US Uses Napalm in Fallujah!

[Tylanner]

?They used these weird bombs that put up smoke like a mushroom cloud? then small pieces fall from the air with long tails of smoke behind them." Aljazeera

Seems to me like the anti-personnel and incendiary CBU-87, cluster bomb.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: DaFinn
"America, which didn't ratify the treaty, is the only country in the world still using the weapon."

Yup, that sounds like US of A. A country well above the others...

Did Iraq and North Korea ratify this treaty. Oh wait...

yes always nice to compare the US of A to those countries when it comes to the moral high ground

The point flew entirely over your head. You tried to say the USA was some bully by being the ONLY country to not ratify the treaty. I'm pointing out how fallacious and disingenous that comment is. Well, I'm sure there are many that didn't as well(either they didn't have the weapons, or they were asses). Why, then, should you be critical of the US? I love it. We are supposed to "win" battles without killing our troops, but we have to basically run up to the enemy and give them a love pat, and then put them down via lethal injection.

My point would be that we are the only country using it, if the report is true. We scream because a country may have WMD's and if we use something just as bad. Is the standard not what we do but what we sign? If the report isn't then the whole thing is moot perhaps, but if so and it was used in areas populated by civilians, we have done as bad as when Saddam gassed the Kurds.

I am going to wait before I yell too loudly, but in any event there IS a moral double standard with the use of these weapons and the cry over WMDs.

I don't really care who signed a piece of paper, I care what is used and how.

 

[NightCrawler]

I guess NeoCons of P&N are running the war. Maybe we should call them Generals of P&N ?

 

[AndrewR]

Sounds like thermobaric weaponry to me, an innovation which the Russians brought to most effective use in Grozny and which the US is catching up on after successful employment in Afghanistan.

Explain to me again why incendiary or overpressure is worse than fragmentation? Perhaps I missed that part. I think part of the problem in the debate is that the horrors of war are just that -- horrors. It's hard to make death neat and clean.

?They used these weird bombs that put up smoke like a mushroom cloud? then small pieces fall from the air with long tails of smoke behind them." Aljazeera

Seems to me like the anti-personnel and incendiary CBU-87, cluster bomb.

I was thinking white phosphorous. A cluster bomb doesn't explode in mid-air, just dispenses the submunitions.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: AndrewR
Sounds like thermobaric weaponry to me, an innovation which the Russians brought to most effective use in Grozny and which the US is catching up on after successful employment in Afghanistan.

Explain to me again why incendiary or overpressure is worse than fragmentation? Perhaps I missed that part. I think part of the problem in the debate is that the horrors of war are just that -- horrors. It's hard to make death neat and clean.

?They used these weird bombs that put up smoke like a mushroom cloud? then small pieces fall from the air with long tails of smoke behind them." Aljazeera

Seems to me like the anti-personnel and incendiary CBU-87, cluster bomb.

I was thinking white phosphorous. A cluster bomb doesn't explode in mid-air, just dispenses the submunitions.

At some level this is true, but the US public had the bejesus scared out of them with WMDs. In truth, this is a WMD as well.

Death is rarely neat, as you say, however that misses the point of whether death by war should be happening in Iraq. It seems that this isn't a glorious campaign, but the continuing correction of a cluster fsck that should never have happened if more prudent leaders were on watch.

 

[GoPackGo]

I say whatever it takes to win....these radicals like to talk big...now they see what happens when we rain fire down on them.

 

[daveshel]

Do I smell a Nobel Peace Prize?

 

[MoFunk]

OK I am a "NEO-CON" and I came here for some slainin'.

I would like to offer a public apology for all of what is going on in Fallujah. None of this would have happened if GW would have listened to the e-mail I sent him begging him to bomb that place into a parking lot shortly after that little bridge incident.

Come on people, you are letting your hate blur your common sense WAY to much here. The media is walking around in Fallujah with a hardon looking for ANYTHING that they can report to make the USA and the military look bad. Do you think for ONE SECOND that if any of this was true, it would not be ?reported? at nauseating levels by now? I thought you liberal blue staters were supposed to be the smart ones of the country?

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I wouldn't be surprised if this article is BS, but the sad thing is that I wouldn't be surprised if this administration did something like this. For some reason I think that if the US actually did use Napalm, it would be more widely reported than apparent 'hack' of a website.

I wouldn't be surprised if it is what theblackbox is talking about. I'm sure the US army has plenty of weapons that can cause similar damage.

Why stop now when it work well for his father?

'Daisy cutterst, 15,000-pound bombs which can "[disintegrate] everything within hundreds of yards". (Walker)' (searh Highway of Death for more info).

'Iraq was bombed with over 300 tons of depleted uranium, a heavy metal that some believe increases the risk of cancer (although this is hotly disputed). The rate of cancer Iraqi children after the war increased four-fold. '

 

[piasabird]

Who cards if we kill terrorists with Napalm? The Civilians there were probably harboring these people or allowing them to be there.

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard
Why exactly do 'neocons' have explaining to do? Or are you just trolling?

Didn't know that someone would put their hand up that quick.

It would help your blood pressure to not read or reply if you don't like the title or comment. :roll:

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Who cards if we kill terrorists with Napalm? The Civilians there were probably harboring these people or allowing them to be there.

Some civies honestly think that they are helping the right cause, some are force to serve/human shield, and the majority are happen to be born/live in the wrong time/place.

<-- I was a civilian in the Vietnam war, and have witness atrocities that was done by the North/South/American.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: NightCrawler
I guess NeoCons of P&amp;N are running the war. Maybe we should call them Generals of P&amp;N ?

