Did US Forces use Chemical Weapons in Fallujah?

[KipWellsFan]

Italian state satellite TV channel RAI News 24 alleges that US troops used chemical weapons during their assault on the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah in November last year. The documentary - 'Fallujah - the hidden massacre' - uses witness accounts from former US soldiers, Fallujah residents, video footage and photographs, to support its claim that contrary to US State Department denials, white phosphorous was used indiscriminately on the city, causing terrible injuries to civilians, including women and children.

 

...

 

The evidence in 'Fallujah - the hidden massacre' claims to show the US forces did not use phosphorous in the legitimate way - to highlight enemy positions - but dropped the substance indiscriminately on the city, and on a massive scale. The documentary also shows the terrible damage wrought by the US bombardment of Fallujah, and the carnage to civilians, some of whom lay sleeping.

 

Equally disturbingly, a document in the report claims to prove that the U.S. forces have used the MK77 form of Napalm - the chemical used with devastating effect on civilians during the Vietnam war - on civilians in Iraq.

http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=....226404219&par=

more at link

 

view 27 minute documentary in english here

http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/inchiest...allujah_ING.wmv

(Disturbing images)

 

I watched it and I'm skeptical, you be the judge.

[Balta1701]

1 thing I haven't been able to figure out about these reports:

 

When the Heck did Napalm get classified as a chemical weapon?

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

1 thing I haven't been able to figure out about these reports:

 

When the Heck did Napalm get classified as a chemical weapon?

 

 

Or White Phosphorus for that matter.

[KipWellsFan]

Modern "napalm" contains neither naphthenic nor palmitic acids (despite the name), but often uses a bevy of other chemicals (including benzene and polystyrene) to stabilize the gasoline base

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napalm

 

WHite Phosphorus itself I don't believe is Napalm and Napalm is banned for use on civilians. I also believe MK-77 is a form of napalm, but I've seen varied ideas as to if its actually banned or not.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napalm

 

WHite Phosphorus itself I don't believe is Napalm and Napalm is banned for use on civilians. I also believe MK-77 is a form of napalm, but I've seen varied ideas as to if its actually banned or not.

 

 

You're correct about that. WP is commonly found in artillery smoke rounds and Ive also seen it used as an incendiary.

[KipWellsFan]

 

I couldn't get pictures straight off the video I was watching. Your opinion Nuke?

[Balta1701]

You're correct about that.  WP is commonly found in artillery smoke rounds and Ive also seen it used as an incendiary.

I believe the question here is what happens when it is fired directly on people. Just because it is used as smoke rounds doesn't mean that in a more concentrated form and applied directly to the skin its won't give dramatically different results.

 

Either way, I'm not sure whether or not any of the things we're talking about exposing people to would count in my mind as a chemical weapon attack. But then again, I also don't know enough about "White Phosphorus" and how the body reacts to it. The EPA lists it as an air pollutant, but and limits exposure per day, but gives no strong guidelines about what would happen if it were used as an anti-personnel weapon.

 

And also Kip, is the U.S. a signatory to whatever treaty it was that banned the use of Napalm? The Wikipedia page you linked to did not say. And from what I've read, I'm not convinced that the U.S. is a signatory to that treaty.

[KipWellsFan]

Here's another wikipedia link, but the part about White Phosphorus isn't a sure thing, shouldn't be in a wikipedia article

 

Use of incendiary bombs against civilian populations was banned in the 1980 United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons. The US has not signed this agreement although they did retire use of napalm. The Mk-77 is the only incendiary bomb currently in use by the United States military. Another incendiary weapon - white phosphorus - is also in use. Only the US and Russia continue to invent and use gelled fuel bombs.

 

The chemical used differs from napalm of the Vietnam War era in that it is based on kerosene and a polystyrene-like gel and reportedly contains an oxidizing agent. This will make it even more difficult to put out once ignited. The official designation of Vietnam-era napalm bombs is the Mark 47. Mk-77s are commonly referred to as napalm in US Military slang.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_77_bomb

more at link

[Balta1701]

If the U.S. has not signed and ratified that agreement, then its use was in violation of no U.S. laws, and in fact should probably be expected whenever the U.S. does go to war.

[mr_genius]

http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=....226404219&par=

more at link

 

view 27 minute documentary in english here

http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/inchiest...allujah_ING.wmv

(Disturbing images)

 

I watched it and I'm skeptical, you be the judge.

 

 

I'm also very skeptical of these claims. If I had to take a "wild guess", I would say this is more of a political advertisement rather than unbiased, truthful documentary. I don't think the US military would need to or even want to use chemical weapons in Iraq. So many downsides to such use and little, if any, upside.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I'm also very skeptical of these claims.  If I had to take a "wild guess", I would say this is more of a political advertisement rather than unbiased, truthful documentary.  I don't think the US military would need to or even want to use chemical weapons in Iraq.  So many downsides to such use and little, if any, upside.

