Monday
Nov212005
Fire in Iraq
Monday, November 21, 2005 at 3:00AM
By Ellen Ratner
We claimed that the reason why we invaded Iraq was to separate Saddam from his CBWs (as in Chemical and Biological Weapons) and, quite possibly, nukes. So I'll be blunt: Why are we now using chemical weapons against the Iraqis?
In another public-relations disaster (not to mention potential war crime) for the Bush administration, it was disclosed this week that the U.S. military had used white phosphorus against insurgents in the densely populated city of Fallujah during the 2004 offensives. This could lead to a scandal on the order of Abu Ghraib prison.
According to Reuters, white phosphorus is defined as "a colorless or yellowish translucent wax-like substance that smells a bit like garlic [and which] ignites easily in air at temperatures of about 86 degrees F. Its fire can be difficult to extinguish."
Let me give it to you straight: This was the stuff that the Allies dropped on Dresden, Hamburg and Tokyo during World War II, intending to kill civilians. And it worked – hundreds of thousands innocent civilians died in hellacious firestorms created by bombings that have permanently besmirched the otherwise noble Allied efforts during that war. In fact, when white phosphorus comes in contact with human flesh, it is virtually impossible to extinguish until the flesh is consumed in unimaginable agony to the victim.
Unlike other chemical weapons, the use of white phosphorus is permitted, but in highly regulated circumstances. The 1983 Convention on the Prohibition of Use of Certain Conventional Weapons bars its use "against military targets within concentrations of civilians." The only time that white phosphorus is permitted is when "military targets within concentrations of civilians are clearly separated from civilians and 'all feasible precautions' are taken to avoid civilian casualties."
Significantly (and sneakily, if you ask me) while the United States is a signatory to the 1983 Convention, it has not ratified Protocol III which contains the restrictions against these kind of incendiary weapons. Conveniently, the Pentagon has simply declared that its use of white phosphorus is permitted out of "military necessity." But don't worry – it pledges that its use will be governed by a sense of "proportionality." Try telling that to Al Jazeera as accounts have emerged from Fallujah about civilians killed and horribly disfigured by our use of white phosphorus. It won't play too well in the Arab world – and this at a time when we need every friend we can get in the Middle East.
Before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Fallujah, a city about the size of Miami, had a population of approximately 350,000 people. By the time the U.S. military's assault in November 2004, the population had decreased to some 200,000. Nevertheless, in Fallujah the insurgents insinuated themselves among the civilian population, in effect, tempting American forces to fight amidst the innocents, and in the process, create media-rich opportunities of dead and wounded civilians that would further inflame the Arab masses against the already deeply unpopular Bush administration. By using white phosphorus, we were foolish enough to take the bait, and further deepen the reservoirs of bad will against our country.
The technique involved was nicknamed "Shake and Bake." Explosive rounds containing white phosphorus were fired at insurgent positions – but it is important to note that in Fallujah those positions are actually houses and mosques, both containing large numbers of innocent civilians. Once the smoke and fire generated by the white phosphorus forced out the inhabitants, high explosive artillery rounds were fired into the position, killing anyone who happened to be nearby. That is, anyone whose flesh wasn't already on fire from the white phosphorus. In that case, dying instantly from an artillery round would be something like a mercy killing.
Those readers who think that the foregoing is just more blood from a liberal bleeding heart had better consider some cold and very hard facts. If our efforts in Iraq are failing – and they are – it is certainly in large part because we have utterly failed to win the hearts and minds of the Sunni Arabs whose cooperation is indispensable if a bloody civil war is to be avoided. Events like the mistreatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and the inappropriate use of white phosphorus at Fallujah have mightily contributed to the current mess between the Tigris and Euphrates.
Yes, I'll be the first to admit that Marine casualties might have been greater without the use of white phosphorus. But I'll also insist that if our efforts in Iraq wind up being for naught, then all the deaths and injuries suffered by our brave young Americans will likewise have been in vain, and that too is unforgivable.
