| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
 Posted - 03/21/2003 : 13:08:47
|
Tell me this isn't absolutely despicable:
Marine Cobra helicopter gunships firing Hellfire missiles swept in low from the south. Then the marine howitzers, with a range of 30 kilometres, opened a sustained barrage over the next eight hours. They were supported by US Navy aircraft which dropped 40,000 pounds of explosives and napalm, a US officer told the Herald.
A legal expert at the International Committee of the Red Cross in Geneva said the use of napalm or fuel air bombs was not illegal "per se" because the US was not a signatory to the 1980 weapons convention which prohibits and restricts certain weapons. "But the US has to apply the basic principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and take all precautions to protect civilians. In the case of napalm and fuel air bombs, these are special precautions because these are area weapons, not specific weapons," said Dominique Loye, the committee's adviser on weapons and IHL.
Full story:
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/21/1047749944836.html |
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2003 : 14:46:34
|
| This isn't absolutely despicable. From my reading of the article, the target was exclusively military. |
 |
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2003 : 16:08:06
|
| I just ran searches at Google on napalm and it looks like the US doesn't use napalm anymore. I found an article on the conversion of the last canister of American napalm, and one at slate.com talking about why we should bring back napalm, most likely facetiously. I could be wrong about this, but it appears smh.com got it wrong. |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2003 : 16:20:49
|
i dont see why the US would even bother with napalm when everywhere else they are using super precise weapons.
-miked |
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2003 : 16:31:51
|
2001 story on US elimination of napalm:
"NWS10apr-6 2001. Navy Recycles Last of Vietnam's "Liquid Fire"
By JO2 Trevor Hoehne, Navy Compass (San Diego)
FALLBROOK, Calif. (NWS) -- After more than two decades,
the last of the nation's inventory of napalm has been erased
from the history books.
... The final containers of the thick honey-like substance
were disposed of March 29.
... Eike Hohenadl, the disposal plant's site manager, added,
'Napalm is a memory of a war that most Americans would like
to forget. I'm glad we are at an end.'" |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2003 : 16:51:23
|
i dont even think there has been any ground combat to the extent that article implies. i mean with one american killed in battle, it doesnt suggest that. it seems more like its been us walking right in, so i dont see why we would have to use napalm. the shock and awe thing is different, though they are only targeting military buildings and are using the most precise weapons ever, so i feel like they are doing the best they can to avoid wasted life.
-miked |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 03/21/2003 : 19:33:39
|
Either the US is using napalm or they're not.
According to this article, written 3hrs ago approved by the Pentagon, napalm was used:
http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/21/otsc.irq.savidge/
There's more under a Google News search:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=napalm
The article you're referring to looks like it's in reference to the 'Vietnam Stock'. Not all napalm, clearly, since they're using it.
It IS dispicable that they're using napalm -- it's COMPLETELY unnecessary, and an absolutely horrific thing to use. ANYWHERE.
Perhaps later i'll find you some info to read on napalm. Fuck. |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2003 : 13:43:14
|
| Still looking for some kind of response on this, please continue to justify the US's use of napalm.. |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2003 : 14:30:08
|
well the cnn article seems to suggest that the napalm was used against enemies only, not in a residential area. then i guess its fair game if its not used on non-combatants
-miked |
|
|
|
El Barto
= Song DB Master =
USA
4020 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2003 : 15:05:42
|
| I ask you this, what the FUCK is the use of napalm by us if we have so much many precision missles, etc.? Why don't we just start carpet bombing them WW2 style? How can you be sure there were no civilians? How can you be sure that the soldiers weren't surrendering (have you see the pictures of the dead Iraqi soldiers with white flags visible in the shot? good job, america!). Please stop trying to justify American stupidity. |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2003 : 16:58:58
|
have you seen the iraqi soldiers disguising as civilians and pulling out guns? have you seen the iraqi soldiers surrending only to pull out guns when american troops came in. have you seen the american POW's with point blank bullet holes in their head, but saddam claiming that he'll honor the Geneva convention. theres bullshit everywhere barto, get used to it. besides id be willing to say that a decent percentage of the civilian kills have been from iraqi troops using them as human shields.
-miked |
Edited by - mdisanto on 03/23/2003 17:09:06 |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2003 : 21:12:01
|
| Still doesn't justify the use of napalm. |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 03:55:29
|
but i guess iraq tactics, which are many many times more cruel, are justified.