 

 

Just to clarify, the official Army policy is one of "no use" regarding chemical weapons. The current Cold War era stockpiles are being destroyed at various facilities throughout the US.

[Balta1701]

I'm also very skeptical of these claims.  If I had to take a "wild guess", I would say this is more of a political advertisement rather than unbiased, truthful documentary.  I don't think the US military would need to or even want to use chemical weapons in Iraq.  So many downsides to such use and little, if any, upside.

There are also very many downsides to torturing prisoners in Iraq, but that hasn't stopped us in the past. Overall, it may very well come down to a debate over what the definition of a "Chemical weapon" actually is. For example...would you call tear gas a chemical weapon?

 

This BBC Piece tells a little bit about the network running this thing, RAI.

 

Italy's heady blend of politics and media has made headlines inside and outside the country, with watchdogs and some politicians pointing to Prime Minister Berlusconi's influence over both public and private broadcasting.

 

The public broadcaster, Rai, has traditionally been subject to political influence, and Mr Berlusconi's Mediaset empire operates Italy's top private TV stations.

 

Between them, Rai and Mediaset effectively control Italy's TV market and are a potentially powerful political tool. The opposition says airtime given by Rai and Mediaset to its representatives has declined.

 

A media law, approved by parliament in 2004, heralded the creation of new digital TV channels and the partial privatisation of Rai. Critics said the bill would reinforce Mr Berlusconi's hold on the media.

 

The Italian press is highly-regionalised. Milan in particular is home to a large number of dailies and news magazines. Most newspapers are privately-owned, often linked to a political party or run by a large media group.

 

Rupert Murdoch's News Corp secured a virtual monopoly of the Italian pay-TV sector when it launched Sky Italia in July 2003. The service was created through the merger of two existing pay-TV services - Stream and Telepiu.

 

Around 2,500 commercial radio stations broadcast in Italy. A few of them have national coverage; most are music-based. They share the airwaves with public broadcaster Rai's radio stations.

[Balta1701]

The UK Independent has picked up on this story.

 

Powerful new evidence emerged yesterday that the United States dropped massive quantities of white phosphorus on the Iraqi city of Fallujah during the attack on the city in November 2004, killing insurgents and civilians with the appalling burns that are the signature of this weapon.

 

Ever since the assault, which went unreported by any Western journalists, rumours have swirled that the Americans used chemical weapons on the city.

 

On 10 November last year, the Islam Online website wrote: "US troops are reportedly using chemical weapons and poisonous gas in its large-scale offensive on the Iraqi resistance bastion of Fallujah, a grim reminder of Saddam Hussein's alleged gassing of the Kurds in 1988."

 

The website quoted insurgent sources as saying: "The US occupation troops are gassing resistance fighters and confronting them with internationally banned chemical weapons."

 

In December the US government formally denied the reports, describing them as "widespread myths". "Some news accounts have claimed that US forces have used 'outlawed' phosphorus shells in Fallujah," the USinfo website said. "Phosphorus shells are not outlawed. US forces have used them very sparingly in Fallujah, for illumination purposes.

 

"They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters."

 

But now new information has surfaced, including hideous photographs and videos and interviews with American soldiers who took part in the Fallujah attack, which provides graphic proof that phosphorus shells were widely deployed in the city as a weapon.

 

In a documentary to be broadcast by RAI, the Italian state broadcaster, this morning, a former American soldier who fought at Fallujah says: "I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah. In military jargon it's known as Willy Pete.

 

"Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone ... I saw the burned bodies of women and children. Phosphorus explodes and forms a cloud. Anyone within a radius of 150 metres is done for."

 

Photographs on the website of RaiTG24, the broadcaster's 24-hours news channel, www.rainews24.it, show exactly what the former soldier means. Provided by the Studies Centre of Human Rights in Fallujah, dozens of high-quality, colour close-ups show bodies of Fallujah residents, some still in their beds, whose clothes remain largely intact but whose skin has been dissolved or caramelised or turned the consistency of leather by the shells.

 

A biologist in Fallujah, Mohamad Tareq, interviewed for the film, says: "A rain of fire fell on the city, the people struck by this multi-coloured substance started to burn, we found people dead with strange wounds, the bodies burned but the clothes intact."

 

The documentary, entitled Fallujah: the Hidden Massacre, also provides what it claims is clinching evidence that incendiary bombs known as Mark 77, a new, improved form of napalm, was used in the attack on Fallujah, in breach of the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons of 1980, which only allows its use against military targets.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I sure hope this isn't true.

