What the fuck is this,...

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Rono

Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
Joined
Dec 26, 2000
Messages
6,163
Location
the Netherlands
Report: Marines dropped devices similar to Napalm on Iraqi troops
Associated Press

SAN DIEGO - Marine Corps fighter pilots and commanders say they dropped firebombs similar to napalm on Iraqi troops earlier this year, according to a report published Tuesday.

The Marines say that in March, U.S. warplanes dropped dozens of incendiary bombs near bridges over the Saddam Canal and the Tigris River in central Iraq to clear the way for troops headed to Baghdad.

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/6465972.htm

Is this true,...
 
Rono,

I posted about that in

so they blatantly lie and you dont care

i think it is true

scarletwine posted about it also.

wonder what sting2 would say about it
if he were still permitted to post here
 
Although many human rights groups consider incendiary bombs to be inhumane, international law does not prohibit their use against military forces.

It is not illegal and in some cases there may be a valid reason to use such a weapon.

Peace
 
when is it valid to use such inhumane weapons? I thought we supposedly learned our lesson in Vietnam? As long as the victims are Iraqis tho and not Vietnamese children and villagers, I guess it's all good. After all, their lives are cheaper. And if they suffer on the way out, so much the better. :tsk:
 
deep said:
wonder what sting2 would say about it
if he were still permitted to post here


please drop this now deep. a passive/aggressive approach to getting him back into fym won't help him. this is between STING2 and the moderating team and is being worked on.


thank you,
lilly
and team interference
 
sulawesigirl4 said:
when is it valid to use such inhumane weapons? I thought we supposedly learned our lesson in Vietnam? As long as the victims are Iraqis tho and not Vietnamese children and villagers, I guess it's all good. After all, their lives are cheaper. And if they suffer on the way out, so much the better. :tsk:

98...99...100

These weapons are designed and are effective at clearing mines and booby traps. That is what they were being used for on the bridges. The article clearly says that. Were there soldiers there, apparently so.

For you to interject "racism" into this is pretty pathetic.:tsk: I am not certain but it almost feels like that was directed at me, since I am the only one defending the use of these weapons in this thread.

The pilot's themselves in the article expressed sadness that there were Iraqi soldiers there when the went on their bombing run.

It is a war. If clearing mined and booby trapped bridges this way saves one American life, yes, I am for it. Not a racial issue, but a battle issue.

Peace Out.
 
Defend them if you want. I can't see how it's possible. I'm sorry. But there are some lines that shouldn't be crossed. Dropping napalm is one of them in my book. And if we're just supposed to shrug and say "oh well, war is hell" then I'm sorry but I'm not really able to do that either. Specially since it looks more and more like an illegitimate war that is still claiming innocent lives.
 
sulawesigirl4 said:
Defend them if you want. I can't see how it's possible. I'm sorry. But there are some lines that shouldn't be crossed. Dropping napalm is one of them in my book.

Again, the napalm was dropped to clear away mines and booby traps at a bridge. A very likely place for them. I suppose I defend it because if I were still in the service and ordered to cross a bridge I would expect them to do what they could to protect our lives and use strategies to protect our lives.



sulawesigirl4 said:
And if we're just supposed to shrug and say "oh well, war is hell" then I'm sorry but I'm not really able to do that either. Specially since it looks more and more like an illegitimate war that is still claiming innocent lives.

Those are your words, not mine. Again this is, like the racial implications of your other remark, a mis-characterization of my position.
 
Dreadsox said:
For you to interject "racism" into this is pretty pathetic.:tsk: I am not certain but it almost feels like that was directed at me, since I am the only one defending the use of these weapons in this thread.


dread-

please don't :tsk: on what people are writing in their posts, and calling it "pathetic" is unacceptable and you know it. sula's post was not directed at you. just because you're on different sides of the table, doesn't mean you can't discuss respectfully.

thank you :)
lilly

___________________________________________
napalm is going to be a very high-emotion discussion, for and against.


let's try and keep level heads in here :)
 
Sorry Lilly,

If I misinterpreted it. Clearly it must have been directed at someone else in the thread.

I will drop it,

Peace
 
Dreadsox said:


sulawesigirl4 said:
And if we're just supposed to shrug and say "oh well, war is hell" then I'm sorry but I'm not really able to do that either. Specially since it looks more and more like an illegitimate war that is still claiming innocent lives.

Those are your words, not mine. Again this is, like the racial implications of your other remark, a mis-characterization of my position.


she's not implying that you are a racist or otherwise marking your character. what you quoted off her had nothing to do with you, but rather with the subject of this thread.

