U.S. uses napalm gas in Fallujah

[GiaOmerta]

america can do plenty wrong(just like france), but to accept what al jazeera says in a obvously sensationalist article is well...stupid.

Amen.

I see no weight in this article.

For the most part I dont believe most forms of media, but especially Al Jazeera, the Iraqi television station, that aired many of these beheadings.

Napalm burns at about 900-1,300°C, on average. Bodies dont melt at that tempature.
Napalm can also cause carbon monoxide poisoning. I wouldnt classify Napalm as a poison gas. It was originally developed for clearing out jungles, I.E. Vietnam.

And besides, the majority of civilian population has left Fallujah. They were given fair warning that shit was going to hit the fan. This is war. War isnt fair. Never has been fought fair.

 

[CptStern]

Amen.

I see no weight in this article.

For the most part I dont believe most forms of media, but especially Al Jazeera, the Iraqi television station, that aired many of these beheadings.

Napalm burns at about 900-1,300°C, on average. Bodies dont melt at that tempature.
Napalm can also cause carbon monoxide poisoning. I wouldnt classify Napalm as a poison gas. It was originally developed for clearing out jungles, I.E. Vietnam.

And besides, the majority of civilian population has left Fallujah. They were given fair warning that shit was going to hit the fan. This is war. War isnt fair. Never has been fought fair.

that's what the geneva accords are for, which the US tends to ignore. I still cant believe some of you are trying to justify using a napalm like substance ...it's pretty pathetic when you dehumanize what's going on by glossing over the fact that the US is using weapons that take out huge areas at a time. I dont see them taking too many precautions in ensuring that the civilian population isnt in the middle of the "shit hitting the fan". It really brings into question the stated reasons for going to war.


btw you obviously supprt the war in iraq so at one time you must have listened to the propaganda being spewed by the the "mainstream" media or else you wouldnt have supported it now would you?.

 

[Eg.]

ok.. military math

1 bomb 40,000 dollars
10 city blocks, (bomb and plane) 60,000

not having to waste an american life to get a job done, priceless

 

[gh0st]

that's what the geneva accords are for, which the US tends to ignore. I still cant believe some of you are trying to justify using a napalm like substance ...it's pretty pathetic when you dehumanize what's going on by glossing over the fact that the US is using weapons that take out huge areas at a time. I dont see them taking too many precautions in ensuring that the civilian population isnt in the middle of the "shit hitting the fan". It really brings into question the stated reasons for going to war.


btw you obviously supprt the war in iraq so at one time you must have listened to the propaganda being spewed by the the "mainstream" media or else you wouldnt have supported it now would you?.

stern where have you seen that these weapons have been used inside a city in iraq?

also, im not sure your thinking of the same geneva convention as everyone else is. please dont gloss over the fact that GC3 refers to civilians

during times of war "in the hands" of an enemy and under any occupation by a foreign power.

iraqi insurgents do not quantify a foreign power. quit using the geneva convention to your ends all the time. youd misinterpret the document, saying somebullshit like "war is against the geneva convention."

 

[CptStern]

stern where have you seen that these weapons have been used inside a city in iraq?

while it's true there is some circumstantial evidence that napalm was used in Fallujah, I will point out that it was used extensively throughout the war (not occupation) ...of course the military tries to justify it by saying it isnt napalm but rather "it's similiar to napalm" ...I'm sure that distinction is lost on it's victems


"Since the beginning of the US-attack on Fallujah the city is almost completely closed; which means that men between 15 and 55 are not allowed to leave the city. Helicopters and Snipers shoot on those who try to flee. The city is bombed all day, 7 days a week. US-army Sources say about 1200 "insurgents" have been killed; the number of dead civilians is not reported - and, probably: not counted. At the moment there are still about 50.000 to 100.000 people in the city. There is no medical aid for them. They have wether electricity nor water or food.
The US-army uses Napalm and Phosphor in Falluja"

source

during the war:

"American pilots dropped the controversial incendiary agent napalm on Iraqi troops during the advance on Baghdad. The attacks caused massive fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.

