Defense of Phosphorus Use Turns Into Damage Control

[kpete]

Weapons
Defense of Phosphorus Use Turns Into Damage Control

By SCOTT SHANE
Published: November 21, 2005

After the Italian documentary was broadcast, the American ambassadors to Italy, Ronald P. Spogli, and to Britain, Robert H. Tuttle, echoed the stock defense, denying that white phosphorus munitions had been used against enemy fighters, let alone civilians. At home, on the public radio program "Democracy Now," Lt. Col. Steve Boylan, an American military spokesman, said, "I know of no cases where people were deliberately targeted by the use of white phosphorus."

But those statements were incorrect. Firsthand accounts by American officers in two military journals note that white phosphorus munitions had been aimed directly at insurgents in Falluja to flush them out. War critics and journalists soon discovered those articles.

In the face of such evidence, the Bush administration made an embarrassing public reversal last week. Pentagon spokesmen admitted that white phosphorus had been used directly against Iraqi insurgents. "It's perfectly legitimate to use this stuff against enemy combatants," Colonel Venable said Friday.

While he said he could not rule out that white phosphorus hit some civilians, "U.S. and coalition forces took extraordinary measures to prevent civilian casualties in Falluja."

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/21/international/21phosphorus.html?ex=1290229200&en=a0e2374c569b9ecc&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[wtmusic]

1. The score is 91 to 14

Nations who believe using WP in close proximity to civilians really sucks, vs. those who don't.

Guess which side we're on.

[gratuitous]

2. Can you say "war crime"?

Just like Ann Coulter thinks executing random liberals is a good idea (as though liberals are ignorant of the fact that the death penalty is sometimes carried out capriciously) because it would teach us that we could be killed at any time, I think putting George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Douglas Feith and the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the dock at The Hague for war crimes would be a very good idea. It would impress on the neocon chickenhawk mind that we are supposed to be a nation of laws and not of men. If they want to live in a country ruled by a corrupt personality cult, may I suggest North Korea?

[Village Idiot]

3. WP is NASTY shit, but why no outrage at the use of MK-77?

Now that use of Napalm against personnel has been outlawed, why aren't people protesting the use of this thinly-veiled alternative against insurgents in Fallujah?


Some facts about MK-77 Incindiary bombs:

"The MK 77 500-pound fire bomb is the only fire bomb now in service. Fire bombs rupture on impact and spread burning fuel gel on surrounding objects. MK 13 Mod 0 igniters are used to ignite the fuel gel mixture upon impact."

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/mk77.htm

How in the heck is the MK-77 so dissimilar from M-47 or M-74 (napalm bombs)?

"Napalm is a mixture of benzene (21%), gasoline (33%), and polystyrene (46%)."

Isn't the content of MK-77 firebombs the SAME?

"The MK-77 is a napalm canister munition. The MK77 familiy is an evolution of the incendiary bombs M-47 and M-74, used during the conflict in Korea and the war in Vietnam."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/mk77.htm


How do they continue to get away with meaningless re-classification efforts like this?

On Edit:

"The Mk 77 Mod 5 firebombs are incendiary devices with a function indentical to earlier Mk 77 napalm weapons. Instead of the gasoline and benzene fuel, the Mk 77 Mod 5 firebomb uses kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/mk77.htm