Clearly it must have been directed at someone else in the thread.

it wasn't directed at anyone dread, it was directed at the subject. she didn't quote you or say your name, there's nothing to lead to that conclusion. i know it's a hard subject. let's try and keep personal things out of it. please :)
________________

i realize that we need to secure as much as we can putting our troops in as little danger as possible. but napalm is a touchy subject....so let's respect eachother and keep the remaining posts of this thread on topic please.

thanks :)
 
Last edited:
Just as an fyi, everything that is posted doesn't always necessarily have to be "directed at" someone in the thread. It is possible to be upset and just generally angry and heartsick at a situation.
 
I am officially Done. Peace

EDITED: MEaning...too tired to continue.
 
Last edited:
Rono said:
Using poison gas can also very effective,...

At clearing mines and booby traps? Really....

Again, the article you posted pretty much demonstrates my point, that the pilot's were not targeting bridges and the soldiers got caught in it.

After doing a look up on the MARK 77 it is designed for use against mines and booby traps.

International law says it is NOT illegal.

Peace
 
Last edited:
Dreadsox said:
International law says it is NOT illegal.

Peace

youre right. its not.

that doesnt mean its not reprehensible. i know, it was for the safety of the troops. its just tough to believe that was the best option.
 
Dreadsox said:


At clearing mines and booby traps? Really....

Again, the article you posted pretty much demonstrates my point, that the pilot's were not targeting bridges and the soldiers got caught in it.

After doing a look up on the MARK 77 it is designed for use against mines and booby traps.

International law says it is NOT illegal.

Peace
It just unlucky for the Iraq soldiers when they hit by this awfull weapon, just a minor unconcivience,....it are only stupid Iraqies and our moral standards are so high that we do not have to care,...
 
it was your eye-catching title got me in rono

all I can do is tell stories about people I know and love ( I do love people I don't know...but I don't know their stories)
A baby boy was born on the day I was married, that makes him 22. He became a good friend of mine. He thrived at school, did us proud.He was school captain and captain of the footy team and had a professional football career ahead of him until he tore his knee. So he joined the Australian Airforce and was promptly sent to Iraq. He is currently guarding the rebuilding works going on at the Baghdad airport. I saw his younger brother the other day and asked after him, I said it must be pretty scary with all the sniping going on there now. His brother said he is more scared of the Americans, they are trigger happy. Just my story from a young man who is there right now.
He also told me his brother is hungry, they aren't getting enough to eat. It's been getting to him, watching others get food packages from home. I've been wondering what I can send to him, poor kid....to all the poor kids.
My story...the end.


How can anyone forget those images of napalm as used in Vietnam?
 
Rono said:
It just unlucky for the Iraq soldiers when they hit by this awfull weapon, just a minor unconcivience,....it are only stupid Iraqies and our moral standards are so high that we do not have to care,...

Never said it was minor....
Never said they were stupid....
Never said I did not care.....

Thanks for the intelligent debate.

Feel free to block me. I would rather be blocked than have someone mischaracterize what I said.


Thanks.
 
Dreadsox said:


It is a war. If clearing mined and booby trapped bridges this way saves one American life, yes, I am for it. Not a racial issue, but a battle issue.

Peace Out.

Dreadsox,

This logic stands perfect to justify the use of nuclear weapons as well: "If I can save the precious life of mine by killing thousands (millions) of other people, I will do it. A battle issue..."
 
ALEXRUS said:


Dreadsox,

This logic stands perfect to justify the use of nuclear weapons as well: "If I can save the precious life of mine by killing thousands (millions) of other people, I will do it. A battle issue..."

No, it's not really the same. The bridge would be gone.

Edit:

Along with the millions of people whose lives are equally as precious.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with Alexrus. There are some things that shouldn't be done even if it saves lives of my countrymen. Honor and love of life supercede it. Another article with US soldiers and scholars reports.

Heavy reproaches against US Pentagon: Napalm bombs in the Iraq war

Translation of the original PDF-file from MONITOR-TV , ARD , Germany Click here to view the program.

Report : Heavy accusations against US-Pentagon : Napalm-Bombs in Iraq-War
Reported by : John Goetz, Georg Restle / MONITOR 507
Date : 07.08.2003

Volker Happe (MONITOR-Moderator) : "Napalm. The Horror-weapon from the Vietnam-war . It is internationally banned and outlawed , it's use is forbidden by the Geneva-Conventions . But nevertheless , it was used in the Iraq-war by the US army .

Good evening , welcome at MONITOR .

Until now, the Pentagon denied strictly any use of Napalm in the Iraq-war and repelled all suspicions made by US-journalists who were in Iraq with the US troops as embedded journalists . But this was a lie . As John Goetz and Georg Restle have found out now ."

