Uranium WMD in Lebanon crossfire?

I think we (whoever) use DU (depleted uranium) in the production of bunkerbuster bombs because of their high mass and strong tinsel strength, which allow a long penetration path through concrete/steet structures. But the article does say they/we weren't signators to the third protocol of the Geneva convention.

weapons which are supposed to be restricted under the third protocol of the Geneva Conventions, which neither Israel nor the United States have signed.

I also don't believe this article is completely factual. I believe a political agenda is being persued.

 

Even if the US and Israel were not signatories, DU (nuclear) and Phosporous (chemical) are weaponry that the US was concerned about Sadaam using. Why is it alright for some nations to use these weapons and not others?

 

Concerned about weapons are not weapons of 'mass destruction'.

Please keep your metaphorical allegations clear . . .

DU is insipidly dangerous as is phosphorous. But, neither of them are WMD. IMHO.

 

I appreciate your opinion.

From Wikipedia...

The US military refers to WMD as:

Weapons that are capable of a high order of destruction and/or of being used in such a manner as to destroy large numbers of people. Weapons of mass destruction can be high explosives or nuclear, biological, chemical, and radiological weapons, but exclude the means of transporting or propelling the weapon where such means is a separable and divisible part of the weapon.

While in US civil defense, the category is now Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive (CBRNE), which defines WMD as:

(1) Any explosive, incendiary, poison gas, bomb, grenade, or rocket having a propellant charge of more than four ounces [113 g], missile having an explosive or incendiary charge of more than one-quarter ounce [7 g], or mine or device similar to the above. (2) Poison gas. (3) Any weapon involving a disease organism. (4) Any weapon that is designed to release radiation at a level dangerous to human life. This definition derives from US law, 18 U.S.C. Section 2332a and the referenced 18 USC 921. Indictments and convictions for possession and use of WMD such as truck bombs, pipe bombs, shoe bombs, cactus needles coated with botulin toxin, etc. have been obtained under 18 USC 2332a. ​

DU and phosporous qualify as WMD in both of the above definitions. I believe my metaphorical allegations are clear. The US and Israel are using WMD.

 

what did it taste like?

 

Opinion?

And you turn to wiki . . . on WMD?

OK - Weapons of mass destruction - DU in rounds does not normally count - I think that it should count as WMD as even small levels should deprive the use of the land for generations.

But, your opinion, my opinion, and definitely wiki's do not define international law. In the amounts found in rounds, I do not think that DU is classified as WMD. If you can find a convention that the USA has signed that says otherwise, please give us a paragraph and line number . . .

Willie pete has been a banned weapon for a long time. However, it is used for signaling.

Is someone using it for targeting personel, or for lighting up the night sky?

 

Further,

Your definitions do not adhere to the USC . . . Nor do they adhere to normal military language (nomenclature).

 

U.S. official admits phosphorus used as weapon in Iraq

 

The leadership of that unit should face courts-martial.

 

I would agree however, what argument would you use that it deserves a court-martial? It is legal for both Israel and the U.S. to use these weapons as they are not signatories to the ban as earlier stated in this thread. Here's Israel's admission to using these weapons in their aggression against Lebanon:Israel admits use of phosphorus bombs

Ultimately, I don't suppose it matters really. Whether or not they use DU, or phosphorous or conventional weapons 200,000-700,000 Iraqi (depending on whose numbers you use) and 1,000 Lebanese civilians are dead. Even today, I have no idea what the official reason for going to (non-declared) war in Iraq was and there is no declaration of an exit strategy.

Having said that, DU should matter to the American folks that care about their American soldiers as it is being used and it does not discriminate.

 

The notion that white phosphorus as used in a bomb or artillery round or grenade is a "weapon of mass destruction" is entirely laughable.:laugh:

 

White phosporous, when used as a weapon, is a chemical weapon. The use of this material as a weapon is banned by international treaty which neither the US nor Israel have signed nor comply with. Chemical weapons are commonly considered to be Weapons of Mass Destruction as they are the C in Chemical Radiological Nuclear or Explosive (CRNE) event. White phosphorous causes chemical burn injuries and causes flesh to melt completely to the bone. If you have clothes that are exposed to this chemical, the clothes will melt to your skin because of the chemical reaction. If you find it laughable to consider it to be a WMD, so be it. Do you at least consider it to be a chemical weapon and didn't the United States make a big deal about the fact that Sadaam had used chemical weapons on "his own people"? Are the chemical weapons that the United States and Israel uses on Iraqi and Lebanese civilians kinder and gentler than the chemical weapons Sadaam was using?

Jeff Englehart, a former marine who spent two days in Fallujah during the battle, said he heard the order go out over military communication that WP was to be dropped. In the RAI film, Mr Englehart, now an outspoken critic of the war, says: "I heard the order to pay attention because they were going to use white phosphorus on Fallujah. In military jargon it's known as Willy Pete ... Phosphorus burns bodies, in fact it melts the flesh all the way down to the bone ... I saw the burned bodies of women and children." (Source: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/1115-03.htm)​

 

Of course , it's a chemical weapon.

So is a hand grenade filled with TNT or a claymore mine that uses C4.

All explosives are chemical weapons.

I repeat:

The notion that white phosphorus as used in a bomb or artillery round or grenade is a "weapon of mass destruction" is entirely laughable.:laugh:

 

That's what we would like you to explain - "insipidly dangerous" is your phrase.

 

But, I did not claim to taste it . . . did you?

 

Carpro

While WP is a weapon that uses chemical reaction for its lethality (and illuminating capability) it is not classified as a "chemical" weapon . . . .

Chemical weapons are weapons that kill by poisoning the human body.

Toxins are chemical substances that are normally developed by biological means that also kill by poisoning.

Binary weapons are weapons that mix two or more inert chemicals to make a resulting explosive or chemical munition.

And while it is interesting that so many people have become experts upon a subject that they know nothing about - Saddam claimed to be seeking WMD just before the US went in . . .

I just want to know where all the muslims are that are so peaceful that they are against the evils perpetrated by saddam and his kind?

Let the muslims go in . . . the terrorists have said that they would quit fighting once we leave. Let the peace loving muslims send their people in . . .

:thumbs:

 

I know.

It's classified as an incendiary and is legal for use against military targets.

This is a revival of the big whoop-de- do over the use of WP in Falluja.

Sarcasm was intended. It is a chemical weapon only in the sense that almost all explosives have chemicals in them.

 

WHEW!

I tho't maybe they had gotten to ya' . . .

God bless

Wayne