Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Young Turks: CNN Confirms Israel Use Of White Phosphorus

More on the WP (Willy Pete) controversy surrounding Gaza from the Young Turks, who are showing most of this CNN video just released.

Regarding charges that they are using WP, Israel is sending mixed messages, at first, unequivocally NO, but now, disingenuous, opaque statements; Human Rights Watch says Israel is using it on civilians; the Red Cross says it has no proof yet that WP is being used on civilians (meaning they haven't made it to the burn victims yet), but now CNN has weighed in and gone into a Hospital in Gaza to show us severely burned patients with burns doctors say they have never seen before.


Cargosquid said...

Pigs are flying somewhere. CNN did a decent report.
The Young Turk is right and wrong. WP is allowed against combatants. He needs to get educated on why WP is used and not other materials.

Israel needs to come clean. However, if Israel wanted to burn down Gaza, they are going about it the wrong way since the are not using WP as an incendiary. The flames would be an inferno. Even used as smoke rounds, burning phosphorus is present.

Star Womanspirit said...


WP is not to be used against people including combatents....It is NOT to be used in a civilian area. Gaza is probably the most densely populated place on earth. This violates International law...Some world leaders are starting to request that the international courts charge Israeli's government leaders with war crimes.

Maybe you will surprise me and actually end up acknowledging this point. Then I will know that you are someone that I should continue to discuss issues with.

From the Christian Science Monitor:
"The usage of white phosphorus is not illegal under international law if it's used in military operations as a smoke screen to cover troop movements or against bunkers, armored vehicles, and ammunition dumps. But its use is forbidden against people – civilians and soldiers alike – under nearly all military codes and laws."

Maybe you need tol do some research on your own sometime rather than just continue to spout out the talking points of the right wing neocon propaganda machine that enables state sponsored terrorism to continue to slaughter innocent people--families, women and children included.

Mosquito said...

buzz buzz hey there cargosquid....

I'm glad you have been stopping by...probably more than I have in recent months...chuckle

I'm hoping to be back in the mood to blog soon but I'm sure enjoying my break... seem to be stuck in this belief that it's okay to use white phosphorus against people...i.e when they are combatents.

I seriously disagree with you on this...I see valid legitimate sources have been offered to you. But I'm not seeing you back up your white phosphours point with any valid source. So if you want to persist in presenting this POV how about sharing the proof that you are relying on to come to this opinion?

I sure haven't found it...but if you have please share it with us.

Hope all is well with everyone...


Cargosquid said...

From "FM27-10 :: Rule of Land Warfare
Chapter Two:

36. Weapons Employing Fire

The use of weapons which employ fire, such as tracer ammunition, flamethrowers, napalm and other incendiary agents, against targets requiring their use is not violative of international law. They should not, however, be employed in such a way as to cause unnecessary suffering to individuals.

This is from the Army Field Manual.

While the use of WP as an incendiary within a densely populated area should be considered very carefully in regards to military needs, ie, bunkers, etc, I agree with you that WP used against Civilians is both wrong and illegal. Personally, I find the use of airburst smoke screens in Gaza to be problematic. If Israel has been using WP as an incendiary against civilian targets, they deserve to be charged. But, that said, if HAMAS is pruposefully using civilians as shields, they too need to be brought to justice. Incendiary devices/weapons are legal weapons to be used against combatants.

I have done my research. Please show where you find the legal source that shows that incendiaries are not legal against combatants.

Cargosquid said...

I understand that you feel that Israel is wrong in its actions. That you feel that Israel is over-reacting and that ANY use of WP should not be allowed. But, on the other hand, do you not also see the crimes committed by HAMAS, Hezbollah, etc? Do you not see that HAMAS uses civilians deliberately as sheilds. Ammo dumps, bunkers and weapons are emplaced so as to endanger civilians. Hezbollah built schools and day care centers. Every one had a weapons bunker in it. Hamas emplaces rocket launchers and mortars near schools, fires, then runs. They know that the Israelis will fire back. They can track the co-ordinates from where the fire came from. That's one of the reasons that Israel launched a ground assault. So that troops would track down the launchers and fighters instead of using artillery. This argument about WP use in Gaza is a side argument. Since the use of force by Israel always brings condemnation, I'm surprised that Israel has been this restrained. If Israel sits and takes the violence, they lose. If they give up land for peace, the lose and get more. If they fight back, they lose. So, what should they do? If Palestine would agree to peace, and abide by the original borders, would that work? Do you believe that Hamas and Hezbollah and their sponsors would stop there? The surrounding countries are trying destroy their country and kill them. Do you blame them for being paranoid?

I don't expect you to "switch sides" and support Israel. But this is a quality blog. Put more perspective from both sides. I see this as a very one sided argument here, so I come by a provide a counter-opinion. There are many quality balanced sources for arguing against Israel and its weapon use. Notice that I don't comment on the Anti-war Israelis other than to opine that Hamas wants them dead too. Its their country. There are many arguments against Israel's way of doing business. Personally, I think that Israel should give the the "occupied" lands back to Jordan and Egypt. And the security wall should be simplified and the route more equitable to the Palestinians. It takes two to make peace. It takes only one to make war. Gaza was returned. And Hamas turned it into a weapons platform. The rockets were not fired into Israel to conquer Israel. It was to draw them into a fight. It worked. But now Hamas has a tiger by its tail. If they continue to fight, they lose. If they surrender, known insurgents will be arrested.

They will never agree to peace with Israel. Please tell me why Israel should tolerate a deadly enemy. I don't know the solution to this, if Hamas does not change. My fear is that peace will come as it always does. When one side wins.

And that will mean that there will be millions dead on both sides. Isreal will either drive Gaza into Egypt or Hamas will kill the Jews.

I feel that true pacifists would not support either side. And would push for the Palestinians to follow Ghandi's way. It would work.
If the Israeli arabs and Palestinians would follow that path, Israel would not know what to do.
But first,Paletstinians, themselves, need to fight Hamas and elect reasonable people.

Now you know my position.
Thanks for letting me visit. Sorry its so long.