Magic-League.com Forum Index Magic-League.com
Forums of Magic-League: Free Online tcg playing; casual or tournament play.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

"US used napalm-like gas in Fallujah on civilians"


Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Other - Non-Magic
Author Message
Koen



Joined: 10 Mar 2004
Posts: 336

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:46 pm    Post subject: "US used napalm-like gas in Fallujah on civilians" Reply with quote

Quote:
US fired phosphorus in Iraq, TV reports
By Reuters | November 9, 2005

ROME -- Italian television aired a documentary yesterday alleging that the United States had used white phosphorus shells ''in a massive and indiscriminate way" against civilians in the November 2004 offensive in the Iraqi town of Fallujah.

The US military has denied that it used white phosphorus against civilians. It confirmed, however, that US forces had dropped MK 77 firebombs, which a documentary on Italian state-run broadcaster RAI compared to napalm, against military targets in Iraq in March and April 2003.

The documentary showed images of bodies recovered after a November 2004 offensive by US troops on Fallujah, which it said proved the use of white phosphorus against men, women, and children who were burned to the bone.

Boston Globe

What a scandal this would be if it's true. The use of chemical weapons by Saddam on Kurds was used as argumentation for the war, when the "Weapons of Mass Destruction"-reason was proved false. And now this. Hypocrisy at its best Razz
Back to top
theTJtrooper



Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 119

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The word of a European documentary director should be discredited and ignored when it comes to the war in Iraq. Of course they would be glad to slander the United States. All they have to do is wait for gullible morons to turn their eye to their documentary, and bingo you have rumors that can't be proven. People who read this and don't think about it will take it for fact, and now you have turned slander into fact. Second of all, you can't possibly compare the use of chemical weapons on masses of people, to an single isolated area, especially when in that area it was used for military purposes.

Quote:
Hypocrisy at its best


No, its more like slander at its best. Its also exactly the kind of thing I would expect to come from a European country, with the exception of the only decent one, England.

Quote:
"US used napalm-like gas in Fallujah on civilians"


I can't believe you can make that claim as a fact in your topic. At the very least, it should be:

"US allegedly used napalm-like gas in Fallujah on civilians"

You shouldn't even say civilians. You weren't there, so your only source of information is an Italian documentarian, whose integrity and fifty cents will buy you a cup of coffee.
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hrm first off anyone who uses napalm is going to be using it for military purposes, Sadam could easily describe any use he himself made of napalm as 'militrary purposes'. The use of napalm, takes more justification than 'military purposes', it is a morality issue.

The sources claim is based upon bodies found with in the wreckage after the attack. I agree this needs more investigation before it is taken as truth, how ever to disregard such claims is ignorant and an indication of your guilt in most circumstances, this one included.

The problem with these sort of things, is it is next to impossible, to find an independant body able to research the claims. That can not be accused of bias from one side or the other.

Perhasp a mixed body of scientists from with in the EU and US, would be best for resolving such issues. This way the scientist's could keep tabs on each other so too speak and make sure nothing is overlooked, exgaerated, fabricated or based upon too little evidence. I am sure there is already a better system for this but for your average joe bloggs telling the difference between a reliable and unreliable source, is difficult. I can not. However that does not mean we should disregard anything of such nature we read or take equally as a certain truth.

All that said the US remains innocent until proven guilty. Less haste and more facts.
Back to top
theTJtrooper



Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Posts: 119

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

According to that, we would have to investigate each and every claim made by anyone, including Italian documentarians. For instance, if I was a film director, and I made a claim that the U.S. uses nuclear weapons on women and children, does that claim require further investigation? We can make the logical assumption that the U.S. military has a strict code of ethics. Yeah, I can't prove this guy wrong. But I can say based on my general knowledge, the military would NEVER do anything that extreme. If they absolutely had to use chemical weapons, I'm sure they would have a good reason to, and it would be the last of their options.

Quote:
The sources claim is based upon bodies found with in the wreckage after the attack. I agree this needs more investigation before it is taken as truth, how ever to disregard such claims is ignorant and an indication of your guilt in most circumstances, this one included.


Disregarding obvious flase statements is not ignorant. Imagine this: A person who followed you around all day and everything that person says is a lie, period. Would you want to tune them out, or would you take everthing they said into consideration? You have to draw the line at some point. I have the power to make decisions for myself. I do not require investigation on every little thing to create an opinion on it.

Heres an illustration...

UberJeber is a cheater. Last game I played against him he rigged his deck for a first turn win. I would advise not playing against him.

