Originally posted by
[email protected] 9 2005, 11:49 AM
it is not a chemical weapon when used for illumination or destruction of equipment, but i a chemical weapon when use against humans. I have heard of the use of napalm also. they call it mk-77(?) but it has the same effect. Democracy Now spent a good half an hour discussing the documentary, and even got a pentagon spokesman to appear. (this show how much they want to deny this, they usually ignore democracy now completley)
When used as a weapon, is a weapon. Simple.
"Reports by the Washington Post suggest that US armed forces used white phosphorus grenades and/or artillery shells, creating walls of fire in the city. Doctors working inside Fallujah report seeing melted corpses of suspected insurgents. The use of WP ammunition was confirmed from various independent sources, including US troops who had suffered WP burns due to 'friendly fire'"
"On November 13, 2004 a Red Crescent convoy containing humanitarian aid was delayed from entering Fallujah by the U.S. army."
"The United States had reportedly been using incendiaries in the 2003 invasion of Iraq [4]. In August 2003, the Pentagon confirmed the use of Mark 77 firebombs.
"We napalmed both those [bridge] approaches," said Colonel James Alles, commander of Marine Air Group 11. "Unfortunately there were people there ... you could see them in the cockpit video. They were Iraqi soldiers. It's no great way to die. The generals love napalm. It has a big psychological effect."
And yes, the MK-77 Firebombs were used extensibely against Fallujah and things such as bridges and whatnot, and the Colonel above even admitted he saw people being burned alive on a bridge.
This video makes it painfully clear that the US War Machine needs to be stopped.
:(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napalm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah#US-I...e_of_Nov_8_2004 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah#US-Iraqi_offensive_of_Nov_8_2004)