The Pentagon denied using napalm at the time, but Marine pilots and their commanders have confirmed that they used an upgraded version of the weapon against dug-in positions. They said napalm, which has a distinctive smell, was used because of its psychological effect on an enemy. "

"In an interview with the San Diego Union-Tribune, Marine Corps Maj-Gen Jim Amos confirmed that napalm was used on several occasions in the war. "

source

source

also, im not sure your thinking of the same geneva convention as everyone else is. please dont gloss over the fact that GC3 refers to civilians

wrong, the accords talk about enemy combatants as well as civilians

iraqi insurgents do not quantify a foreign power. quit using the geneva convention to your ends all the time. youd misinterpret the document, saying somebullshit like "war is against the geneva convention."

sure, the US managed to weasel it's way out of responsibility by claiming the insurgents are not an organized army but the charges of dropping napalm was DURING the war, not during the occupation


btw gh0st you disgust me ..why does it matter if the insurgents are not a national army? does that give the US carte blanche to do whatever they want, no matter how dispicable no matter how inhumane ..in that sense they are no better than the insurgents

 

[gh0st]

while it's true there is some circumstantial evidence that napalm was used in Fallujah, I will point out that it was used extensively throughout the war (not occupation) ...of course the military tries to justify it by saying it isnt napalm but rather "it's similiar to napalm" ...I'm sure that distinction is lost on it's victems

yeah, poor insurgents. better ask their feelings about our bombs before we bomb them. no wonder your military is the institution it is, youd be polling your enemies for the least painful way to attack them.

"Since the beginning of the US-attack on Fallujah the city is almost completely closed; which means that men between 15 and 55 are not allowed to leave the city. Helicopters and Snipers shoot on those who try to flee. The city is bombed all day, 7 days a week. US-army Sources say about 1200 "insurgents" have been killed; the number of dead civilians is not reported - and, probably: not counted. At the moment there are still about 50.000 to 100.000 people in the city. There is no medical aid for them. They have wether electricity nor water or food.
The US-army uses Napalm and Phosphor in Falluja"

they had their chance to leave, if they are still there its their own problem.

"American pilots dropped the controversial incendiary agent napalm on Iraqi troops during the advance on Baghdad. The attacks caused massive fireballs that obliterated several Iraqi positions.

The Pentagon denied using napalm at the time, but Marine pilots and their commanders have confirmed that they used an upgraded version of the weapon against dug-in positions. They said napalm, which has a distinctive smell, was used because of its psychological effect on an enemy. "

i will admit that it most likely was used during the war. i doubt very much that it was used in cities though, and none of your evidence seems to support that.

wrong, the accords talk about enemy combatants as well as civilians

i know. there are several geneva conventions, the one you speak of refers to a national standing army, of which the insurgency is not.

sure, the US managed to weasel it's way out of responsibility by claiming the insurgents are not an organized army but the charges of dropping napalm was DURING the war, not during the occupation

youre the one bringing up the geneva convention every 2 seconds, im just pointing out that its not particularly relevant right now

btw gh0st you disgust me ..why does it matter if the insurgents are not a national army? does that give the US carte blanche to do whatever they want, no matter how dispicable no matter how inhumane ..in that sense they are no better than the insurgents

i assure you, the feelings mutual. it matters because you lied by saying the geneva convention applied to insurgent terrorists.

regarding this whole napalm thing, stern, you dont know the specifics of the weapon. you dont know how similar or disimilar it is to vietnam era napalm, you are just vomitting out what your indy media bullshit has to say. since cnn has reported this "napalm" issue, i doubt its much of an issue at all, since if something illegal was done it would be all over by now. al jazeera making it an issue doesnt count either, ALJ should be disqualified as a source, as well as foxnews (i only say that as a compromise, i respect foxes journalism much more than al jazeeras)

 

[GiaOmerta]

The ironic thing is, many of these insurgents are foreign fighters.

al jazeera making it an issue doesnt count either, ALJ should be disqualified as a source

Indeed, Al Jazeera is not a valid source. They have hosted the violent beheadings. They themselves should be punished for fueling the fires of these rebellions.

And for these terrorists. They are barbarians. They have no regard for human life. They should be treated as such. My government shouldnt pay for them to live, but rather yet pay for their death.

 

[CptStern]

"insurgents" are not all terrorists. If a foreign country occupied the US of A would you not fight in a milita? would you not use everything in your means to expel the invaders? wouldnt there always be some other group some other faction of americans who would so desperately want their country to free that they would do anything to achieve it?

you've both been so inundated with a barrage of american indoctrination that you've traded your own inate sense of decency for a bit of cloth and an ideal. In this sense you are no better than the people you wish to rid the world of.

 

[hasan]

I really am not interested in reading 9 pages of debate aobut fox or something ..

but just to let you know, aljazeera.com is NOT the website of aljazeera.

The website of Al Jazeera is http://english.aljazeera.net

 

[A True Canadian]

I really am not interested in reading 9 pages of debate aobut fox or something ..

but just to let you know, aljazeera.com is NOT the website of aljazeera.

The website of Al Jazeera is http://english.aljazeera.net

Thanks for clearing that up. But even the official site hints that the US is using chemical weapons:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F0A47D67-7D17-4140-A992-2AEC1CF0624A.htm

"There is a terrible crime going in Falluja and they do not want anybody to know. I transferred four injured people from the Jordanian field hospital to a hospital in Baghdad.