Pictures from a war from more than 35 years ago . US combat-jets drop Napalm-bombs over Vietnamese villages , devastate an whole country and spread fear and dismay among the population .

Pictures from a war some months ago . The War-victims in Iraq do not know through which kind of weapons they were mutilated . But already since the beginning of this war there was a mean and heavy suspicion .

US-troops on their way to Baghdad . Journalists , who were at this time on the road with the US military, wrote then from really heartbraking scenes after US airraids at the Kuwaiti-Iraqi border:
" It loooked more like a massacre than like after a combat-fight . Dead bodys lying around everywhere . They dropped some kind of explosives and Napalm. "

Napalm ? The same firebombs they used in the Vietnam-War ?

The US journalist James Crawley was on the ground with US troops as an embedded journalist .
He too wanted to know , which kind of bombs exactly were dropped at this time .

James Crawley , US Military Journalist :

" I asked , what kind of bombs they've used , and they said laserbombs , satellite-guided bombs and Napalm." Napalm in the Iraq-War . The US Ministry of Defence rejected this announcements immediately : "We did not used Napalm in Iraq and we won't use it neither ."

Cockpit-pictures from an US combat-jet in Iraq . What exactly was dropped from the US-jets over Iraq ? Firebombs ? Napalm ?

We drive to San Diego , to the base of the US Marine Corps who were at service in Iraq . To us , the speaker confirmed the use of Napalm-firebombs .

Joseph Boehm , Colonel US Marine Corps :

" In the 30 wardays we used only 30 canisters . The marines used it on their way to Baghdad . Where it was exactly , I don't know . It is a lethal weapon and also a psychological weapon ."

These are the firebombs we're talking about : they are labeled MK 77 , an advanced and perfected version of the Napalm-bomb used in Vietnam . The US Military and armament-industry still uses the same name for it : MK 77(Napalm)

James Snyder , Physicians for Social Responsibility :

" There is absolutely no difference in the impact and use of MK 77 and Napalm . They're both made for the same purpose . The only difference lies in their fuel . But both are designed to kill as much humans as possible , attack bunkers and spread fire." We wanted to know from the Pentagon , if these MK 77 bombs were used in the Iraq-war .

A Pentagon-speaker told MONITOR :

" I can confirm , that MK 77 bombs were dropped at the Kuwaiti-Iraqi-border." And on the question , if the MK 77 bombs are indeed Napalm-firebombs , the speaker said : " MK 77 is called
Napalm due to the fact , that their impact on targets resembles remarkable to the use of Napalm."

Therfore it is a fact : The US used in the Iraq-War the same weapons as they did in Vietnam :
Napalm-bombs , one of the most horrible war-weapons of all times , with real heavy damages done especially to all surviving victims .

James Snyder , Physicians for Social Responsibility :

"I can't imagine myself a worse way of death . We all know nightmares from dying in fire . That's the way hell must look . I can't hardly imagine myself to witness an attack with such a weapon . Completely wrapped by a burning liquid and to burn to death."

Pictures from Vietnam . They lead finally to the international ban of such firebombs :

"It is under all circumstances prohibited and forbidden , to target and attack the civilian population , single civilians or any civil objects with incendiary firebombs."

Prof. Hans-Joachim Heintze , University Bochum :

"Napalm-Bombs are against the international law , they are banned by the Geneva-Conventions.
They are banned because they work indiscriminately and without any distinction , they harm in the same way civilians and military targets , and they cause unnecessary sufferings and harm to the victims of these bombs."

But for the US Marines at San Diego , Napalm is just a weapon like all the others too .

Joseph Boehm , Colonel US marine Corps :

"This isn't that important to us . We don't think it's dangerous . To the effects I can't say much , because I haven't been attacked myself by such a weapon until now . I guess it's lethal , that's why we use it , but it's not more lethal than other weapons."

3 month ago , the Iraq-War was declared officially terminated . But to some of its truth we will have ourselves probably still to accustom."

Volker Happe : " The lies around the Iraq-war won't obviously take no end."
 
Dreadsox said:


Never said it was minor....
Never said they were stupid....
Never said I did not care.....

Thanks for the intelligent debate.

Feel free to block me. I would rather be blocked than have someone mischaracterize what I said.


Thanks.
I will never block people but i get fucking angry when Intelligent leaders use babaric weapons and use everything to justify this,...


But,....i have a beautifull sigar from Cuba and a very nice single malt Irish Whiskey. Come over for a drink,...
 
