jesus mu-shu dumplings wrote:
US admits use of white phosphorous in Iraq
http://www.dawn.com/2005/11/17/top13.htm

WASHINGTON, Nov 16: The Pentagon has admitted that
US troops used white phosphorus as a weapon against
insurgents in the Iraqi city of Fallujah last November.
"It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy
combatants," military spokesman Lt-Col Barry Venable
told the BBC in Washington.

snip

White phosphorous, in a form used by the military, ignites when
it is exposed to oxygen, producing such heat that it bursts into a
yellow flame and produces a dense white smoke. It is used to
mark enemy targets and to produce smoke for concealing troop
movements. It can also be used as an incendiary device to
firebomb enemy positions. It continues to burn until deprived
of oxygen and, if extinguished with water, can later reignite
if the particles dry out and are exposed again to the air.


Not exactly. It can burn all the way through and out the other side.
No need to stop at the bone. Water will not extinguish it. It will
stop burning when it is deprived of oxygen or consumed.

White phosphorous can cause painful burn injuries to
exposed human flesh. If particles of ignited white phosphorus
land on a person's skin, they can continue to burn right
through flesh to the bone. Toxic phosphoric acid can
also be released into wounds, risking phosphorus poisoning.
Exposure to white phosphorus smoke in the air can also
cause liver, kidney, heart, lung or bone damage and even death.


Phosphorus isn't toxic enough to kill except in extremely large
quantities. This kind of poisioning will make you sick, little else.
The internal damage depicted here is unsupported by any information I
have seen.

A former US soldier who served in Iraq says breathing in
smoke close to a shell caused the throat and lungs to blister
until the victim suffocated, with the phosphorus continuing
to burn them from the inside.


He was discussing things he does not know about. False.

Despite initial denials, the Pentagon has now acknowledged on
Tuesday that US troops had used the substance as
an incendiary weapon against insurgent strongholds there.

The Pentagon has not denied the use of White Phosphorus.

The UN Convention bans the use of incendiary weapons against civilans,
not against humans.
See for yourself:
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/515?OpenDocument

Of course any deliberate engagement or targeting of civilians is
already a war crime. so that the US has not signed this one is not of
especial import except to say that we aren't bound by it expressly.

White Phosphorus is not banned.

It also isn't a chemical weapon.
We are signtory to the Chemical Weapons Convention which defines
chemical weapons. See he
http://www.opcw.org/html/db/cwc/eng/cwc_frameset.html

So it isn't a chemical weapon and it isn't banned.

Indiscriminate use is. The stories circulating do not support that
contention. See he
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2004...q/19_30_504_10...


Bogert received the coordinates for the targets and recorded them on a
map. This is proper procedure. He's receiving coordinates from a
Forward Observer, indirect fire weapons never see their targets, the
FOs do. The coordinates are plotted so that it is known what was
ordered where. There is also a verification that takes place in the
call for indirect fire to avoid problems with numerical transposition
or other mistakes.

In article .com, RTO
Trainer wrote:

jesus mu-shu dumplings wrote:
US admits use of white phosphorous in Iraq
http://www.dawn.com/2005/11/17/top13.htm

WASHINGTON, Nov 16: The Pentagon has admitted that
US troops used white phosphorus as a weapon against
insurgents in the Iraqi city of Fallujah last November.
"It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy
combatants," military spokesman Lt-Col Barry Venable
told the BBC in Washington.

snip

White phosphorous, in a form used by the military, ignites when
it is exposed to oxygen, producing such heat that it bursts into a
yellow flame and produces a dense white smoke. It is used to
mark enemy targets and to produce smoke for concealing troop
movements. It can also be used as an incendiary device to
firebomb enemy positions. It continues to burn until deprived
of oxygen and, if extinguished with water, can later reignite
if the particles dry out and are exposed again to the air.


Not exactly. It can burn all the way through and out the other side.
No need to stop at the bone. Water will not extinguish it. It will
stop burning when it is deprived of oxygen or consumed.

Perhaps there is confusion here about poisoning by phosphorus
ingestion, which the toxicology textbooks do cover since WP was once a
major ingredient in a rat poison, which somehow became popular for
suicide in some subcultures. Eating WP will usually kill by destroying
the kidneys, but if that is survived and the phosphate ion gets into
the system, it will bond to bone.

White phosphorous can cause painful burn injuries to
exposed human flesh. If particles of ignited white phosphorus
land on a person's skin, they can continue to burn right
through flesh to the bone. Toxic phosphoric acid can
also be released into wounds, risking phosphorus poisoning.

Clearly, this has to be quantified. Carbonated beverages, in the 19th
and early 20th century, were called "phosphates" as phosphoric acid was
used to generate carbon dioxide and still some flavoring. You will
still find it in the ingredients of many sodas, especially colas.

Phosphoric acid is a very good rust remover, which is why soaking a
part in Coca-Cola can work. More commonly, people use trisodium
phosphate, the active ingredient in many laundry detergents, for rust
removal.

