Syria

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

I'll be interested to see how this has played in the US. I mean, the public didn't want another war, so they should be pleased. But are they comfortable with Russia leading the way?

[DanishVillan]

"You are either with us or against us" - The junior Bushmaster

 

So Putin support the regime that the US happily sent prisoners to for torture and the UK happily sold sodium fluoride to.

Against the group that the west created to fight the Sovjet Union but is now considered terrorists anywhere in the world but Syria.

 

Fascinating

[chrisp65]

Watching the news last night and there were pictures from a broadly 'christian' town, where the Assad supporting national army were trying to get rebels out. The locals, the old men and the business owners locally were trying to help the army get rid of the rebels. Old men with big crucifix's fighting the with Assad. They complained that they had sent the world St Paul (or somesuch) but the world had sent them Al Qaeda. The rebels in that particular town were upset they weren't getting the support, the air strikes, that they thought America had promised. The rebels were the Al Nusra Front, an organisation seen as Al Qaeda in Syria.

 

I can't help wondering how a few USA drone attacks would have helped exactly.

[peterms]

Given the recent attention on chemical weapons, some people might be interested in this current petition about Fallujah, where many years after the US' use of chemical weapons there, 144 babies are born with defects for every 1,000 live births.  That's a truly stunning figure.  The petition asks for the release of data which it appears is being withheld.

[AVFCforever1991]

Thanks Peter, signed.

[bannedfromHandV]

Given the recent attention on chemical weapons, some people might be interested in this current petition about Fallujah, where many years after the US' use of chemical weapons there, 144 babies are born with defects for every 1,000 live births.  That's a truly stunning figure.  The petition asks for the release of data which it appears is being withheld.

 

Where does it state that the US used chemical weapons?

 

I'm not against this sentiment by the way I just can't see how you jump from birth defects to the US using chemical weapons......

[peterms]

 

Given the recent attention on chemical weapons, some people might be interested in this current petition about Fallujah, where many years after the US' use of chemical weapons there, 144 babies are born with defects for every 1,000 live births.  That's a truly stunning figure.  The petition asks for the release of data which it appears is being withheld.

 

Where does it state that the US used chemical weapons?

 

I'm not against this sentiment by the way I just can't see how you jump from birth defects to the US using chemical weapons......

 

 

The petition doesn't state it.  It's asking for the release of medical data, not commenting on methods of waging war.

 

If you want to know about what happened at Fallujah, the US used both white phosphorous and depleted uranium.  There's a mountain of stuff out there.  Here's a couple of links.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-considine/us-depleted-uranium-as-ma_b_3812888.html

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-forces-used-chemical-weapons-during-assault-on-city-of-fallujah-514433.html

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/15/usa.iraq

 

Warning - this one contains pictures of some of the deformed babies, so many people may wish to avoid it.  http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/20/ten_years_later_us_has_left

[AVFCforever1991]

 

Given the recent attention on chemical weapons, some people might be interested in this current petition about Fallujah, where many years after the US' use of chemical weapons there, 144 babies are born with defects for every 1,000 live births.  That's a truly stunning figure.  The petition asks for the release of data which it appears is being withheld.

 

Where does it state that the US used chemical weapons?

 

I'm not against this sentiment by the way I just can't see how you jump from birth defects to the US using chemical weapons......

 

 

If you are interested, this is a very informative documentary about the use of chemical weapons in Fallujah:

 

Graphic image warning

 

 

The title of the documentary is acutally 'Fallujah - The hidden massacre'

Edited September 12, 2013 by AVFCforever1991

[Risso]

Apparently 'white phosphorous' isn't a chemical weapon though.  It's a chemical, that's used in weapons, but that's not the same thing.  Oh no.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

It's an unknown known, you know? Or is it a known unknown?

[Awol]

Apparently 'white phosphorous' isn't a chemical weapon though.  It's a chemical, that's used in weapons, but that's not the same thing.  Oh no.

WP is a perfectly legitimate tool to provide rapid smokescreens, it isn't supposed to be used as an anti-personnel weapon because it's very nasty stuff, although it's very effective when used in grenades.

 

Depleted Uranium is also being slightly misrepresented here too, it's not used on civilians like Sarin , VX or mustard gas, it's a part of certain shells used in the anti tank role because it goes through armour like butter. DU was used in Bosnia and GW1 to kill tanks and I don't recall people accusing the western armies of trying to poison people then?

