Clearly, WP munitions are NOT chemical weapons under international law. That much is pure hyperbole and while Tom tends to grossly exaggerate the "lies of the Left", on this one I'm dissapointed to see how Kos and others are reporting it.
Ditto, it is certainly not the case that use of WP was a common, routine, high level policy. I suspect you'd find many -- not all, but many -- brigades that never fired a single WP shell in their entire rotation. And no American unit in Iraq has ever merely set out to broil civilians for the hell of it. Are we even sure all those bodies _are_ civilians in the video? There's plenty to challenge there.
Unlike Tailwind, though, it's clear WP *was* used. I am aware that the State Dept's official position is that WP was used only for illumination during night battles. From looking at various blogs, it is also not hard to find military guys saying that's BS, their particular unit fired WP shells against targets, not just for illumination. As someone who routinely talks to officers who've served in combat units in Iraq, I will merely note that I am not in a position in which I can publically disagree with a stated position of the U.S. government.
Current Events » in reply to re: Evidence (Tailwind II)
re: Evidence (Tailwind II)
The whole thread (28 posts)
- Evidence of US Use of Chemical Weapons on Civilians
- Sounds like more anti-American propaganda.
- More evidence of people who don't know what they are talking about.
- Funny thing about definitions
- re: Evidence (Tailwind II)
- WMDs, against civilians. Yer tax dollars at work, and for what? (n/t)
