" But then you can see a difference between Downs syndrome suicide bombers and bombing people with napalm.

I don't." - (Folkiedave)

I most certainly do see the difference in unprincipled and unscrupulous religious nutters deliberately kidnapping, or conning, unwitting mentally challenged people into carrying explosives into a market place crammed with innocent civilians only to have those same unprincipled and unscrupulous religious nutters deliberately detonate those explosives from afar.

At least the pilot carrying out the bombing run is a) Deliberately putting his life on the line to carry out that attack and b) Is attacking a military target that is capable of firing back.

On the "Napalm" hysterics as reported by a forum representing Marxist Thought Online it can be seen that the USMC has used Mk-77 bombs during the initial stages of the conflict in 2003 against military targets and against fortified positions in Fallujah during the assault in 2004, it also notes that the vast majority of civilians had fled Fallujah before fighting began. While the US has signed up to the Convention it has so far refused to sign the Protocol. It is the Protocal that Marxist Thought outlines has been breached, and only then if the munitions were targeted at areas in which there was a known civilian presence. Now I would tend to think that you only ever fire at what you have to, or what you deem to be a threat to your troops. I would doubt very much if large numbers of civilians were present, they most certainly were not in the first reported instance - which was a manned Iraqi observation post in the desert close to the Kuwaiti border.

Exactly where the UK comes into this I don't know. We most definitely have not used these sort of munitions since the 1960's. last recorded use by UK armed forces was during attempts to ignite the oil escaping from the "Torrey Canyon". UK finished with Napalm type weapons while I was still in the navy.