[Risso]

 

Apparently 'white phosphorous' isn't a chemical weapon though.  It's a chemical, that's used in weapons, but that's not the same thing.  Oh no.

WP is a perfectly legitimate tool to provide rapid smokescreens, it isn't supposed to be used as an anti-personnel weapon because it's very nasty stuff, although it's very effective when used in grenades.

 

Depleted Uranium is also being slightly misrepresented here too, it's not used on civilians like Sarin , VX or mustard gas, it's a part of certain shells used in the anti tank role because it goes through armour like butter. DU was used in Bosnia and GW1 to kill tanks and I don't recall people accusing the western armies of trying to poison people then?

 

 

Isn't that the point with white phosphorous though?  It might have legitimate uses, and however much it isn't supposed to be used as a weapon against individuals, it clearly has been.  If somebody douses a building in petrol and sets fire to it, the petrol goes from being a legitimate fuel for a vehicle, to being an accelerant in arson.  I take your point about depleted uranium shells, but it's hard to accept that a substance like WP that will burn somebody through to the bone isn't a chemical weapon when misused.

[Chindie]

 

 

Apparently 'white phosphorous' isn't a chemical weapon though.  It's a chemical, that's used in weapons, but that's not the same thing.  Oh no.

WP is a perfectly legitimate tool to provide rapid smokescreens, it isn't supposed to be used as an anti-personnel weapon because it's very nasty stuff, although it's very effective when used in grenades.

 

Depleted Uranium is also being slightly misrepresented here too, it's not used on civilians like Sarin , VX or mustard gas, it's a part of certain shells used in the anti tank role because it goes through armour like butter. DU was used in Bosnia and GW1 to kill tanks and I don't recall people accusing the western armies of trying to poison people then?

 

 

Isn't that the point with white phosphorous though?  It might have legitimate uses, and however much it isn't supposed to be used as a weapon against individuals, it clearly has been.  If somebody douses a building in petrol and sets fire to it, the petrol goes from being a legitimate fuel for a vehicle, to being an accelerant in arson.  I take your point about depleted uranium shells, but it's hard to accept that a substance like WP that will burn somebody through to the bone isn't a chemical weapon when misused.

 

It isn't a chemical weapon, still. By that thinking a thermobaric missile is a chemical weapon - a bomb that uses a vapour cloud of fuel to cause a massive pressure wave once ignited that, in essence, makes everything in it's path go 'pop'.

 

White phosphorus certainly shouldn't be used against personnel, it's horrific, but its not a chemical weapon. It's an incendiary weapon - it may be toxic, but it's main use is in it's propensity to burn. Chemical weapons predominate use is in their toxic properties.

[Awol]

 

 

Apparently 'white phosphorous' isn't a chemical weapon though.  It's a chemical, that's used in weapons, but that's not the same thing.  Oh no.

WP is a perfectly legitimate tool to provide rapid smokescreens, it isn't supposed to be used as an anti-personnel weapon because it's very nasty stuff, although it's very effective when used in grenades.

 

Depleted Uranium is also being slightly misrepresented here too, it's not used on civilians like Sarin , VX or mustard gas, it's a part of certain shells used in the anti tank role because it goes through armour like butter. DU was used in Bosnia and GW1 to kill tanks and I don't recall people accusing the western armies of trying to poison people then?

 

 

Isn't that the point with white phosphorous though?  It might have legitimate uses, and however much it isn't supposed to be used as a weapon against individuals, it clearly has been.  If somebody douses a building in petrol and sets fire to it, the petrol goes from being a legitimate fuel for a vehicle, to being an accelerant in arson.  I take your point about depleted uranium shells, but it's hard to accept that a substance like WP that will burn somebody through to the bone isn't a chemical weapon when misused.

 

Sorry, I didn't make the point very well. WP in an anti-personnel role is hideous and rightly banned, so for example its use by Israel on civilians in Gaza was clearly a war crime. I just don't think it's in the same league as the various gases, poisons and potions employed in chemical warfare and when the army train soldiers in NBC/CBRN that is what they are training for, not protecting themselves against WP.

 

EDIT: Chindie got there first and explained it better than I did.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Awol

[TrentVilla]

 

 

Britain's Observer issues correction: Israel did not use chemical weapons In Gaza

By HERB KEINON

09/08/2013 17:55

 

Israel won a small battle against creeping attempts to equate its use of white phosphorous in Gaza to Syrian President Bashar Assad’s use of chemical weapons, when The Observer in Britain issued a correction on the matter on Sunday.

