Worse than napalm?
Published by michael November 11th, 2004 in warWhat can I do? My tax dollars are funding the destruction of the Iraqi people. I didn’t vote for this shmuck and unfortunately, Kerry most likely wouldn’t have followed a radically different course of action in Iraq (although he would have been FAR better on nearly every other issue).
Now come reports of Marines using White Phosphorous which apparently burns like Napalm, and melts its victims’ skin and tissue with a nearly inextinguishable fire. It’s also toxic enough to create Superfund sites, and cause severe health effects (in some applications, I don’t know about the contamination of the battlefield environment for future generations as with Depleted Uranium. Robert Stribley on Hitched to Everything questions its ethical implications. Boing Boing explains how the U.S. apparently considers itself exempt from international law.
As I became aware when writing about Depleted Uranium (DU) our military isn’t as concerned with the consequences of inhumane weaponry as they are with the efficiency of those weapons and unfortunately, neither is most of the public. I find it very unpleasant to read about the brutality of war, but as a paying customer, shouldn’t that be my undeniable duty?
White phosphorous on technorati



No Responses to “Worse than napalm?”
Please Wait
Leave a Reply