BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Rapparee
Date: 09 Nov 05 - 03:30 PM

Speaking as a former Infantryman, I'm in favor of ANYTHING that does unto you before you do unto me. Willie Peter, napalm, flamethowers, softpoint bullets, saw-toothed bayonets, nerve gas, fougasse, razor wire, claymore mines, toe popper mines, you name it.

Speaking as a human being, war disgusts me. It's one of the few things I truly loathe.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: GUEST,DB
Date: 09 Nov 05 - 12:03 PM

A few days ago 'Guest' advised us to "kill the enemy anyway you can" and this has rather preyed on my mind. It occurs to me that this is a regrettable and justifiable necessity if you are defending your country or territory from invaders (although it is not something to be gloried in!).
If, on the other hand, you are an invader and you use excessive force which inflicts death, injury and mutilation on innocent non-combatants you are a war criminal!

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Teribus
Date: 09 Nov 05 - 01:05 AM

Nothing to do with Napalm-like materials and phosphorus but everything to do with the location. Reported by BBC today:

"UN extends mandate of Iraq troops

The United Nations has extended the mandate of the US-led multinational forces in Iraq for another year.
The UN Security Council voted unanimously to extend the mandate to the end of 2006.

The existing UN mandate had been due to expire at the end of this year, after parliamentary elections planned for 15 December."

This being the case, please refrain from posting that the presence of MNF in Iraq is an 'illegal occupation' - It would appear to be a UN sanctioned presence and that the UN has voted that it continue for another year.

On the subject of the thread I believe that artbrooks has nailed it in his last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 10:12 PM

Phosphorous in chemical compounds has many uses, good and bad. It is important in plant and animal growth, in bone formation in the body, etc., etc. The element phosphorous is never found pure in nature and is extremely dangerous- see post by Peace, above.

The same may be said of the element sodium, also extremely unstable and dangerous and never found pure in nature, but when combined with elemental chlorine, a deadly gas, forms our table salt and makes the seas salty.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 09:36 PM

Protocol III states that it prohibits, in all circumstances, making the civilian population as such, individual civilians or civilian objects, the object of attack by any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat or a combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target. Under most circumstances, that is not the primary purpose of any WP munition, although it could certainly be misused.

The "definitions" section of Protocol III includes, among other things, the following: Incendiary weapon" means any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat, or combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target. (a) Incendiary weapons can take the form of, for example, flame throwers, fougasses, shells, rockets, grenades, mines, bombs and other containers of incendiary substances.
(b) Incendiary weapons do not include:
(i) Munitions which may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signalling systems;

None of this means that this is a "good" weapon, if there is such a thing, or that it won't cause horrendous injuries to anyone who comes into contact with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 08:11 PM

From the BBC:

WHITE PHOSPHORUS
Spontaneously flammable chemical used for battlefield illumination
Contact with particles causes burning of skin and flesh
Use of incendiary weapons prohibited for attacking civilians (Protocol III of Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons)
Protocol III not signed by US.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 07:26 PM

Thank-you, Paul Burke, for spelling it out.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Peace
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 07:23 PM

White phosphorus burns and produces a great amount of heat. I read somewhere it is about 4000 degrees when it burns. It is also attracted to the fats in people's bodies, so when it hits skin it burns through and just keeps on burning. Rapid removal is recommended. That is, if some hit my skin say on the arm, and I had a sharp knife (and the guts to do it), I would either dig out the piece or cut out the piece taking the necessary flesh and tissue with it.

To give an idea of how hot 4000 degrees is, our bunker gear will keep us fairly well protected to about 1000 degrees for a short time. Flashover occurs at about 1200 degrees. Flashover occurs in about 1 1/2 seconds. It's the point at which everything that can burn in a room bursts into flames all at once. Completely dressed firefighters trapped in flashovers die or--if they live--suffer horrible burns. The few who escape do so by laying face down on the floor and waiting for ten seconds for the flash to happen and subside. Then the heat in the room returns to a relatively friendly 900-1000 degrees. That's when it's time to leave, really fast. I have been in about 1150 degrees. It's very hot. I have no idea what getting burned by phosphorus would be like, but sure as hell it would feel like pain from another world. Materials used by people to burn others in war--inhuman. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Kaleea
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 07:05 PM

Very interesting, as the phosphoric acid found in rootbeer & cola drinks causes an allergic reaction to me. Then there is phosphorus in detergents-isn't that a sudsing agent? I was thinking that when I lived in Minnesota it was not allowed to be in detergents there. Is this all made from the same phosphorus as in the weapons? So, I suppose it's used to make things bubble up & expand, including bad stuff?

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 05:54 PM

I have been unable to locate any UN or Geneva Convention that covers WP.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 05:06 PM

KKCR, community radio in Kauai, has just finished a broadcast on this topic (on the internet), on "Democracy Now" with discussion between the Italian reporter and American officers and soldiers.
The use of white phosphorous missiles is admitted by military leaders, used for obscuration (fogging) and as a weapon. They insist that there is no prohibition on its use.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: robomatic
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 04:38 PM

Actually, Dave, after the posted bit of ignorance that Americans hadn't experienced war on their own territory, Paul Burke immediately responded with reference to the Civil War, then made reference to "this century". Art Brooks posted examples from the following (20th) century. The following post (nameless, of course) that two of his choices weren't "American soil" was out in the night. They weren't yet States, but they were American territories on which American citizens were attacked.

