NBC military analyst Col. Jack Jacobs (longer bio) is responding to the white phosphorus story on MSNBC's "Connected" now. He says the cannisters in question are used for marking terrain and that they've been used since Vietnam (as other bloggers have been pointing out today), though they're neither banned nor used as weapons against civilians. He also acknowledges how damaging such a story can be.
The BBC has picked up the story as well. GlobalSecurity.org has more details on white phosphors, aka "Willy Pete" -- including the fact that it's not a banned substance:
White phosphorus is not banned by any treaty. The United States retains its ability to employ incendiaries to hold high-priority military targets at risk in a manner consistent with the principle of proportionality that governs the use of all weapons under existing law. The use of white phosphorus or fuel air explosives are not prohibited or restricted by Protocol II of the Certain Conventional Weapons Convention (CCWC), the Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons which may be Deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate Effects .
The NATO manual includes instructions on the safe handling of the substance when used as an "incendiary" -- or to illuminate territory, as Jacobs described, so clearly its something that is used by NATO forces (as an "incendiary" not a weapon, at least when countries are playing by the rules).
Again, this is a highly inflammatory report that could have devastating consequences to the United States -- to our image, and to our troops in the field. It should be taken seriously and investigated seriously, and if it's wrong, it should be rebutted immediately and effectively (though I have no confidence that the crowd running Washington can do it -- surely Karen Hughes and Condi Rice have proven they are about as effective as a rubber sword, and the Bush administration hasn't exactly inspired confidence with its assumption of the near-dictatorial power to detain, abuse and in some cases, tolerate the torture of prisoners...)
Also important to note: this is not a new story. These pictures have been all over the Arab world since late last year, when the U.S. sent 10,000 troops in to retake and pacify the city of Fallujah, which had fallen back into insurgent hands following the clumsy insertion and retraction of American forces. Check this out from November 16 of last year, about a week after U.S. forces launched "Operation Al Fajr" (Arabic for "dawn.":
When the [New York] Times quoted Marine battalion commander Gary Brandl in another front-page story, on Nov. 6, the lieutenant colonel sounded straightforward: “We are going to rid the city of insurgents. If they do fight, we will kill them.”
However, on the same day, the Associated Press reported that the same Lt. Col. Brandl said: “The enemy has got a face. He’s called Satan. He’s in Fallujah, and we’re going to destroy him.” // http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/11280/
George Bush, in opening the war on terrorism, put the issue immediately into a religious context by using the word "crusade". Lt Col Brandl is just following Bush's lead.
During this crusade, the US Army is using chemical weapons - phosphorus rounds. They are designed to burn through enemy metal bunkers, and cannot be extinguished by water. Doctors are reporting casualties with phosphorus burns, and in some cases, melted bodies.
In addition to phosphorus, troops have used napalm and cluster bombs.
The story includes this link, which further charges the U.S. with using not just white phosphorus, but Napalm on the city of Fallujah:
Doctors and hospitals have been erased so that they cannot be a nuisance and provide independent account of the events inside the city as they did previously in April. The US artillery has fired white Phosphorus rounds [1] that create a screen of fire that cannot be extinguished with water. It is designed to burn through metal bunkers; imagine what it can do to human flesh. Not surprisingly one of the doctors that have managed to stay alive in Fallujah has already reported burned corpses and some completely melted.
The US has also used Napalm [2] once again in this war, another ‘horrible’ weapon in the words of Pentagon that also sticks to your skin and melts it. If you were unlucky and managed to get attacked by such weapons you would beg Musab Al-Zarqawi to behead you to end the sufferings. Or you would plead for a suicide-bomber to come and ‘rescue’ you from the situation.
And a Google search of "white phosphorus+weapon" brings up streams of articles making the same accusation regarding Fallujah, over and over again, including this pdf file, which also contains the grim still pictures of alleged white phosphorus victims that were included in the Italian TV report (and my link above). What's new this time, is that the accusation is coming from an Iraq war ally -- an Italian media outlet (although this isn't the first time Italian journlists have gone after the Iraq war... remember ex-hostage Giuliana Sgrena who witnessed the death of an Italian intelligence director and then squarely blamed the Americans?).
The article accusing the U.S. do seem to misstate the notion that white phosphorus is a banned chemical weapon -- it appears to be an allowed chemical, if a nasty one -- like depleted uranium (which is likely wreaking even more havoc on the soil and environment of Iraq). But the persistent accusation that U.S. forces deliberately used it as a weapon is unbelievably harmful to us. We have to get to the bottom of it and get the facts -- whatever they are -- out. Soon.
Update: We still don't know much about Jeff Eglehart, the alternately designated ex-Marine or ex-Naval officer quoted in the RAI24 report. In this Google translation on an Italian anti-war web-site, he is said to have told the reporters that troops in the city were under orders to treat everyone -- aged 10 or aged 60 -- as a "target" and he is said to have described the taking of the city as "a genocide." But again, who is this guy? Has any U.S. outlet interviewed him? Inquiring minds want to know ...
<%
dim done
done = request.form("done")
if done = "" then
done = "No"
%>
Tell a friend
<%
Else
if request.form("done") = "Yes" then
'sets variables
dim email, sendmail
email = request.form("email")
Set sendmail = Server.CreateObject("CDONTS.NewMail")
'put the webmaster address here
sendmail.From = "webmaster@aspbasics.com"
'The mail is sent to the address entered in the previous page.
sendmail.To = email
'Enter the subject of your mail here
sendmail.Subject = "Check out this website"
'send a specific page or send a site url
dim url
'url = Request.ServerVariables("HTTP_REFERER")
url = "http://www.aspbasics.net"
'This is the content of the message.
sendmail.Body = "Site recommendation from a friend!" & _
vbCrlf & vbCrlf & "A friend has sent you this email and thought you would should check out this site." & _
vbCrlf & url & vbCrlf
'this sets mail priority.... 0=low 1=normal 2=high
sendmail.Importance = 1
sendmail.Send 'Send the email!
response.redirect Request.ServerVariables("HTTP_REFERER")
'Response.write ("Sent to ") & email
End if
End if
%>
"[T]he practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny.' Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 84, August, 1788