 

If true though, it sure as hell had better come to out in the MSM and there had better be a public outcry over it.

[Balta1701]

Reuters has picked up on the Italian story. As has the Rev. Moon owned UPI, although implicit in their coverage is the idea that it was only being used as flares. I'm told that ABC, MSNBC, and the Christian Science Monitor have also at least mentionned the story, although those I cannot confirm.

[KipWellsFan]

 

Another image of alleged napalm like substance used in Fallujah

[FlaSoxxJim]

Now that I'm starting to dig, there were rumblings of something strange about Falujah 2 as far back as January.

 

This is from Dahr Jamail, one of the embedded journalists at the time:

 

“The soldiers are doing strange things in Fallujah,” said one of my contacts in Fallujah who just returned. He was in his city checking on his home and just returned to Baghdad this evening.

 

Speaking on condition of anonymity he continued, “In the center of the Julan Quarter they are removing entire homes which have been bombed, meanwhile most of the homes that were bombed are left as they were. Why are they doing this?”

 

. . .

 

“At least two kilometers of soil were removed,” he explained, “Exactly as they did at Baghdad Airport after the heavy battles there during the invasion and the Americans used their special weapons.”

 

He explained that in certain areas where the military used “special munitions” 200 square meters of soil was being removed from each blast site.

 

In addition, many of his friends have told him that the military brought in water tanker trucks to power blast the streets, although he hadn’t seen this himself.

 

“They went around to every house and have shot the water tanks,” he continued, “As if they are trying to hide the evidence of chemical weapons in the water, but they only did this in some areas, such as Julan and in the souk (market) there as well.”

 

Here's the whole piece.

 

Andf these excerpts are from the blog Non Sum Dingus.

 

"They (US military) used these weird bombs that put up smoke like a mushroom cloud. Then small pieces feel from the air with long tails of smoke behind them. "He explained that pieces of these bombs exploded into large fires that burnt peoples skin even when water was dumped on their bodies, which is the effect of phosphorous weapons, as well as napalm. "People suffered so much from these, both civilians and fighters alike."

 

. . . there is a post by a marine who was involved in the assault on Fallujah.

 

1st Lt. Neil Prakash writes that on November 8th 2004:

 

"In preparation for the assault, artillery guns dropped white phosphorus or ÒWilly PeteÓ on the city. The FA guys later told us this was the newest WP in the way it deployed. Whatever it was, it was incredible. As the rounds came in, they burst in the air several hundred feet above the ground. They streaked towards the ground in little spider trails burning bright orange. The WP hit the ground creating a thick white smoke screen but it still burned bright orange on the ground. This lit up the battlefield for the main effort, and created a smoke screen."

 

That description sure sounds like the pictures Kip posted. The plausible deniability here is going to be that the Willy Pete was used to illuminate the battlefield and some of it just happened to inflict casualties. The only real counter to this is to press the question of why the soldiers were trying to hide evidence of its use, if in fact it turns out that was the case.

[Balta1701]

From the US Army field manual in an article on Fallujah...

 

"WP [i.e., white phosphorus rounds] proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE. We fired 'shake and bake' missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."

The question is no longer whether or not it was used. The question is whether or not it is considered a chemical weapon. The U.S. army's own field manual admits it was used.

 

Via Kos.

Edited November 9, 2005 by Balta1701

[Balta1701]

By the way, this is what the U.S. Military had to say the first time these stories surfaced.

 

Phosphorus shells are not outlawed. U.S. forces have used them very sparingly in Fallujah, for illumination purposes. They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters.

Directly contradicted by their own field manuals.

[FlaSoxxJim]

I avoided looking at these VERY GRAPHIC and unsettling images for the first few days of this "story" (Why is this not all over the place?). But seeing the results of the chemical weapons attack (that is what it is regardless of how it is officially classified) on countless civilians tells me that there is no level of inhuman barbarism to which we will not sink in this war.

 

We have irrevocably lost any fragment of moral high ground we may have still been clinging to by raining hell onto a city in this way.

 

These are VERY GRAPHIC images of the dead, from the website of embedded journalist Dahr Jamail.

 

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_alb...=album32&page=1

 

Also, here's a link to a thread on the subject from Daily Kos yesterday that has some eyewitness accounts of how the soldiers firing the WP/Shake&bake mortar rounds never questioned what it was they were firing at or what the effects were. For the sake of their sanity and souls (if you cotton to such), I understand why.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/9/164137/436

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

I avoided looking at these VERY GRAPHIC and unsettling images for the first few days of this "story" (Why is this not all over the place?).  But seeing the results of the chemical weapons attack (that is what it is regardless of how it is officially classified) on countless civilians tells me that there is no level of inhuman barbarism to which we will not sink in this war.