One could argue that the bombing of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania constituted an attack on American territory.

The current American activity in Afghanistan is a direct result of American civilians most cruelly attacked in their own workplaces by terrorists given residence by a religiously motivated dictatorial regime.

The thread title is a result of ignorance as to the distinction between entirely different military tools, which was pointed out early in the posts, yet somehow the ignorance keeps on a'rollin'.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: NH Dave
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 03:35 PM

Art, you missed the invasion of the US by British or if you will, Canadian troops, who burned Washington in retaliation for our having burned York, in Canada, as part of the War of 1812.

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: robomatic
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 08:17 AM

New York City, NY - September 2001

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: beardedbruce
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 08:15 AM

Actually, they were territories, as was the Phillipines. Much like Puerto Rico, today.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: GUEST,Historian
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 08:13 AM

Sorry, Artbrooks.
Hawaii was not part "American soil" in 1941, nor was Alaska in 1942

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: artbrooks
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 06:43 AM

Columbus, NM - March 1916; Pearl Harbor, HI - December 1941; Attu, AK - May 1942.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Paul Burke
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 03:54 AM

War never on US soil? So you were merely eating goober peas between 1860 and 1865? And the Red Indians left the Great Plains because they were fed up of living there? OK, this century then, and memories are short anyway.

The real problem is the asymmetry of American thinking. It's OK to use whatever means are available or necessary to defeat any real or imagined enemy, but if the enemy applies that attitude to you, that shows how wicked and immoral they are.

Spell it out:

If it's OK for the US to attack other countries, it's OK for other countries to attack the US.

If the US can use torture and detention without trial, so can anyone else.

It's not, and it's not.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Nov 05 - 02:55 AM

You are probably right, Amos.

War is pretty gruesome but I think it was especially horrible for the citizens of Fallujah. I also think that the U.S. has been very lucky that war has never been on their soil. Perhaps Americans would have a better understanding of the destruction and the numbers of women and children that are suffering if they had ever been in the 'front line in a mortal battle'.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Amos
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 10:54 PM

DV:

Yes, phosphorous is a chemical. So is lead, and so is nickel. Just because something is made of chemicals does not classify it as a chemical weapon in the sense you are trying to use it.

The huge immorality of the war in Iraq is not in the particulars of American firepower or the details of its mechanisms. Those are the deckchairs on the Titanic, to mix metaphors rather badly. The larger question is whether there in FACT exists a moral reason for conducting warfare there at all. Once you are on the front line in a mortal battle, fine distinctions about which chemicals your weapons are made of is not of major importance, unless you find yourself ordered to use WMDs such as biotoxins, nuclear arms, or poison gasses.

Those deckchairs are red herrings, I think.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 10:13 PM

Oh, I get it, Guest. What I get is that Iraqi civilians are being subjected to some pretty grim arsenals. Whether they are chemical (I thought phosphorous was a chemical) or fire bombs isn't the point.

What is yet to be determined is how the phosphorous was used in Fallujah and who were the victims of the fire bombs. The point is that it isn't happening to U.S. or British civilians or in your country. Its happening in Iraq.

If your people were being killed and maimed and your country was being destroyed by an illegal war, I doubt if you would be so indifferent.

Keep your eyes open for an Italian documentary and more information from Julianna Sgrena.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: artbrooks
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 09:33 PM

Phosphorus flares are standard for illumination, and have been for many years. Phosphorus shells, fired from artillery or mortars, are used to produce a fast and thick smoke screen. The bits of burning phosphorus are dangerous, since they will continue to burn when dosed with water. It is not the munition of choice for causing personnel casualties, since the bursting radius of a phosphorus shell is irregular and erratic.

The fact that flammable munitions such as the M-77 aerial bomb were used against military targets during the initial part of the war in Iraq was announced at the time. Technically, this isn't napalm, since the formula used is different, but the effect is similar.

These are not chemical weapons, except in the sense that they involve chemical compounds...but then, so does black powder. The common definition of chemical weapon is a toxic or incapacitating substance, normally spread as a gas or aerosol mist.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 08:54 PM

Yeah really stupid question, however, Dianavan appears to be missing a couple of cylinders and not all of the remaining are firing.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 08:44 PM

Do tell me if this is a really stupid question, but I'll ask anyway....

Wouldn't a firebomb be reasonably obvious in use? I'm just asking, as it would appear to have taken two years to be noticed.

Subject: RE: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 08:41 PM

Kill the enemy

ANY WAY YOU CAN

The sword cuts both ways

YOU don't seem to Understand!!!

Subject: BS: Napalm-like materials and phosphorous
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Nov 05 - 08:28 PM

The U.S. has just issued a denial that they used napalm in Fallujah. They also claimed that the phosphorous used in Fallujah was only used for illumination. The State Dept. claims it has done nothing illegal.

That may be true but the use of Mark-77 firebombs, which have a similar effect to napalm, were used against enemy positions in 2003 and there are many claims of civilians being burned by phosphorous in Fallujah.

Just because a chemical isn't banned, doesn't make it right to use it. Its still chemical warfare. I would also question why so many civilians in Fallujah suffered phosphorous burns if it was only used for 'illumination'. Seems like a fine line to me.