"They told me that there is a crime in there; chemical weapons are being used. The corpses don't have traces of gunshots but black patches.

Now I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but it does appear that something strange is going on in Iraq at the moment. I realize that it is a time of war, and secrets must be kept to gain an advantage, but it's little things like this that cause one the wonder...

 

[KoreBolteR]

why would i want to know the site of al jazeera, they help recruit terrorists, and are in some ways terrorists sitting behind a dest reading to the middle east, and now try to sell thier shit all over the world, to make al-qaeda bigger

 

[Kangy]

why would i want to know the site of al jazeera, they help recruit terrorists, and are in some ways terrorists sitting behind a dest reading to the middle east, and now try to sell thier shit all over the world, to make al-qaeda bigger

It's nice to know you're educated on this matter. Especially when you won't even look at the only English media they provide, assuming you can't read and understand Arabic.

 

[KoreBolteR]

i have some arabic friends who also hate al-jazeera

 

[The Mullinator]

My parents are friends with an Egyption born engineer. They are always recieving jokes from him about Bush as he absolutely hates Bush and the US media.

Last year he went to Egypt for a week, when he came back he told us something that I personally found unexpected:
He called Al-Jazeera the Fox news of the middle east. He hated it because he called it extremelly biased.

Now he hates both the US media and Al-jazeera. I just thought I would add that to the mix here.

 

[KoreBolteR]

its like a far right and far left situation, LOL
i watch bbc or sky news tho ROFL

 

[Eg.]

ive got an egyptian girl in my school, in america, that thinks that the US is the devil land, and that the gassing of the kurds by saddam never happened.

 

[gh0st]

ive got an egyptian girl in my school, in america, that thinks that the US is the devil land, and that the gassing of the kurds by saddam never happened.

is she hot?

 

[Tr0n]

is she hot?

Grow up.

 

[KoreBolteR]

is she hot?

ROFLROFLROFL

 

[Eg.]

naw, headscarf, really short, nasal vioce, always going on how the evil americans blah blah blah. but i got this hot 6 foot asian-polsih girl, hmm.

 

[seinfeldrules]

is she hot?

hahahaha :cheers:

 

[Kangy]

Actually, you have been using napalm in Iraq, and it came from the mouth of a US soldier serving there at the time of the interview.

To quote F9/11

Trooper: So we called in for some artillery... napalm, y'know. Some citizens got badly burnt...

Or something close to those lines.

 

[firemachine69]

napalm is not a "banned" weapon.

it is not a "gas" it is petrol in jellied form.

it does not "melt" human bodies as the article claims, it simply burns them

i bet your one of those people who say fox news is "propaganda" but believe everything aljazeera says ROFL!!

Correct on the napalm thing.

 

[CptStern]

I'm sure the victems of said "napalm/whatever" appreciate the difference

burned or melted ...horrible horrible way to die

 

[aeroripper]

All is can say is that is that if we really are using chemical weapons in falluah (sp) the people responbile for ordering that should be thrown in prison. It seems to me like the military is trying to "find loopholes" in the geneva convention so we can do all these things. From what it looks like it doesn't specifically state "insurgents" (i might be wrong, i havn't read it)... but you'd figure we should be somewhat moral about it being the " "moral" " country we are... you know since we're all high and mighty about banning a few gay people getting married rather than using banned weapons and killing thousands.

And don't throw that crap in my face about "oh but saddam killed lots and lots of people" .... i get tired of hearing that same excreiment everyday on every mainstream news channel in america. Yes saddam was a bad guy... he's gone now but we're not by ANY means the "white knight" riding in to rescue the Iraqi's and spread "freedom" and deliver them from the "terrorists". Spin spin spin that's not what's happening...

Like others have mentioned and weighing the different facts saddam used chemical weapons that we gave and funded him in the late 80s\90s (maybe earlier i don't remember) but now we got to scold him and make him out to be this huge threat to national security and rumsfield told 4 star army generals how to fight this and now we're a lot more soldiers for it.

It just seems like a big case of the ends doesn't justify the means.

Yes will took out saddam... but we are pretty much destroying their infrasture and not really caring that much about the toll its taking on the population. So if any questions come up to why all the cilvilans are dying we can just blame saddams old regime and how he killed and gassed people and then everybody loves the war again.

Also i don't think its justified that these "insurgents" go and kidnap innocent people and behead them. Those sound like the actions of a desperate man (i would be too if facing a vastly more powerful military force...) but i would never do anything like that.