“Contrary to the impression given in ‘Assad is a war criminal, but an attack will do nothing for the people of Syria’ (Comment, last week, page 34), white phosphorus, used by Israeli forces in Gaza in 2008, is not a chemical weapon as understood by the Chemical Weapons Convention, and its use is in itself not ‘in breach of all international conventions,’” the paper noted.

 

A week earlier, the Observer, which is The Guardian’s Sunday sister publication, ran an op-ed piece by Nabilia Ramdani, introduced to readers as a “French-Arab journalist who worked extensively in Syria until the Arab Spring,” arguing against US military intervention in Syria.

“Others point to the hypocrisy of the West, which continues to provide some of the most lethal weapons known to mankind to its political and trade allies,” she wrote. “USsourced white phosphorus shells – a chemical weapon that causes severe burning right down to the bone – were used by Israeli forces against Palestinians in Gaza in 2008 in breach of all international conventions, for example.”

This paragraph raised the ire of the Israeli Embassy in London.

The spokesman there, Yiftah Curiel, contacted the editors of the Observer and requested a correction that – after a degree of give and take – was indeed provided.

“This is an example of zero tolerance for disinformation,” the official said. “If this goes unchallenged, then it becomes the conventional and accepted wisdom. It needs to be corrected.”

Israeli officials said this “setting the record straight” was especially important in this case amid pernicious efforts – with the world’s attention focused on Assad’s use of chemical weapons – to blame Israel for having used chemical weapons in the past.

 

Here

[peterms]

 

Apparently 'white phosphorous' isn't a chemical weapon though.  It's a chemical, that's used in weapons, but that's not the same thing.  Oh no.

WP is a perfectly legitimate tool to provide rapid smokescreens, it isn't supposed to be used as an anti-personnel weapon because it's very nasty stuff, although it's very effective when used in grenades.

 

Depleted Uranium is also being slightly misrepresented here too, it's not used on civilians like Sarin , VX or mustard gas, it's a part of certain shells used in the anti tank role because it goes through armour like butter. DU was used in Bosnia and GW1 to kill tanks and I don't recall people accusing the western armies of trying to poison people then?

 

 

The point with WP is that it is indeed being used against civilians, eg by Israel as you say, but also by the US.

 

But when you say DU is not being "used on civilians", in fact civilians are continually being exposed to it, with the horrific results described above.  Does the US try to absolve itself from responsibility?  Does it say "We used it against tanks.  Hey, if it's still lying around and poisoning people ten years later, that's nothing to do with us.  It's not a weapon any more, it's just litter"? 

 

The effects of DU have long been known.  The effect of using it was known by the US.  The effect of leaving it to poison generations of people is also known.  And yet that is what the US is content to allow.  Probably no surprise, from the country which refuses to make the US firm Union Carbide deal with its poisoning of the town of Bhopal.  They're just poor brown people, right?  What's a few hundred stillbirths and mutations?

 

When a country invades another, as the US did, it acquires legal responsibilities.  Jon, you will know that perhaps better than anyone, as I suppose (I hope) you will have been briefed on it.  To duck those responsibilities by looking the other way, and by seeking definitions of terms which evade responsibility, is unworthy of any nation which calls itself civilised, let alone the "leader of the free world". 

 

No-one should go along with that amoral, self-serving deception.

[tonyh29]

Probably Putin fancies a Nobel peace prize figuring if Obama can have one anyone can have one

[chrisp65]

He can ride into town stripped to the waste on a rhino to collect it.

[peterms]

Oh dear.  In the middle of the quite justified moral outrage over what's been happening in Syria, it seems that publicity about other very similar instances of illegal chemical warfare is being suppressed.

 

Can such a thing happen in the free world, or would it only happen in secretive commie dictatorships?  No, it seems to be happening in the country that is both the leader of the free world, and the world's policeman.  Well, colour me shocked.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-refuses-to-publish-report-on-cancers-and-birth-defects-in-iraq-caused-by-depleted-uranium-ammunition/5349556

[peterms]

New chemical weapon plant discovered in the Middle East!  Negev desert.

 

Oh, sorry, it's Israeli.  Better pretend it doesn't exist, then.