Now lets say I posted that, and no one knew who I was, and it was my first post on this site. Would I be very credible? Lets introduce another person...we will call him Stucco. Stucco sees my post, and requires an investigation based on the evidence I presented. As a result, you are suspended from playing Magic online until the investigation is concluded.

Do you see what happens there? I make a completely false claim, and you get suspended for playing Magic online. Eventually it is realized that I lied and you are allowed to play again. It was a worthless investigation, one that should have been ignored in the first place. I realize everything in the example is hypothetical, UberJeber doesn't cheat (as far as I know).

What I'm trying to say is, theres no need to investigate every claim made by any random person. You can use your best judgement to decide what is right and what isn't.
Back to top
kokusho6



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 85

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

1 word describes this.....propaganda.."sorry about the spelling if i spelled it wrong"
Back to top
Memnarch



Joined: 31 Aug 2004
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

TJTrooper, why do you jump to the conclusion that the documentary is false, just because it is european
then, wouldnt american reports be false too, because they are pro-war, and america would be prowar
Back to top
j_allstar



Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 10:49 pm    Post subject: on red white and blue Reply with quote

It still amazes me how people can make such ignorant statements in their "arguments" and justifty and justify what they are saying because it is patriotic. DoItFaster seems to present an example of this nicely, even going as far as to say that the mistakes our goverment makes are not important, but only the actions we make to fix those mistakes. Brilliant reasoning.
This is the problem with people who come barreling out with their "strong" arguments. They dont look at contraversy from a neutral point of view. In this case, they instantly assume the documentry is true, or they instantly assume it is false. Neither approach is correct. In philosophy we believe that one cannot argue one point of view before he has looked at the argument from both sides. It is appearent that some who posted here have not done so.
Dont believe everything your goverment does is just.
Dont believe everything you read or watch.
And please dont ever start an argument with this:

"Yeah, I can't prove this guy wrong. But I can say based on my general knowledge..."

Because your argument is already pointless.

Sorry if I offended anyone but I see no reason why this argument should be passed off as "false." Do people really believe our military (or any for that matter) is incapible of doing this? Its war and things like this happen (again I am not justifying the actions or saying I believe them to be absolutly true, I am only saying they are not absolutely false... not by a long shot)
Back to top
DaMasta



Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Andromedea wrote:
**** em, we should of just turned Iraq into a lake.


LOL seriously he's right we should demand cities to give up whatever terrorist are there and if they don't we knock them the fuck off the map maybe the first time well have to blow some shit up but i gaurantee it wont have to happen a 2nd time.

And don't you think the military will use a smarter method than that gas or w/e it was I'm sure they don't want people to complain more about america.
Back to top
Snack



Joined: 05 Sep 2004
Posts: 114

PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 11:51 pm    Post subject: Re: on red white and blue Reply with quote

j_allstar wrote:
Do people really believe our military (or any for that matter) is incapible of doing this? Its war and things like this happen (again I am not justifying the actions or saying I believe them to be absolutly true, I am only saying they are not absolutely false... not by a long shot)


In the U.S. legal system, convicting a party means you must prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Based on the highly volatile and biased nature of global journalism, I doubt that a credible case can be established. Possbility is always a case. Incidentally, I'd recommend seeing the movie "Twelve Angry Men."
Back to top
j_allstar



Joined: 02 Nov 2005
Posts: 25

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:29 am    Post subject: snack Reply with quote

snack- I have no argument with that because I agree you. There IS always a possibility. That said, I think you missed my point, which, in case anyone else didn't get it, is that making remarkably uninformed assumptions is worthless to the conversation, and one should only argue one point or the other AFTER they have researched the topic so they know what they are talking about.
Pushing what you believe on others like a whiney child is not going to get anyone anywhere.
Back to top
Koen



Joined: 10 Mar 2004
Posts: 336

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
US Criticized for Use of Phosphorus in Fallujah Raids
By Andrew Buncombe
The Independent UK

The 1980 UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons bans the use of weapons such as napalm and white phosphorus against civilian - but not military - targets. The US did not sign the treaty and has continued to use white phosphorus and an updated version of napalm, called Mark 77 firebombs, which use kerosene rather than petrol. A senior US commander previously has confirmed that 510lb napalm bombs had been used in Iraq and said that "the generals love napalm. It has a big psychological effect."

John Pike, director of the Washington-based military studies group GlobalSecurity.Org, said the smoke caused by the bombs could confuse or blind the enemy or mark a target. "If it hits your clothes it will burn your clothes and if it hits your skin it will just keep on burning," he said.


