It WAS A Weapon

Last week, I wrote about an article that accused the United States of using white phosphorous as a chemical weapon. White phosphorous, when it comes in contact with skin, burns it to the bone in seconds. White phosphorous was used in an attack on Fallujah (and who knows how many other attacks). Just in case you were wondering, yes, there were innocents in Fallujah at the time.

Trust me, you don't want to see the pictures.

The White House pooh-poohed the accusations, claiming:

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."

The other, more ridiculous excuse that I've heard claims that the use of white phosphorus is perfectly innocent, because it "is not covered by international conventions on chemical weapons."

In other words, since they forgot to put this one on their list, we can use it to burn the flesh off other human beings.

Well, guess what, kiddies? the use of white phosphorus as a weapon by the US Army has been admitted by... The US Army.

US forces yesterday made their clearest admission yet that white phosphorus was used as a weapon against insurgents in Iraq. A Pentagon spokesman told the BBC last night that it had been used as "an incendiary weapon" during the assault last year on Falluja in 2004.

Lieutenant Colonel Barry Venable said the substance, which can be used to lay smokescreens but burns down to the bone in contact with skin, was not covered by international conventions on chemical weapons.

(snip)

A recent documentary by the Italian state broadcaster, RAI, claimed that Iraqi civilians, including women and children, had died of burns caused by white phosphorus during the assault on Falluja. The report has been strenuously denied by the US. But Col Venable said it had been used to dislodge enemy fighters from entrenched positions in the city.

"White phosphorus is a conventional munition. It is not a chemical weapon. They are not outlawed or illegal," he told the BBC. "We use them primarily as obscurants, for smokescreens or target marking in some cases. However, it is an incendiary weapon, and may be used against enemy combatants."

Asked if it was used as an offensive weapon during the siege of Falluja, he replied: "Yes, it was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants. When you have enemy forces that are in covered positions that your high explosive artillery rounds are not having an impact on, and you wish to get them out of those positions, one technique is to fire a white phosphorus round into the position: the combined effects of the fire and smoke - and in some case the terror brought about by the explosion on the ground - will drive them out of the holes so you can kill them with high explosives."

It also turns civilians into mush-covered skeletons. And then there's this.

They claimed the flammable material was only used to illuminate enemy positions or create smokescreens but US soldiers had written about the practice in an internal army magazine and a spokesman later confirmed white phosphorous had been deployed as an incendiary weapon during the assault on Fallujah.

The admission backs up claims made in an documentary by the Italian state broadcaster, RAI, which alleged Iraqi civilians had died of burns caused by the weapon.

Witnesses described other victims, including women and children, left with "caramelised" skin as a result of their injuries.

The Ministry of Defence said today that British troops have stocks of the chemical and have used it during operations in Iraq to create smokescreens.

But unlike the US, the UK is a signatory to protocol III of the 1980 Convention on Conventional Weapons, which prohibits the use of the substance as an incendiary weapon against civilians or in civilian areas.

Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell said: "A vital part of the effort in Iraq is to win the battle for hearts and minds.

"The use of this weapon may technically have been legal, but its effects are such that it will hand a propaganda victory to the insurgency."

Handing the insurgency ammunition doesn't necessarily mean handing them bullets. Idiots.

More at this Kos diary, which points out that Field Artillery Magazine fails to point out that:

. . . there is no way you can use white phosphorus like that without forming a deadly chemical cloud that kills everything within a tenth of a mile in all directions from where it hits. Obviously, the effect of such deadly clouds weren't just psychological in nature.

So, even when you're "not using it as a weapon," you're using it as a weapon. Of course, they were using it as a weapon, so que sera sera.

I'm anxiously awaiting all the right-wing, pro-war, anti-Saddam bloggers and pundits (such as Little Green Racists and Blogs for Bush, who were whining "it wasn't a chemical weapon"... no links; I refuse to link to them.) to immediately decry the use of white phosphorus; pointing out that it is extremely hypocritical to "take Saddam out" on the grounds of WMDs and chemical weapons, when we are using chemical weapons. I'm sure they'll also point out the fact that the Army and the White House have been lying all along.

Just watch me hold my breath.


Update: Pusboy looks into his crystal ball and forsees neocon talking points. My favorite: "The president needs to have every kind of weapon at his disposal, even those that cause slow, painful, agonizing death. You know, because of 9-11 and stuff."

(Tip 'o the Energy Dome to The Green Knight. I've got a telephone cross-post from Istanbul...)