I think chickenhawk fits them just fine...

 

[Pliablemoose]

Excuse me, I have an update, I was busy looking at the Ohio recounts, but this just in:

The US has used weapons in Iraq and people have been killed, OMFG...

What do you expect our military to use? Paintball guns or laser tag equipment?

Peace

 

[novon]

They finally found the weapons of mass destruction - it was on their planes!

God help us.

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: novon
They finally found the weapons of mass destruction - it was on their planes!

God help us.

That's not a WMD, that's a WMD!

/Crocodile Dundee

 

[RabidMongoose]

Originally posted by: Czar
if you want to uphold law and order, uphold international will, international treaties then for sure you must do so yourself when you are trying to force others to do the same right?

Is the US not allowing anyone else to use these types of weapons?

And why should a country uphold an international treaty that it did not even sign? And aren't these weapons not exactly the same weapons from the treaty, but a different variant?

I don't see the problem in using these in a war at this time, unless I am missing something here.

 

[judasmachine]

The US just doesn't care about anything but it's own income. Too many people now are advocating the unthinkable. They are suggesting we use tactics we used to comdemn the Russians for, such as, preemptive strikes, leveling of entire cities so that you don't have to fight house to house, and shooting the wounded. If there is such a thing as moral supremecy, the US lost it about 3 years ago.

 

[Tab]

War is dugusting, and burns are considered the most painfull way to die. I mean its going to be more painfull, but you're still going to die. The reason WMDs like Chemical/Biological/Nuclear weapons are considered banned is because of the huge amount of destruction they cause to the enviorment and devestate the populace when comapred to convential weapons. As for napalm, if you inhale that stuff you're going to die pretty damn quick.

 

[ReiAyanami]

so that's how the air-fuel bomb works in C&amp;C: Generals

no wonder the war's costing so much, we're dropping fuel on them!!

so is agent orange around the corner? how about mk ultra, oh wait that was abu grihab

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Excuse me, I have an update, I was busy looking at the Ohio recounts, but this just in:

The US has used weapons in Iraq and people have been killed, OMFG...

What do you expect our military to use? Paintball guns or laser tag equipment?

Peace

Spitballs

CsG

 

[Genx87]

My point would be that we are the only country using it, if the report is true. We scream because a country may have WMD's and if we use something just as bad.

You think dropping an incinderary cluster bomb is as bad as dopping VX, Mustard, or a nuke?

interesting.

'Iraq was bombed with over 300 tons of depleted uranium, a heavy metal that some believe increases the risk of cancer (although this is hotly disputed). The rate of cancer Iraqi children after the war increased four-fold. '

the UN did a study after GW1 on depleted Uranium rounds and found unless you were either shot with one or right at the point of contact when it hit and then inhaled the dust. You were not in any greater risk for cancer. The Army also has special protective measures when dealing with spent rounds just in case.

 

[imported_Condor]

Too coll! Krispy critters in scarves!

 

[IAteYourMother]

Originally posted by: judasmachine
The US just doesn't care about anything but it's own income. Too many people now are advocating the unthinkable. They are suggesting we use tactics we used to comdemn the Russians for, such as, preemptive strikes, leveling of entire cities so that you don't have to fight house to house, and shooting the wounded. If there is such a thing as moral supremecy, the US lost it about 3 years ago.

Good to see Bush taking the moral high ground and spreading his "values" to each and every one of us.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: OffTopic

Originally posted by: RabidMongoose
I wouldn't be surprised if this article is BS, but the sad thing is that I wouldn't be surprised if this administration did something like this. For some reason I think that if the US actually did use Napalm, it would be more widely reported than apparent 'hack' of a website.

I wouldn't be surprised if it is what theblackbox is talking about. I'm sure the US army has plenty of weapons that can cause similar damage.

Why stop now when it work well for his father?

'Daisy cutterst, 15,000-pound bombs which can "[disintegrate] everything within hundreds of yards". (Walker)' (searh Highway of Death for more info).

'Iraq was bombed with over 300 tons of depleted uranium, a heavy metal that some believe increases the risk of cancer (although this is hotly disputed). The rate of cancer Iraqi children after the war increased four-fold. '

So now Daisy Cutters are "weapons of mass destruction"? While the literal interpretation of that phrase might seem to apply to something like the BLU-82, it is NOT the military meaning of the term. A weapon of mass destruction refers to a weapon which has the ability to kill that far outstrips its size when compared to conventional munitions. Check the size of the BLU-82. Do you expect a 15,000 lb bomb to have a small explosion?

In comparison, a SMALL nuclear weapon, which will weigh less than the BLU-82, will have on the order of 100-150 kilotons of explosive power -- that's 100,000-150,000 TONS (not pounds) of TNT. Even assuming that the BLU-82 explosive power is greater than that of TNT pound for pound, the difference is amazing.

Incidentally, the Highway of Death had nothing to do with a BLU-82 (or Daisy Cutter, same thing -- Daisy Cutter is actually the term originally applied to the fuse for the BLU-82, not the bomb itself). The thieving Iraqis killed on the highway were gunned down with ordinary bombs, rockets, and bullets, not leveled with the big bomb. The BLU-82 has also been replaced in the US inventory by the MOAB, which is even larger. Progress is beautiful.

Just one further clarification -- depleted uranium is not used in bombs. It's used in armor piercing ammunition like that fired from the M1 tank, the M2/M3 infantry fighting vehicle, and perhaps other sources. It isn't used for its shrapnel ability, which is essential to a "bomb", but for its penetration ability given its density.