Riverwind Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 The US forces used white phosphorus weapons in the attack in Faluja in 2004. Here is a website that describes these weapons in a non-judgmental way: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...unitions/wp.htm This case raises interesting questions where the line between a WMD and a conventional weapon should be drawn. White phosphorus is a clearly a chemical weapon that can affect a small area. It is not classed as a chemical weapon because it is not used with the intention to cause injury with the chemical effects of the weapon yet the people attacked with these weapons can suffer some extremely severe chemical burns. However, these subtleties are lost on anyone (particularly the anti-us insurgents in Iraq) who need evidence to show that the US is not better than Saddam. Seems like the US military has created yet another political headache for its masters in Washington To me it is further evidence that no-one can engage in 'justified' pre-emptive war because the tactics necessary to ensure victory will inevitably undermine the moral basis for the war. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
PocketRocket Posted November 18, 2005 Report Posted November 18, 2005 G'day, SPAR. Just so you know, this is already being discussed here...... http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=4205 Quote I need another coffee
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.