Napalm Peter is an incendiary and would definitely not be classified as either chemical or biological weapon.

Depleted Uranium is exactly what it says it is, it is less radioactive than all that naturally occuring uranium that is lying about planet earth, I could eat the stuff by the bucket load and it would not affect me. The DU stories are a myth, particularly those relating to Iraq and Coalition use of the munitions that are used in and anti-tank role. During Desert Storm there were no major battles involving Coalition Forces around Basra.

After the Iraqis signed the ceasefire at Safwan (which they never honoured) they were allowed to fly helicopters. And they used their helicopters to suppress a Shia uprising in the South of Iraq. now let me see what helicopters did they fly again, oh yes Soviet supplied M-24 Hinds armed with rotary 20mm cannon firing - Yes Peter you've got it DU rounds, so IF there is any problem related to the dust spatter from DU rounds in Southern Iraq they can from Iraqi Gunships not Coalition aircraft.

WHO reckons DU radiation is a load of rubbish.

And if I may be allowed a little diversion into morality, why was it OK for the UK to use chemical weapons in the 1920s (in Iraq, by happy coincidence) and not OK for Saddam to use them in the 1980s.

I don't know you tell me, although I can't ever remember saying that it was OK for the UK to use chemical weapons in the 1920's. The reason why it was not OK for Saddam to use them in the 1980's had something to do with an agreement that he had signed saying that he wouldn't use them maybe.

Bobert I would read that speech/report again, you have obviously skipped most of it to land on the bits that you think supports your arguement.

Oh Peter the text I quoted in red comes from the speech given by Blix to the UN Security Committee on 27th January 2003. You can confirm that by opening the link, its there in the transcript for all to see.

Was the US right to invade Iraq and enforce the terms of the Safwan ceasefire - Most certainly