-miked |
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 04:42:28
|
| I wonder why Iraqi soldiers fire back every which way they can? I really, really do. I mean, this is war - no one's supposed to die, right? |
|
|
|
Erebus
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1834 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 06:52:59
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave Noisy
Still looking for some kind of response on this, please continue to justify the US's use of napalm..
I am not convinced that napalm was used. What I have read suggests to me that the two reports may be in error, perhaps on the basis of a misstatement by military personnel. If in fact it is policy to use napalm in some tactical situations, given the nature of war it does not exercise me the way it does some. |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 09:18:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by mdisanto
but i guess iraq tactics, which are many many times more cruel, are justified.
-miked
Why do people respond like this?
This isn't what i'm asking. I don't doubt that Iraq does questionable things. Is this really how adults justify their actions? |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 09:25:50
|
Interesting, they're now claiming they didn't use napalm, and don't have any:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/23/1048354475977.html
I really hope they're telling the truth.
Back to the point - so what if it's a tactical advantage to use napalm? It'd be a tactical advantage to just nuke all of Iraq, wouldn't it? 'Tactical advantage' is not a license for unethical (and otherwise illegal) actions. |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 13:01:56
|
the difference between nuke and napalm is that nuke has lasting environmental effects. I dont see whats so bad about using napalm so long as its not targeted on civilians, i mean we gave them fair warning, we encouraged them to surrender becuase it wasnt worth it, perhaps the napalm that probably wasnt even used was just another way to drive home the point that its hopeless for them to fight. But anyway, U.S. officials claim that 100% of their weapons are smart and precision, so i doubt they even used it becuase they wouldnt really need it anymore.
and ivandivel, the reason iraqs strategy is different is because it puts civilians (human shields) and protected prisoners (POWs) purposely in risk. its wrong and cannot be exused by saying that they have to do what they can to survive.
-miked |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 21:32:51
|
Miked - do you even know what napalm is? Could you imagine part of your body covered in napalm??
It is completely unnecessary, and an exceedingly cruel weapon.
Nobody should have to endure napalm. |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 23:38:59
|
apart from the fuckers who dish it out
International Air Guitar Hitman |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2003 : 23:42:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by mdisanto
though they are only targeting military buildings and are using the most precise weapons ever, so i feel like they are doing the best they can to avoid wasted life.
precision weapons that have shot down a British tornado..... hmmm, you'd think that precision weapons would be cleverer than that.
International Air Guitar Hitman |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 03:42:47
|
fine dave, they shouldnt use it, it doesnt really matter becuase they probably didnt.
and stuart, with the ammount of weapons being used its reasonable that one would go wrong. atleast the patriot missles are better than they were in the first gulf war. besides, friendly fire is unfortunately part of every war.
were doing what we have to do, if 1. we dont successfully reconstruct iraq and just bail out on them or 2. there turns out to be no weapons of mass destruction, then id completely change my position. but those two things are strong enough reasons to go to war when all other means had been exhausted.
-miked |
|
|
|
Stuart
- The Clopser -
China
2291 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 05:58:17
|
I don't think that all means were exhausted though...... It appeared that Iraq were starting to comply, slowly but at least they were starting to make moves. The US and Britain, particularly the US were pretty much saying from day one that war was unavoidable..... I think that the US had made their mind up long ago that there was going to be another war. Imy opinion the UN should have had more time. In terms of preventing war the UN has no relevance anymore thanks to the US and Britain.
International Air Guitar Hitman |
|
|
|
Dallas
= Cult of Ray =
USA
725 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 08:07:27
|
Iraq was starting to comply? What a crap statement. Disarming is the simplest thing in the world to do. South Africa alerted the int'l community of all its arms within days.
Some people dont have the wherewithal to deal with the reality of life. Evil exists in this world. I am glad that the US, Britain, Spain, Poland, Israel, and 40 other countries had the courage to finally say enough. Saddam Hussein as killed more muslims than any other human or country on Earth. The US has been defending the liberty of Muslims for over 10 years.
The appeasers think it is moral to stand by and watch Iraqi's civilians be killed and tortured every day. Luckily for humanity there are people far braver who can actually empathize with a nation that wants what the appeasers want kept for themselves: FREEDOM.
Sorry folks, supporting the continued existence of the Hussein regime is not about Peace. It is about appeasement and cowardice. No war equals more Saddam. The math is that simple.
