VirusHead

If the bodies are burned but they have unburned clothing on, then the photo staged. The suggestion that something burned one thing in contact with an other but not the other is absurd on its face.

DU is only a health risk if you come into contact with a recenly destroyed target of a DU round or if the target had DU in its composition such as our armor. The rule if thumb is stary away from burning vehicles.

From Electronic Iraq:

In November 2004 US forces launched a massive attack on the city of Fallujah. Much of the city was destroyed and tens of thousands of residents fled as refugees.

Reports have emerged of burnt and melted bodies in the city, consistent with the use of napalm or the equally controversial weapon white phosphorus (also known as ‘Willy Pete’)

Residents who survived the attack reported seeing incendiary bombs used in the city. Abu Sabah, who lived in the Julan district of Fallujah which witnessed some of the heaviest attacks, said:

“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.”

He said that pieces of these strange bombs explode into large fires that burn the skin even when water is thrown on the burns. [9]

“Usually we keep the gloves on,” said Army Capt. Erik Krivda, of Gaithersburg, Md., the senior officer in charge of the 1st Infantry Division’s Task Force 2-2 tactical operations command center. “For this operation, we took the gloves off.”

Some artillery guns fired white phosphorous rounds that create a screen of fire that cannot be extinguished with water. Insurgents reported being attacked with a substance that melted their skin, a reaction consistent with white phosphorous burns.

Kamal Hadeethi, a physician at a regional hospital, said, “The corpses of the mujahedeen which we received were burned, and some corpses were melted.” [10]

Seems to me that maybe they mixed the new napalm with phosphorus – Willy Pete, also known as Whiskey Pete.

That sounds like a good description of employed WP munitions and no one denies they were used in Fallujah.

WHat is incorrect is to state or imply that WP is a chemical weapon or a WMD.

Napalm is an entirely differnt substance. The MK77 is similar, but acutal Napalm we don’t have anymore. The MK77 is an air dropped munition, a bomb. WP is employed either in mortar or artillery shells or in a hand grenade.

We have nothign that “melts” bodies. WP burns.

WP is not also known as Whiskey Pete, Whisky Papa, yes.

I would be interested to hear your opinion of the actual footage, then. Have you seen the documentary footage? How would you explain those images?

One of the parts that I viewed looked like phosophorus of some kind was used to light the sky, but went off low with multiple trails that then clearly hit the buildings. It is legal to use for illumination, but not against civilians.

So you don’t feel that the WP was mixed with the sticky gel to stick to human flesh? Again – how do you explain the condition of the casualties (ie the murdered women and children we specifically targeted knowing that most of the intended targets had already left the city).

There is an Artillery Officer that has left a comment on the blog at Protein Wisdom. He has seen teh documetnary and I have not. He says (I think this is the same thing you are refering to) that those scenes are the backblast ov various rocket munitions.

Any munition used deliberately against civilians is illegal. It’s the intent that makes the difference.

Mixing WP with most gels would be counter-productive. Phosphorus is stored in kerosene or glycerine in order to keep it inert. It ignites on contact with oxygen. Mixing it with somethig oxygenated (including water) would cause it to burn. Mixing it with the flamable kerosene or even subsances like glycerine which would make it sticky but is not itself flamable, would keep it from igniting.

You alleged deliberate targeting of civilians. That’s serious. If it’s true that would be illegal. What evidence has persuaded you of the truth of this? I haven’t come across anything that would convince me, much less stand up in a court.

I was reporting an allegation, not alleging. However, what it looks like to me is that explosions went off too close to the ground – trails created further explosions on the ground. I care less about “motivation” than what actually might have happened.

I defer to your expertise on weaponry – I don’t know anything about these things. However, I do recommend that you watch the film and form your own opinion based on the visuals. That’s why I linked to it.

Motive is what has to be proven if one wished to prove a case for a War Crime.

I’m downloading the video now so I can stop, start and freeze as I like.

Also check out the Daily Kos on U.S. admission of using white phosphorus as a weapon (shake and bake):

March edition of Field Artillery Magazine in an article entitled “The Fight for Fallujah”:

“WP [i.e., white phosphorus rounds] proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE. We fired ’shake and bake’ missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out.”

Testimony about the use of these “shake and bake” techniques of WP usage are detailed in an account by an embedded Journalist regarding the April 2004 attacks on Fallujah by the Marines:

Fighting from a distance

After pounding parts of the city for days, many Marines say the recent combat escalated into more than they had planned for, but not more than they could handle.

“It’s a war,” said Cpl. Nicholas Bogert, 22, of Morris, N.Y.

Bogert is a mortar team leader who directed his men to fire round after round of high explosives and white phosphorus charges into the city Friday and Saturday, never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused.

“We had all this SASO (security and stabilization operations) training back home,” he said. “And then this turns into a real goddamned war.”

Just as his team started to eat a breakfast of packaged rations Saturday, Bogert got a fire mission over the radio.

“Stand by!” he yelled, sending Lance Cpls. Jonathan Alexander and Jonathan Millikin scrambling to their feet.

Shake ‘n’ bake

Joking and rousting each other like boys just seconds before, the men were instantly all business. With fellow Marines between them and their targets, a lot was at stake.

Bogert received coordinates of the target, plotted them on a map and called out the settings for the gun they call “Sarah Lee.”

Millikin, 21, from Reno, Nev., and Alexander, 23, from Wetumpka, Ala., quickly made the adjustments. They are good at what they do.

“Gun up!” Millikin yelled when they finished a few seconds later, grabbing a white phosphorus round from a nearby ammo can and holding it over the tube.

“Fire!” Bogert yelled, as Millikin dropped it.

The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call “shake ‘n’ bake” into a cluster of buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week.

They say they have never seen what they’ve hit, nor did they talk about it as they dusted off their breakfast and continued their hilarious routine of personal insults and name-calling.

What do you think this says that supports your contention? Kos is irrelevant; no denying that WP was used and it is a weapon, so using it as a weapon is no great stretch.

The instructive phrase in the anecdote above is this: “Bogert received coordinates of the target, plotted them on a map….”

Coordinates were received from someone with eyes on the target; a Forward Observer. Cpl Bogert plotted the coordinates on the map both as verification of his instructions and for accountability purposes after action.

Nothing indiscriminate about what is described; mortars and artilelry are indirect fre weapons. The tube crews almost never actually see what they are shooting at. It’s the FOs that keep the process aboveboard.

After watchig the video, I have to agree with teh artillery officer I mentioned earlier. The night pictures showing a burst in the sky of sparks trailing streamers of smoke are rocket backblast from heliborne launchers.

In the entire video there is no image that I can identify as WP.

Go here to see daylight photos of WP munitions detonations. http://www.coralstrand.karoo.net/contents/f_gallery.htm

Interesting. Well, I see that the issue made network news last night. I feel confident that it will be questioned and investigated. If we are using WP and any new napalm-like chemical weapons, that has to be known. If not, well, I still think that we need to question the reason for razing Fallujah.

There’s no “if” to the question. We have used Mk-77s which are napalm-like. We have used WP. No doubts.

There’s just nothing presently legaly wrong with doing so. The answer to this, if you feel so motivated (I do not) is to change the law.

By all means, question Fallujah and the Iraq campaign and the whole war on terror. It’s the only way to keep the process lawful. It’s a part of my function as a Soldier and especially as an NCO to ask these questions in the moment. It’s your duty as a citizen to question those decisions as well.