old adage "its one thing to know and another to show" seems to apply

[The Magistrate]

18. Not So, Sir

You are mistaking this for 'star shells', artillery rounds with sub-munitions of parachute flares, usually (at least in the past) burning magnesium.

White phosphorus rounds are legally used to create obscuring smoke, and to create fires to burn off cover to reduce opportunities for concealment available to an enemy. Prior to treaties enacted in the eighties of the last century, it was routinely employed as an anti-personnel round, being extremely effective against entrenched positions lacking over-head cover, and in the clearing of buildings in urban warfare, and in dealing with troops operating in cave systems. It was issued in forms down to hand grenade level.

As a smoke generator, it has characteristics that are excellent for some purposes and less than optimum for others, relative to other methods of producing battle-field smoke screens. The smoke produced is very hot, and so rises quickly; this produces a thinner screen, but a taller one, and so it can be of more benefit in obscuring troops on the ground from an enemy at an elevation, in upper floors of buildings or on hill-tops, but is less effective at obscuring ground to ground observation. The smoke is produced immediately, without requiring the combination of multiple chemicals in a round, which can take a little time. Among other forms of smoke shell used in the twentieth century were combination rounds employing mixtures of chemicals that produced a thick, 'cool' smoke that hugged the ground, and arsenical compounds that were ignited to give off a thick white smoke that was somewhat poisonous to inhale, and left a dangerous residue.