This is from a former appeaser and human shield who actually slipped away from his Iraqi minders while in Iraq:
A group of American anti-war demonstrators who came to Iraq with Japanese human shield volunteers made it across the border today with 14 hours of uncensored video, all shot without Iraqi government minders present.
Kenneth Joseph, a young American pastor with the Assyrian Church of the East, told UPI the trip "had shocked me back to reality."
Some of the Iraqis he interviewed on camera "told me they would commit suicide if American bombing didn't start. They were willing to see their homes demolished to gain their freedom from Saddam's bloody tyranny. They convinced me that Saddam was a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists.
"Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head."
|
|
|
|
vilainde
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Niue
7443 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 08:25:02
|
Awww fuck. Nobody is supporting Saddam. Being against the war doesn't mean you're in favor of Hussein's tyranic regime. Is it that difficult for you to understand that? The ongoing war is a total disaster, hundreds of Iraqis have been killed today in Nasyria and Saddam is still alive. So what's the point?
Denis |
|
|
|
Dallas
= Cult of Ray =
USA
725 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 08:49:43
|
Cant you understand, No War equals more Saddam. So, if you are against War, you are for the continuance of Saddams regime. 12 years of diplomacy resulted in nothing but 12 years of pain and torture of Iraqi's who want nothing more than to breath free air. Just like the air in France or the US. Then the Iraqi's can sit comfortably while some other poor human is being oppressed elswhere. Just like the post-liberation French.
Only someone from the comfy confines of a free society could miss 'the point'. Appeasers can't see the point because they have no empathy for a suffering human being in Iraq. As long as the suffering stays in Iraq and France gets its Oil on the cheap, what's the point.
|
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 08:58:52
|
| Great, i look forward to the american invasion of israel to clean things up there, the invasion of saudi-arabia should be just under way. While their at it, they might as well take out nigeria too. May god continue to bless america. |
|
|
|
Dallas
= Cult of Ray =
USA
725 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 09:09:37
|
Unable to make a coherent point about Iraq, just try to move the debate elsewhere.
I guess your point is that unless one can root out all evil in the world (not Israel IMO), than root out none. What a brave soul you are. |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 09:30:49
|
Dallas - no one here wants to see Saddam in power. That is a given. There's no point in bringing this point up.
The question, clearly, is whether or not the US and Britian (and whoever else) should have attacked Iraq.
The peace options were far from exhausted.
What gives the US et al the right to go to Iraq and, against international policies, and do what they want? It comes down to because they can. This is a perfect example of 'might makes right'.
They didn't have permission. They walked out on the UN. They were big babies, because France didn't agree with them, they had a hissy-fit and decided to do what they wanted instead. Pathetic.
The US has proven themselves, without a doubt, utterly incapable of going into a country and instilling a democracy. So what the hell are they doing in Iraq??
As for your point about 'evil', there are probably just as many people in the world now who would say Bush is as evil as Saddam. Does that give the rest of the world the right to bomb all of the US until they get him?
Good thing the rest of the world doesn't think like the US military and Bush. |
|
|
|
Dallas
= Cult of Ray =
USA
725 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 09:57:03
|
Peacenicks dont want to deal in realities. Do you argue the fact that no war means a longer ride for Saddam? If you do want to argue that, why has he remained in power for over a decade, continuing to oppress? Peacenicks refuse to calculate the cost of continued appeasement. How long do YOU think that the Iraqi's should continue suffering? Another couple months or years may sound reasonable to you, but, when your brothers have been killed or jailed, wife or sister raped, a month can seem like an eternity. I guess they should just suck it up...I understand that a peacenick as an invdividual may not support Saddam. But, the reality is that the "Peace" cause of today provides comfort and hope to Saddam. Because Peace with Saddam means a future of death and oppression for millions. It is a cause and effect.
I'll take up your points if you are serious, the US has the RIGHT based on the fact that Saddam has not complied with cease-fire he signed in 1991. Also, Saddam has shot at Brit or US planes over 1,000 times in the last 18 months. These planes were protecting Iraqi citizens that Saddam had a proscribed policy of genocide against. Saddam has not complied with resolution 1441 and 15 other UN resolutions over the last 12 years. Not to mention the simple humanity of liberation. Liberation, good. Continuance of an oppressive regime, bad.
The US made a mistake once in not taking an aggressor who declared war against them seriously. That was Osama. I'm glad that we have taken Saddam up on his threats to our country, allies, and citizens both home and abroad.