Also what other people said about how it all seems so "scientifically calculated" and mostly bloodless on the american news. We like our wars without the grit and like to think its really "not that bad". I was watching a show on my local news the other day and they took a poll and like 70% of the people said they would rather see more war info and less time spent covering the anti-war\videos of bomb ridden towns. Why? You can't have your cake and eat it to.

And its definitely not right to just get a new version of napalm and use it since "uhh... its not NAPALM... that's what you guys banned right? Well we sure don't use that stuff... we use "NAPALL II"... what it sounds like napalm!? No it doesn't we don't use banned weapons and stuff"" -us military

Funny how the "rules" don't apply the power that needs to follow them the most. How are they gonna really do anything about it anyways? Is the UN gonna have sanctions against us? Hell no... Are the EU countries going to give us a final warning and bomb us? Hell no

No one can really do anything to us about it so why follow the rules? It's like this current administration doesn't care about things like that.

What about patriot act and patriot act II that just passed? (the 3,000 page report that they only had what, a hour to read it?)... which likely includes a national ID card biometric scheme and all kinds of other police-state powers... well that's for another discussion

sorry for jumping all other the place i'm not very concise

 

[Steve]

Edited, because I need to learn to read the whole thread before I post.

 

[aeroripper]

I was referring to this post:

Thanks for clearing that up. But even the official site hints that the US is using chemical weapons:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F0A47D67-7D17-4140-A992-2AEC1CF0624A.htm



Now I don't want to jump to any conclusions, but it does appear that something strange is going on in Iraq at the moment. I realize that it is a time of war, and secrets must be kept to gain an advantage, but it's little things like this that cause one the wonder...

EDIT: Yea i had a long post hehe... if they really are using them maybe its because they want to "make sure" they've taken it this time. I think they tried to take it back in april but failed, i think the media was real quiet about that back then. If it got out to the public that they couldn't take falluah it would pin the nail in the coffin on our efforts to "stablize" the country before elections. It's all about the image.

Another note: does anyone else think its ridiculous and extremely ignorant\niave to think we can just switch them to a democracy\republic before their country is even remotely secure? I think this war is quickly turning into another vietnam. It'd give it at least 10 years before democracy can actually work effectively... maybe 20 years...

and the whole method of were supposedly "giving them the freedom of democracy" may not be the ideal government for them. What we see as political freedom they might see as decadance towards god.

 

[Choscura]

just out of spite, i'd like to point out that the bush administration is marginally forced to lie to keep the critics from poncing all over them. when you think about it, it really IS a bad idea to leave something like napalm out in the open, because the human rights assholes jump all over it.

how about this to chew on: war is about killing, plain and simple. anything that kills more of them and keeps them from killing more of you is a suitable weapon. what is so hard to understand about this? if the human rights people want to go out and line up and get ready to be shot, i'm perfectly happy to sit and watch them die in a 'fair' fight.

 

[CptStern]

no it's not a war ..it's an occupation. They are supposed to be "helping"

 

[Choscura]

its a war until they stop fighting back. because, as you know, we have to wait for them to fire the first shot, according to the geneva convention.

 

[CptStern]

its a war until they stop fighting back.

maybe they should just lie down and accept the fact that a foreign army is occupying their country

 

[Eg.]

and if they dont we should kill them or put them in hard labor camps. worked for stalin

 

[CptStern]

actually i think people like you should be put to death at birth ..or better yet maybe your parents should have been sterilized




..now doesnt that sound a little extreme when the shoe's on the other foot?

 

[Eg.]

meh, thats the thing,

ur in canada.

that nation has no power

70% of ur exports go to the US. we embargo u for 2 day ur economy will crumble. along with the fact that ur amry will go bankrupt by 2010, menaing the US will cover ass for everything, it also means that turning canada into a new puerto rico will be pretty easy.

 

[CptStern]

sure pally :upstare:

they'd be cutting off their number one source of oil ..not gonna happen with oily bush in power


you need us :E

 

[Eg.]

. 50 percent of our oild comes form saudi arabia, so canada can die, we dont need u. maybe for laughs and weed

 

[CptStern]

wrong, boyo

 

[^Ben]

wrong, boyo

:golfclap:

 

[Eg.]

505 of our oil comes from saudi arabia, and therefor canada si useless

 

[CptStern]

505 of our oil comes from saudi arabia, and therefor canada si useless

505? 505? barrels? 505 monkeys? 505 barrels of monkeys? Oh wait % symbol is right above the number 5 key ..hmmm could you have made a typo? your spelling is impeccable :E

hey pally, look at the link, saudi arabia contributes 14.5% annually ..putting it in second place ...probably the reason why you havent invaded saudi arabia the terrorist capital of the world, therefore the same would apply to canada. Nah nah nah no invasion for you!!