Phosphorus is a normal and necessary component of the body; one of the
key energy transfer mechanisms is the reversible conversion of
adenosine triphosphate (ATP) to diphosphate (ADP). Ironically, too
much phosphorus, especially in laundry detergents, creates a water
purity problem: it overstimulates the growth of algae.

Exposure to white phosphorus smoke in the air can also
cause liver, kidney, heart, lung or bone damage and even death.


Phosphorus isn't toxic enough to kill except in extremely large
quantities. This kind of poisioning will make you sick, little else.
The internal damage depicted here is unsupported by any information I
have seen.

Despite initial denials, the Pentagon has now acknowledged on
Tuesday that US troops had used the substance as
an incendiary weapon against insurgent strongholds there.

The Pentagon has not denied the use of White Phosphorus.

The UN Convention bans the use of incendiary weapons against civilans,
not against humans.
See for yourself:
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/515?OpenDocument

Of course any deliberate engagement or targeting of civilians is
already a war crime. so that the US has not signed this one is not of
especial import except to say that we aren't bound by it expressly.

White Phosphorus is not banned.

It also isn't a chemical weapon.
We are signtory to the Chemical Weapons Convention which defines
chemical weapons. See he
http://www.opcw.org/html/db/cwc/eng/cwc_frameset.html

So it isn't a chemical weapon and it isn't banned.

Napalm or napalm-like incendiary weapons are not outlawed.
International law permits their use against military forces.

Incendiary devices like white phosphorous were banned by the Geneva
Convention.
The U.S. did not sign the relevant protocol to the convention.

The use of white phosphorus or fuel air explosives are not prohibited or
restricted by Protocol II: http://www.nawcwpns.navy.mil/~treaty/CCWC.html

What is restricted is the purposeful and malicious targeting or making
civilian populations the object of attack by incendiary weapons and
restricts the use of incendiary weapons against military targets located
within a concentration of civilians, and from what evidences are given and
shown, there is little to no evidence given to conclusively indicate or
prove that the US did in fact purposely and maliciously target civilians for
attack with white phosphorous or other incendiary weaponry or devices in or
within Fallujah.

What appears to be white phosphorous in the Italian Neo-Kommie propaganda
video has not been substantiated by any type of forensic evidence
whatsoever.

Probably will not be long before reports start circulating that the US
somehow used Agent Orange in Fallujah and parts of Iraq, as well.

"SeeingEyeDog" wrote in message
...

Probably will not be long before reports start circulating that the US
somehow used Agent Orange in Fallujah and parts of Iraq, as well.

We do know that the US has been using depleted uranium [DU]
in several types of ordinance. Nasty crap. Has a half life of
about 50K Years and atomizes into fine particles when it
is dispersed by the resulting explosive charge around which the
shaped DU is wrapped. Nice ****. Great way to get rid of
the depleted nuclear waste from our reactors eh folks ???

Parts of Iraq will literally be radioactive
HOT half a million Years from now.

This is FAR WORSE than any alleged uses of WP.
Adleast that crap is inert after it burns out. DU is HOT
for 50,000 Years !

See: http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/du.htm

The Meatball Preacher wrote:
"SeeingEyeDog" wrote in message
...

Probably will not be long before reports start circulating that the US
somehow used Agent Orange in Fallujah and parts of Iraq, as well.

We do know that the US has been using depleted uranium [DU]
in several types of ordinance. Nasty crap. Has a half life of
about 50K Years and atomizes into fine particles when it
is dispersed by the resulting explosive charge around which the
shaped DU is wrapped. Nice ****. Great way to get rid of
the depleted nuclear waste from our reactors eh folks ???


DU is 0.7 times as radioactive as natural uranium, which is considered
"slightly radioactive". Since DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion years,
there is very little decay of those DU.

DU does not atomize. Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Debunking yet another lie about Iraq. - John Metzler.
www.worldtribune.com
cuhulin

wrote:

DU does not atomize.

That was the original thinking. Studies have since shown that DU
particles become small enough to become wind borne and have been found
up to 25 miles from the impact site.

Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

In article , Carter-K8VT
wrote:

wrote:

DU does not atomize.

That was the original thinking. Studies have since shown that DU
particles become small enough to become wind borne and have been found
up to 25 miles from the impact site.

Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

I'm interested in qualified scientific studies in this area. Have you
any citations?

Carter-K8VT wrote:
wrote:

DU does not atomize.

That was the original thinking. Studies have since shown that DU
particles become small enough to become wind borne and have been found
up to 25 miles from the impact site.

Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.

Also not true. The latest studies *have* found significant amounts of DU
retained in humans.

This is someting I've been trying to follow. Can you offer a poiner to
a study or a sory about it?

Failing that, do you know how long between exposure and measuring the
DU in the system?

wrote:

DU does not atomize. Recent research suggests that the particles of DU
when pulverized by such actions a armor impacts are too large to be
retained in the human body for any appreciable time and will be
rejected. If so, there is little or no danger that DU will build up in
a human even with repeated exposures.




http://www.firethistime.org/extremedeformities.htm