I believe a voluntary war is immoral. Targeting civilians voluntarily is also immoral in my book. Some weapons effectively exterminate all living things in a target area. White phosphorus (WP) is one such weapon. The Pentagon has admitted using WP in Fallugah. Whether WP is a chemical weapon or not, is not as important to me as it is to the International Criminal Court given the Geneva Convention banning chemical weapons.
What the Pentagon believes is a chemical weapon is important in view of international law. Contrary to recent news releases, the Pentagon has called WP a "chemical weapon" when used by Saddam. Hat tip to Seeing the Forest
Think Progress
To downplay the political impact of revelations that U.S. forces used deadly white phosphorus rounds against Iraqi insurgents in Falluja last year, Pentagon officials have insisted that phosphorus munitions are legal since they aren’t technically “chemical weapons.â€
The media have helped them. For instance, the New York Times ran a piece today on the phosphorus controversy. On at least three occasions, the Times emphasizes that the phosphorus rounds are “incendiary muntions†that have been “incorrectly called chemical weapons.â€
But the distinction is a minor one, and arguably political in nature. A formerly classified 1995 Pentagon intelligence document titled “Possible Use of Phosphorous Chemical†describes the use of white phosphorus by Saddam Hussein on Kurdish fighters:IRAQ HAS POSSIBLY EMPLOYED PHOSPHOROUS CHEMICAL WEAPONS AGAINST THE KURDISH POPULATION IN AREAS ALONG THE IRAQI-TURKISH-IRANIAN BORDERS […] IN LATE FEBRUARY 1991
No comments:
Post a Comment