 

We have irrevocably lost any fragment of moral high ground we may have still been clinging to by raining hell onto a city in this way.

 

These are VERY GRAPHIC images of the dead, from the website of embedded journalist Dahr Jamail.

 

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_alb...=album32&page=1

 

Also, here's a link to a thread on the subject from Daily Kos yesterday that has some eyewitness accounts of how the soldiers firing the WP/Shake&bake mortar rounds never questioned what it was they were firing at or what the effects were.  For the sake of their sanity and souls (if you cotton to such), I understand why.

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/9/164137/436

 

 

Jim.

 

 

Do you know what 25 MM rounds do to human bodies? Or .50 caliber rounds? or 40 MM grenade rounds? HE rounds? Bombs dropped from planes?

 

They tend to do stuff a lot like what happened to those POS insurgents you have pictured there. This is a non-story if I ever heard of one. If I took a terrorist that was killed by an exploding bomb or caught in a fire and laid him next to someone killed by WP you couldn't tell me the difference.

Edited November 10, 2005 by NUKE_CLEVELAND

[FlaSoxxJim]

Jim.

Do you know what 25 MM rounds do to human bodies?  Or .50 caliber rounds?  or 40 MM grenade rounds?  HE rounds?  Bombs dropped from planes?

 

They tend to do stuff a lot like what happened to those POS insurgents you have pictured there.  This is a non-story if I ever heard of one.  If I took a terrorist that was killed by an exploding bomb or caught in a fire and laid him next to someone killed by WP you couldn't tell me the difference.

Nuke,

 

I well understand that flesh is going to lose to the munitions in all of those cases. But trying to rationalize your comments about the POS insurgents with the images I saw, they must really be recruiting young. 1-2 years old in some cases.

 

There is ZERO regard for collateral civilian casualties here.

 

And if this is such a non-story, then why was the military trying to clean up the evidence of chemical weapon use after the attack, and why was the story about WP not being a munition floated if in fact it is used in such a way?

[Balta1701]

Jim.

Do you know what 25 MM rounds do to human bodies?  Or .50 caliber rounds?  or 40 MM grenade rounds?  HE rounds?  Bombs dropped from planes?

 

They tend to do stuff a lot like what happened to those POS insurgents you have pictured there.  This is a non-story if I ever heard of one.  If I took a terrorist that was killed by an exploding bomb or caught in a fire and laid him next to someone killed by WP you couldn't tell me the difference.

All I want to say in response is this...you'll remember that one of the main reasons we went to war with Saddam was that he had used chemical weapons against targets in his own country, and those chemical weapons wound up killing a lot of civilians along with the actual targets he was going after.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Nuke,

 

I well understand that flesh is going to lose to the munitions in all of those cases.  But trying to rationalize your comments about the POS insurgents with the images I saw, they must really be recruiting young.  1-2 years old in some cases.

 

There is ZERO regard for collateral civilian casualties here.

 

And if this is such a non-story, then why was the military trying to clean up the evidence of chemical weapon use after the attack, and why was the story about WP not being a munition floated if in fact it is used in such a way?

 

 

No regard for civillian casualties? That's rediculous. First of all nearly all of em cleared out of the city during the runup to the fight, second, how can you tell which were killed by WP mortar rounds and not, say, caught in a housefire or an RPG explosion.

 

I really don't think that of the few civillians that were left in the city during the fight that they were going to hang around in a trench with a bunch of armed insurgents.

[Balta1701]

New information means a bump in this thread...

 

The people at the center for American Progress have unearthed a Pentagon document where the Pentagon complained about the possible use of the chemical weapon white phosphorus by Saddam.

 

    IRAQ HAS POSSIBLY EMPLOYED PHOSPHOROUS CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST THE KURDISH POPULATION IN AREAS ALONG THE IRAQI-TURKISH-IRANIAN BORDERS. […]

 

    IN LATE FEBRUARY 1991, FOLLOWING THE COALITION FORCES’ OVERWHELMING VICTORY OVER IRAQ, KURDISH REBELS STEPPED UP THEIR STRUGGLE AGAINST IRAQI FORCES IN NORTHERN IRAQ. DURING THE BRUTAL CRACKDOWN THAT FOLLOWED THE KURDISH UPRISING, IRAQI FORCES LOYAL TO PRESIDENT SADDAM ((HUSSEIN)) MAY HAVE POSSIBLY USED WHITE PHOSPHOROUS (WP) CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST KURDISH REBELS AND THE POPULACE IN ERBIL (GEOCOORD:3412N/04401E) (VICINITY OF IRANIAN BORDER) AND DOHUK (GEOCOORD:3652N/04301E) (VICINITY OF IRAQI BORDER) PROVINCES, IRAQ.