As far as the UN goes, as a body it is meaningless. A bunch of paper pushers who scribe meaningless resolutions and declarations. 12 years, 16 resolutions, no compliance. And WHY would a despot comply when non-compliance has allowed him to not only survive but proliferate his WOMD? Lets check with Khadaffi on the Human Rights commission for a good answer. Doesnt that tell you everything about the UN as a legitimate body?
Your point about evil makes no sense to me. I know of no country, for or against this war who would compare Bush to Saddam and suggest that Bush is more evil. That is bizarre. This whole 'rest of the world' line is also a red-herring. The # of countries supporting the US is now in the mid 40's.
There are people in the world who HATE America. Some of them are in America. These people DO try to bomb us at every opportunity. Or fly planes into our buildings. Or kidnap journalists and slit their throats. In case you missed it, we are fighting those individuals today. The position of the US is that it no longer will allow these types to stew until they are able to strike again. I fully support that position.
I wish there was peace all over the world. But, peace and freedom do not come cheaply. The coalition nations (like Churchill before) understand that.
|
|
|
|
El Barto
= Song DB Master =
USA
4020 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 10:47:46
|
quote:
I dont see whats so bad about using napalm so long as its not targeted on civilians, i mean we gave them fair warning, we encouraged them to surrender becuase it wasnt worth it
Oh my god, give me a break man! So, we "gave them fair warning" and they didn't give up, so all available weapons are fair game? That's a sad, weak argument.
quote:
But anyway, U.S. officials claim that 100% of their weapons are smart and precision, so i doubt they even used it becuase they wouldnt really need it anymore.
Wrong. I was watching the news Friday and they said a number of times (while the bombing of Baghdad was going on) that 90% of the bombs were smart. The reporter (who was in Baghdad at the time) was worried about the other 10%.
quote:
besides, friendly fire is unfortunately part of every war.
Yeah, you're right. You know more US troops died in the first Gulf War to friendly fire than anything else? USA! USA! WOOOOOO!
quote:
The US has been defending the liberty of Muslims for over 10 years.
Has it? Last I heard, we were allied with Israel, who kill Muslims on a daily basis. Of course, we don't hear that on the news...we only hear about Israelis being killed.
quote:
Being against the war doesn't mean you're in favor of Hussein's tyranic regime. Is it that difficult for you to understand that? The ongoing war is a total disaster, hundreds of Iraqis have been killed today in Nasyria and Saddam is still alive. So what's the point?
Well said, man. I'm sick of people painting this black and white. Oh, so you're against war, you must be pro-Saddam. Get real.
quote:
Great, i look forward to the american invasion of israel to clean things up there, the invasion of saudi-arabia should be just under way. While their at it, they might as well take out nigeria too. May god continue to bless america.
Excellent point. Where does it end? And by the way, Israel is just as guilty as any other terrorist nation. And don't try to fucking play the anti-Semetic card. It's quite possible to be against Israel and not be labeled a Nazi. Fucking double standards.
quote:
How long do YOU think that the Iraqi's should continue suffering? Another couple months or years may sound reasonable to you, but, when your brothers have been killed or jailed, wife or sister raped, a month can seem like an eternity.
You know what, give me a break. Iraqis aren't the only people in the world who are suffering. Perhaps the US military should invade the US and liberate our suffering. I don't have statistics here, but how many of our own people are without health care? How many people are homeless? How many people are hungry? How many people lost their jobs cause of the declining economy? How many of our own women are raped every day, every year by our own people? I'd be willing to bet more than those raped in Iraq. It seems to me we'd rather turn our backs on our own country and liberate another country's oil. Sure, Saddam is guilty, but again, where does it end? How many other countries are oppressed? Are we going to go into every single one of them and dominate the world? Think about that before you try to use that bullshit argument. It seems to me that all of the sudden, people who are pro-war have some new-found sympathy for the Iraqi people. It's false, and they need to really believe it in order to have some kind of justification for the war. Keep fooling yourself that you really care, because I've seen the same argument a million times and I find it hard to believe that every single person who uses it really feels sympathy and compassion towards those suffering in Iraq, especially when most of them are HUGE AMERICA LOVERS and we have just as many REAL AMERICANS suffering here.
quote:
Also, Saddam has shot at Brit or US planes over 1,000 times in the last 18 months. These planes were protecting Iraqi citizens that Saddam had a proscribed policy of genocide against.
