White Phosphorous was used in Fallujah in 2004. Watch this documentary, its 30 mins long.

Direct link, save as:

http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/inchiesta/video/fallujah_ING.wmv

The US is so hypocritical its not even funny.

~BRiney

I've not watched the documentary, nor have I really into the issue, but I must honestly say that I don't see what the problem is.  White phosphorous is an incendiary weapon, not a chemical or biological agent in the traditional sense.  It certainly isn't a weapon of mass destruction.

How is the use of white phosphorous in Iraq any different than using a traditional "backpack" flame thrower in World War II and in Korea, or airborne napalm in Vietnam?

-b0b
(...doesn't see the problem is.)

I don't see it as such.  It has always been my understanding that the government takes a very realist approach to the way it forms it policy... which basically leaves its options open.  In relative terms this "war" has been humane.  Contrast this with the "heroic" actions of the WWII generation who carpet bombed entire German cities, fire bombed Japanese cities that killed more civilians than the atom bombs did, and set up concentration camps that are still considered legal.  And this is only the tip of the iceberg of what I am sure are many other unethical actions.

In short, this is nothing new.

I agree that this is nothing new, and the atrocities committed by both sides in World War II are too many to be properly named. I was merely referring to the U.S. policy of not targeting civilians and using unsanctioned weapons as being hypocritical to what actually goes on.

Another shady dealing by the United States was during the Indonesian invasion of East Timor in the early 70's. The U.S. is always on a soap box preaching about the evils of genocide but East Timor was allowed to be taken over by Indonesia with barely a peep by Western leaders.  It just so happened that Indonesia is a very large oil exporter and they "coincidentaly" used United States military equipment. In the middle of this massacre where hundreds of thousands were being murdered, the Indonesian Army ran out of ammo and equipment and Jimmy Carter signed another deal with them for more equipment, and they continued with their atrocity.

Cambodia was another example. In 1969 the United States began a 4 year carpet bombing campaign which murdered hundreds of thousands of Cambodians. Not a single thing reported. Pol Pot comes out and startes killing Cambodians and all of a sudden its a world outcry of genocide.

I'm pissed because noone is speaking for these people. They are being abused and murdered in Iraq and all we hear is how American soldiers are being killed. Any loss of life is horrible but the media has totally forgetten or overlooked war crimes committed by the United States.

I totally agree with you David, this is not a new occurance. I can't even begin to imagine the horror of the napalm bombings of Tokyo in WW II. American bombers would come in from 2 different angles and drop napalm over the city in the form of an X. This huge burning X could be seen for miles. Then the rest of the bombers would come in and destroy everything in the spaces between the lines. This was to ensure total destruction.

South Park nailed it when they said the U.S. is all about saying one thing and doing another.

~BRiney

(...viva la revolution)

WHAT?!  YOU'RE NOT FOR THE WAR?!  THEN YOU MUST NOT SUPPORT THE TROOPS!!!  YOU'RE NOT AMERICAN!!!  YOU HATE AMERICA!!  WE ARE AT WAR WHY DON'T YOU SUPPORT BUSH AND GIVING HIM MORE POWER!  DON'T ASK ABOUT YOUR RIGHTS, THESE TROOPS NEED TO CURB SOME OF YOUR RIGHTS TO PROTECT YOU AND YOUR RIGHTS!

X
(Thought about injecting some humor into the situation)

X, I get the point, I just want to avoid bringing in the ethics of using such a weapon because in the final analysis, it is pretty much moot.  Any government--and we can even bring this down to the individual-- will do whatever is necessary to achieve their aims.

What I am trying to say is that while America tries to paint a veneer of being high and moral while doing things to the contrary is hypocritical (Jason is compeletely right on that point), my point is... So what?  What do you expect?

Perhaps I'm just a big cynic, but I don't believe that trying to adhere to idealistic values can be done.  As to whether the ends justify the means, I believe that it can.

MediaMaster wrote on Nov 16^th, 2005 at 7:23pm:




Revolution.  Sure, it's not necessary yet, but things won't get any better.  I can pretty much guarantee that.

You know what?  Even a successful revolution wouldn't solve anything.  Even if by some miracle a coup would succeed and restore a 1776-style American government, it'd be a temporary victory.  Over time, America would be brought down by the same greed that has infected it today.  Greedy politicians and a greedy citizenry have destroyed this country, and they'll destroy it again.  Every great civilization has suffered the same fate.  It's not a problem with government or politicians, it's a problem with humanity.  There's only one man that's going to fix that, and we aren't it.

The only thing we can do is continue to fight the good fight (overlooking our occasional disagreements) to slow down America's descent.  Ultimately, America is doomed and there isn't a thing any of us can do about it.  I call it "Pax Americana."

-b0b
(...buy guns, buy gold.)

The cure for 1984 is 1776.  Viva la revolution!

-b0b
(...should buy more ammo.)