I ran across a new sight about DU.

http://traprockpeace.org/TribTest062803.html

It's from a scientist that worked for the nuclear weapons labs. She provides a declassified memo in the 40's about developing something like DU.


"DECLASSIFIED MEMO TO GENERAL L.R. GROVES, OCTOBER 30, 1943:

BLUEPRINT FOR DEPLETED URANIUM
A classified memo1 dated October 30, 1943, was sent to General L.R. Groves from Dr. A.H. Compton, Dr. James B. Conant, and Dr. H.C. Urey, three of the most competent physicists working under General Groves on the Manhattan Project. This memo, written nearly two years before the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, was a recommendation that radiological materials be developed for use as a military weapon on the battlefield. It is a blueprint for depleted uranium weaponry.

This memo which is now declassified, was given to me by Major Doug Rokke, a physicist and former head of the U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Weapons Project. He is a Gulf War I veteran and is now suffering from depleted uranium exposure with severe health effects refered to as Gulf War Syndrome. My work is inspired by the hibakusha around the world who, like Doug, have told me their stories.

In the memo, the scientists recommended dispersing the radioactive materials in very fine particles, 0.1 microns in diameter, from the ground or the air. It would disperse like a radioactive gas, invisible and undetectable to the enemy. They described how increasing the amounts of radiation dispersed would accelerate the lethality and decrease the time until death and increase the numbers of dead."

I wasn't aware of the limitations on weapons:

"LEGALITY TEST FOR WEAPONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
Weapons must pass four tests in order to determine that they are legal under international law. The tests are:

TEMPORAL TEST ? Weapons must not continue to act after the battle is over.

ENVIRONMENTAL TEST ? Weapons must not be unduly harmful to the environment.

TERRITORIAL TEST ? Weapons must not act off of the battlefield.

HUMANENESS TEST ? Weapons must not kill or wound inhumanely."

Napalm or MK77 also fits the bill, Agent Orange, and cluster bombs also.

"The military use of DU violates current international humanitarian law, including the principle that there is no unlimited right to choose the means and methods of warfare (Art. 22 Hague Convention VI (HCIV); Art. 35 of the Additional Protocol to the Geneva (GP1); the ban on causing unnecessary suffering and suoperfluous injury (Art. 23 ?le HCIV; Art. 35 ?2 GP1), indiscriminate warfare (Art. 51 ?4c and 5b GP1) as well as the use of poison or poisoned weapons.

The deployment and use of DU violate the principles of international environmental and human rights protection. They contradict the right to life established by the Resolution 1996/16 of the UN Subcommittee on Human Rights."

"GULF WAR I
Depleted uranium was used in Gulf War I for the first time on the battlefield in large amounts. The use of over 340 tons of depleted uranium weaponry in Iraq in Gulf War I has had devastating results over the past decade and the devastating effects are increasing. The battlefields were far from the cities of southern Iraq but soldiers and downwind populations could not escape exposure to the invisible war, depleted uranium in the wind. Cancer, birth defects and radiation related diseases in both Gulf War veterans and Iraqi civilians has increased to alarming levels.

Children born to Gulf War veterans after the war and children born to civilians living in areas downwind from the battlefields in Iraq expose the impact of this invisible war. In a Veterans Administration study5 of 251 Gulf War I veterans, they determined severe birth defects and diseases in 67% of the children6 born after the war. They were born without eyes, brains, organs, legs, arms, hands, feet, or had blood and other radiation related diseases. The Iraqi children also have birth defects and a high incidence of leukemia. In the decade after the Gulf War, each month the number of babies born with birth defects and mutations has increased.

Dr. Hari Sharma, an independent researcher, has measured the depleted uranium levels in 71 residents of Basra who died after the war was over. He found levels of 150 micrograms of depleted uranium per kilogram of tissue throughout their bodies. That would amount to a very high exposure rate, roughly estimated at 10 alpa particles per second throughout the body. Alpha particles are the most biologically damaging form of radiation. The radioactive decay products of depleted uranium are even more radioactive by millions and billions of times."

"Following the Gulf War, Dr. Doug Rokke was in charge of the team cleaning up the depleted uranium for the U.S. Army. He provided me with documents detailing some of the U.S. Army directives and memorandums regarding depleted uranium. In a document dated March 1, 1991, ?Los Alamos Memorandum7? he said ?I was directed to lie? to cover up the environmental effects of depleted uranium weaponry ?so that the Army can continue to use it?. He told me ?what right do we have to throw thousands of tons of nuclear waste all over any country? [International Humanitarian Lawyer] Karen Parker considers this to be indiscriminate killing??

I'm sickened by what the US is willing to do to win a war, no a slaughter.
 
Back
Top Bottom