We claimed that the reason why we invaded Iraq was to separate Saddam from his CBWs (as in Chemical and Biological Weapons) and, quite possibly, nukes. So I'll be blunt: Why are we now using chemical weapons against the Iraqis?
In another public-relations disaster (not to mention potential war crime) for the Bush administration, it was disclosed this week that the U.S. military had used white phosphorus against insurgents in the densely populated city of Fallujah during the 2004 offensives. This could lead to a scandal on the order of Abu Ghraib prison.
According to Reuters, white phosphorus is defined as "a colorless or yellowish translucent wax-like substance that smells a bit like garlic [and which] ignites easily in air at temperatures of about 86 degrees F. Its fire can be difficult to extinguish."
Let me give it to you straight: This was the stuff that the Allies dropped on Dresden, Hamburg and Tokyo during World War II, intending to kill civilians. And it worked – hundreds of thousands innocent civilians died in hellacious firestorms created by bombings that have permanently besmirched the otherwise noble Allied efforts during that war. In fact, when white phosphorus comes in contact with human flesh, it is virtually impossible to extinguish until the flesh is consumed in unimaginable agony to the victim.
Unlike other chemical weapons, the use of white phosphorus is permitted, but in highly regulated circumstances. The 1983 Convention on the Prohibition of Use of Certain Conventional Weapons bars its use "against military targets within concentrations of civilians." The only time that white phosphorus is permitted is when "military targets within concentrations of civilians are clearly separated from civilians and 'all feasible precautions' are taken to avoid civilian casualties."
Significantly (and sneakily, if you ask me) while the United States is a signatory to the 1983 Convention, it has not ratified Protocol III which contains the restrictions against these kind of incendiary weapons. Conveniently, the Pentagon has simply declared that its use of white phosphorus is permitted out of "military necessity." But don't worry – it pledges that its use will be governed by a sense of "proportionality." Try telling that to Al Jazeera as accounts have emerged from Fallujah about civilians killed and horribly disfigured by our use of white phosphorus. It won't play too well in the Arab world – and this at a time when we need every friend we can get in the Middle East.
Before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Fallujah, a city about the size of Miami, had a population of approximately 350,000 people. By the time the U.S. military's assault in November 2004, the population had decreased to some 200,000. Nevertheless, in Fallujah the insurgents insinuated themselves among the civilian population, in effect, tempting American forces to fight amidst the innocents, and in the process, create media-rich opportunities of dead and wounded civilians that would further inflame the Arab masses against the already deeply unpopular Bush administration. By using white phosphorus, we were foolish enough to take the bait, and further deepen the reservoirs of bad will against our country.
The technique involved was nicknamed "Shake and Bake." Explosive rounds containing white phosphorus were fired at insurgent positions – but it is important to note that in Fallujah those positions are actually houses and mosques, both containing large numbers of innocent civilians. Once the smoke and fire generated by the white phosphorus forced out the inhabitants, high explosive artillery rounds were fired into the position, killing anyone who happened to be nearby. That is, anyone whose flesh wasn't already on fire from the white phosphorus. In that case, dying instantly from an artillery round would be something like a mercy killing.
Those readers who think that the foregoing is just more blood from a liberal bleeding heart had better consider some cold and very hard facts. If our efforts in Iraq are failing – and they are – it is certainly in large part because we have utterly failed to win the hearts and minds of the Sunni Arabs whose cooperation is indispensable if a bloody civil war is to be avoided. Events like the mistreatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and the inappropriate use of white phosphorus at Fallujah have mightily contributed to the current mess between the Tigris and Euphrates.
Yes, I'll be the first to admit that Marine casualties might have been greater without the use of white phosphorus. But I'll also insist that if our efforts in Iraq wind up being for naught, then all the deaths and injuries suffered by our brave young Americans will likewise have been in vain, and that too is unforgivable.
Reader Comments