They were flying in NO FLY ZONES. Of COURSE he was shooting at them! You keep saying "over the last 12 years." Have we been actively following up for the last 12 years or has it been passive? Cause I guarantee if we were actively following up and pressuring them for 12 years, they would comply. I compare it to telling your kid to do his homework once when he gets home from school...chances are, unless you follow up, he's not gonna do it...or pretend he is. I used that tactic all the fucking time.
quote:
I'm glad that we have taken Saddam up on his threats to our country, allies, and citizens both home and abroad.
What threats?
quote:
A bunch of paper pushers who scribe meaningless resolutions and declarations.
If the UN is meaningless, and 1441 is meaningless, then how can you use his lack of cooperation with 1441 as an argument to go to war? You just nulled it.
quote:
Your point about evil makes no sense to me. I know of no country, for or against this war who would compare Bush to Saddam and suggest that Bush is more evil. That is bizarre. This whole 'rest of the world' line is also a red-herring. The # of countries supporting the US is now in the mid 40's.
Then you need to open your eyes...I know lots of people who don't like Bush and think he's evil (and he is). The countries supporting is in the mid 40s...how many are not supporting? How many of those countries have donated money, supplies, and troops to the US? Right.
quote:
There are people in the world who HATE America. Some of them are in America. These people DO try to bomb us at every opportunity. Or fly planes into our buildings. Or kidnap journalists and slit their throats. In case you missed it, we are fighting those individuals today. The position of the US is that it no longer will allow these types to stew until they are able to strike again. I fully support that position.
If they bombed us at every opportunity, there would be a LOT more bombing. They only flew 3 planes into our buildings...you make it sound like a regular occurance. You might think we're fighting those individuals today. You must be one of those dreamers who think that taking over these "terist nations" will end terrorism. That's laughable. If anything, attacking their homelands will only make it worse. News flash, do you realize other countries view us as terrorists? |
|
|
|
mdisanto
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1140 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 11:55:12
|
quote:
The peace options were far from exhausted.
iraq has been making a joke out of the U.N. for 10 years, we gave them 10 years.
and what about the mudered POW's and human shields, these people are insane and need to be out for good! you people are complaining about supposed napalm, they are the evil ones.
-miked |
|
|
|
Dallas
= Cult of Ray =
USA
725 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 12:10:53
|
barto, I have no idea what your point is. You made me laugh though.
You are obviously talking out of your ass. You dont even know what the No Fly zone is. The No fly zone was put in place by the Brits and the US to keep Saddam from flying chemical weapons and/or bombs into the villages of the citizens he was trying to obliterate. The US and Britain patrol those No-Fly zones to (imagine this) insure that Saddam complies.
You dont even understand what is going. "Come on Man, it was the NO FLY ZONE! Of COURSE Saddam shot at them! There is NO FLYING allowed!" My God, do a little homework man. But thanks for the entertainment...
You have let some real doozies fly today. You are a credit to the peace movement!
"They only flew 3 planes into our buildings..."
"9/11 is irrelevant"
"How many of our own women are raped every day, every year by our own people? I'd be willing to bet more than those raped in Iraq"
Uhhh, rape in the US is a crime performed by sick individuals. We have a Police force and judicial system to combat it. In Iraq, it is a Government sanctioned punishment for dissenters. So, they are morally equivelant in your world. Last I checked Police were not pulled from the streets to fight in Iraq. Again, talking from your ass...
|
|
|
|
El Barto
= Song DB Master =
USA
4020 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 12:42:24
|
| Thanks for chosing to insult rather than respond. We all know when someone's beat. I'd happily respond to you if you could be more civil. |
Edited by - El Barto on 03/25/2003 12:45:20 |
|
|
|
Dallas
= Cult of Ray =
USA
725 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 12:50:17
|
I'll take that as your proverbial white flag...
"They only flew 3 planes into our buildings..."
"9/11 is irrelevant"
|
|
|
|
El Barto
= Song DB Master =
USA
4020 Posts |
Posted - 03/25/2003 : 15:17:58
|
| No...I said I would respond if you would actually respond to my messages. 9/11 is irrelavent to Iraq because there is no proof that Iraq was involved, no more than we were (we gave the Taliban $43 MILLION in May 2001 after they destroyed their opium crops). We can't use 9/11 as our "fall back" argument, it's bullshit. If you can give me a good argument as to why it applies to what's happening today, then please, enlighten me. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Topic Locked