The Independent

I think the documentary footage shows that white phosphorus was used. For me, the only question is how careful the military was to prevent white phosphorus taking on civilians. Seeing how the US military is under pressure to keep their own casualties at a minimum, seeing how Fallujah was unreachable for journalists because of the heavy fights there at the time and seeing how important Fallujah was to prove the US was in control, I think there's a good chance they resorted to indiscriminate usage of white phosphorus.

This is obviously very wrong.
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@TJtrooper

The reason why, I did not belive I would have to explain this but it seems I once again I must. I will state the obvious.

If you Ignore any such allegations made against you and they are NOT taken seriously, what happens when something really does happen. Nothing because the claim will be ignored, hence all claims of this nature MUST be taken seriously. (once evidence is provided)

Your example was flawed, if you accused me of stacking my deck, I would only be banned once the allegation was proven, not prior. And what would be the point of making a complaint at all, if it was just going to be dismissed, as untrue. On what is fundementaily a racial basis, if they have solid evidence then any claim of this nature should be taken seriously and looked into further.

@doitfaster

being burnt to death by naplalm and such weapons is a gruesome way to die. These people whom died to these napalm attacks are as innocent, as your own mother and father. If you do not take precautions too protect the innocent, then you have become as bad as the terroists themselves.
Back to top
CloudRisen



Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 114

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Koen wrote:
Quote:
US Criticized for Use of Phosphorus in Fallujah Raids
By Andrew Buncombe
The Independent UK

The 1980 UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons bans the use of weapons such as napalm and white phosphorus against civilian - but not military - targets. The US did not sign the treaty and has continued to use white phosphorus and an updated version of napalm, called Mark 77 firebombs, which use kerosene rather than petrol. A senior US commander previously has confirmed that 510lb napalm bombs had been used in Iraq and said that "the generals love napalm. It has a big psychological effect."

John Pike, director of the Washington-based military studies group GlobalSecurity.Org, said the smoke caused by the bombs could confuse or blind the enemy or mark a target. "If it hits your clothes it will burn your clothes and if it hits your skin it will just keep on burning," he said.


The Independent

I think the documentary footage shows that white phosphorus was used. For me, the only question is how careful the military was to prevent white phosphorus taking on civilians. Seeing how the US military is under pressure to keep their own casualties at a minimum, seeing how Fallujah was unreachable for journalists because of the heavy fights there at the time and seeing how important Fallujah was to prove the US was in control, I think there's a good chance they resorted to indiscriminate usage of white phosphorus.

This is obviously very wrong.


The use of Phosphorus as a lighting tool shouldnt seem to odd for someone who knows as much as you koen. What also shouldnt seem odd is the fact that terrorist armies fight with women in children near around them or even as shields. That is there main defense against a superior army. To assume that all of a sudden US army troops just started Napalming random civilians is a poor way too look at something. And it really does show your european "hate america when there not currently saving us from a war we got ourselves into but cant win" attitude.
Back to top
gumonshoe



Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Posts: 433

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 3:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

God, you know what... Republicans are stupid war-loving Rednecks... LIBERALS KILL AND EAT THERE BABIES!
Back to top
CloudRisen



Joined: 08 Sep 2004
Posts: 114

PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 4:06 pm    Post subject: Re: Ridiculous Reply with quote

Vancer wrote:
This is absolutely ridiculous. White Phosphorus or not, death is death. Can you imagine a battalion of Ceasar's Army coming under investigation for using spears instead or swords? or perhaps even setting fire to a village? War is war. Nothing done in war can make it better, and nothing can make it worse.
Now about thw WMD's....that was never disproven, nor will it ever be. Saddam had a little over a year to send his WMD's back to the supplier. Its a little bit too late to arguing about this anyway seeing as how we're already there, the war is already going and we haven't mastered time travel. If you though Farenheit 9/11 was was a well balanced, informative, and unbiased documentary then you are nothing more than an animal gobbeling kibble from the hand of Michael Moore. I agree more with Trey Parker and Matt Stone who made Team America, both sides are wrong. America shouldn't be out policing the world. The next time a fascist dictator tries to take over europe and eradicate all the people he doesn't like we should just sit back and watch.


Your a moron.
The actual comparison would be to ceasors soldiers taking torches to light there battles in the night and dropping one and torching a town.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Other - Non-Magic All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

All content on this page may not be reproduced without consent of Magic-League Directors.
Magic the Gathering is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved.


About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy