What are the chemicals used to make bullets? Do they also qualify as "chemical warfare"....

Good to hear there is someone out there with the balls to stand up to the left wing propeganda machine.

Lots of support for President Bush from Iran

Marc,

They will, eventually...because the US simply MUST be the most horrific thing around...I imagine that one day it'll be asserted that our humanitarian assistence is designed to kill babies...

The Left always slanders its victims. To actually investigate their accusations is for all practical purposes a waste of time and resources.

So what else is new?

You are wrong Mark. Here is the information on white phosphorus (you misspelled it as phosphorous).
It is indeed a chemical.
http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ipcsneng/neng0628.html
I see that you just make things up as you wish them Mark.
Unfortunately truth doesn't work that way my friend.
Anyone who want to make light of this chemical should go expose themselves to it and come back and post there experience here at Blogsforbush.

*Sighs*

I have no clue how the lefties can even believe some of the stuff they spew.

Christopher,

So is the gunpowder, so-called, that we use today...in fact, all explosives are chemicals, when you come right down to it.

What the left is doing is accusing the US of engaging in chemical warfare...this is a phrase which carries with it certain baggage. First off, it is cruel and inhuman to use chemical weapons on an enemy; secondly, it is what Saddam did (and thus the left makes the accusation because they want us to be just as bad as Saddam); thirdly, it is illegal for American military forces to use chemical weapons. The choice of the words "chemical warfare" was deliberate on the part of the left...it is a bit of hate-speech against the United States, designed to make us odious and inflame our enemies against us.

But WP is NOT chemical warfare...it isn't a nerve agent, a blister agent or, indeed, any other chemical agent designed to do harm via a chemical reaction with the human body. WP is an INCENDIARY weapon...it is designed to burn, and burn it does, very badly.

Additionally, the way the left is putting it is that the US military is irresponsibly using WP...that we are killing civilians either on purpose or via gross negligence...and that is a slander for which I wish the military could sue the leftwing groups responsible. It is a bald faced lie - and a lie known to be a lie by those who peddled it to you...

I guess a chemical weapon isn't a chemical weapon unless the US government say it is or isn't. We say we dont "do torture" yet the evidence is overwhelming that we do indeed torture prisoners, and the Bush administration wants to make it ok to torture them. I understand that many of those terrorist pigs are deserving of nothing less than torture, but we must not fall to their level of evil.
I believe it was a military itself who made the reports about their using white phosphorus in Fillujah. So its not just the left-wing bloggers talking about this.
I'm curious, how would you feel if it was proven and admitted that our government used WP weapons not to light up the sky, but to burn out everything in that area of town including woman and children.
Its not an attack against Bush, its a real feeling of godlessness if we do in-fact use weapons like this and then call our military "Gods Army" as some have called our them on this site.

Christopher,

No, a chemical weapon is a chemical weapon...mustard gas, nerve gas, that sort of thing. Saddam didn't drop WP on the Kurds...had he done so, we wouldn't have been quite as horrified; but he used nerve gas on them, and so we were horrified.

One thing you should ask yourself: Why would the US military, the best military force in human history, WANT to kill women and children? Do we accrue any benefit from it? Does it help us win the war? Of course not - so unless you think our troops are bloodthirsty savages, you'll have to admit that any story of them wantonly killing women and children are false.

You don't think our soldiers are savages, do you?

Show me this overwhelming evidence, that we do indeed "torture', and like's been said here before, pantys on heads DON'T COUNT!!!

It's amazing we're winning,(and we are), this terror war with some trying to tie BOTH of our hands!!!

Wake up, you on the left, your country, that you hate, is the good guys!

I'm curious, how would you feel if it was proven and admitted that our government used WP weapons not to light up the sky, but to burn out everything in that area of town including woman and children.

Prove it, and we will entertain such foolishness. Until then back off or get in the fight yourself, so you can do such a superior job for humanity. Your a typical lefty fruitcake christopher.

You don't think our soldiers are savages, do you?

I see your sarcasm Mark, but I'm not amused at these foolish allegations from the left wing nuts. Yes, they actually do think our boys are savages. Which is why we can't give them an inch in these areas, or it will be vietnam all over again.

Your definitions of what is a chemical weapon is immaterial. The only definition that matters is the one accepted by the United Nations.

The United Nations defines a chemical weapons as: “Chemical substances that can be delivered using munitions and dispersal devices to cause death or severe harm to people and animals and plants.”

The Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 defined white phosphorous as a chemical weapon and the United States and all other signatories to the Convention were suppose to start phasing out its use on April 29, 1997.

The treaty set up several steps with deadlines toward complete destruction of chemical weapons.
Phase I: 1% destruction, April 2000
Phase II: 20% destruction, April 2002, also complete destruction of empty munitions, precursor chemicals, filling equipment and weapons systems
Phase III: 45% destruction, April 2004
Phase IV: 100% destruction, April 2007, with no extensions past April 2012

bearman,

I know - just giving Christopher a chance to either back down or declare himself in public...

Christian,

I went and checked that convention, and here is what it had to say:

"For the purposes of this Convention:

1. "Chemical Weapons" means the following, together or separately:

(a) Toxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes;

(b) Munitions and devices, specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of those toxic chemicals specified in subparagraph (a), which would be released as a result of the employment of such munitions and devices;

(c) Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in connection with the employment of munitions and devices specified in subparagraph (b)."

I guess you can try and lawyer your way into saying that this includes WP, but I could lawyer my way out of it...you want WP considered at chemical weapons, you're going to have to get speficif - because I absolutely assure you, until the left cooked up this story last week, not a single person on Earth ever considered WP to be a chemical weapon.

Its like this - had Saddam used WP on our troops, we would not have been justified in retaliating with WMDs because WP is not a WMD. Get it?

Christian is a typical lib; when the facts don't fit, make up new ones. It constantly amazes me that they think they can get away with this crap in the google era. It takes exactly 0.05 seconds to find the "Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993" and prove that Christian is full of s#*%.

Why do so many on the right call Americans who question things about this war or administration (haters of this country)? I dont slam the right as anti-Americans for their views. I'm just trying to have a civilized discussion about this.
What would you people need in order to REALLY question some of the actions of our military? I dont blame our soldiers if civilians get killed, I blame their commanders for they are the ones responsible.
Calling me a left-wing fruitcake may entertain those of you who question nothing about this war, but for those of us in the center (who will win in 2008) it is further proof that change is needed in order to finish what we started in Iraq and return to the real war on terrorism as in Osama bin Laden (anyone remember that name associated with 9/11?)
If I didn't love my country I wouldn't give a crap what our government was doing period. If I agreed with everything I would be a fool.
Lets keep this conversation open and non-combative.
I dont question anyones patriotism here, so please act like adults and quit the name calling, it accomplishes nothing.
By the way, thank you Mark for allowing me to post my comments here, its a priviledge that you allow me.
Thank you.

not to mention that christians U.N. is full of ..it also! You expect us to admire an institution filled with the hypocrisy of the left. Where is your condemnation for the scandals that went far beyond our border and or government, yet you still hold this institution in esteem, almost as bad as your nobel peace prize commitee. Ha!

Why do so many on the right call Americans who question things about this war or administration (haters of this country)? I dont slam the right as anti-Americans for their views. I'm just trying to have a civilized discussion about this

Yah right... civilized. That is where you lack Christopher. If you really wanted a civilized conversation you'd go to huffpo(Bwahaaaa)! You don't slam the right for their views? B.S. you spit in our faces every time you bring forth another dumb conspiracy theory without the evidence to back. If all your consiracy's on the left were true we(that's right WE) the people would have hung GWB from the closest Oak tree! Instead you(christopher)endanger our sovereignty, our reputation, and most of all My BROTHER, and his brothers in arms! For what, you a..hole? for a whim! A conspiracy! Why don't you ask some real questions? Like how deep does the scandal between the U.N. and sadaam go. Is it possible that the U.N. not only had a food for oil scandal, but maybe a remove WMD's scandal. No I guess I shouldn't ask that since there is no hard evidence.

You want to know why we don't question our goverment on unfounded B.S. Because it was set up to hold itself accountable! Witch hunts are only political, and those are what you seek. Most of all tho Christopher we know the men over there that fight, they are our brothers, our fathers, our cousins, our children. We believe in them most of all.

it is further proof that change is needed in order to finish what we started in Iraq and return to the real war on terrorism as in Osama bin Laden (anyone remember that name associated with 9/11?)

Where have you been the last three years Christopher. We still have troops in Afghanistan today hunting down that guy, what's his name? Oh yah, Osama bin ladled. Haven't heard much from him in the last two years. I wonder if he's still alive? I wonder if he is in anyway effective for anybody? I wonder if he might be in Iraq? Now that would be a reason to get out today! So many questions, unanswered hmmmm......... Guess i'll have to go with the gut, or Faith as you libs. just hate.

Christian,

Maybe you just don't understand the way our military works...I was in, so was Bearman; it is drilled into your head that you MUST NOT obey an immoral or illegal order.

It is just infuriating to think that you believe a US military officer would order the deliberate or grossly negligent killing of non-combatants - and even more infuriating that you think our troops would obey such an order if it were given. These are AMERICAN soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines...troops with a two century long tradition of ever more merciful behaviour towards those in their power. It is the ENEMY who deliberately targets women and children...who hides behind the skirts of women to take pot-shots at our troops...

You don't seem to realise that you are insulting myself, Bearman and every single US servicemember past and present when you make such accusations...

Dear Beerman,
Everything is a conspiracy to you. You say the government has a system of holding itself responsible for itself? lol!!
I have to admit that my stomach is still sore from laughing from that statement.
Ever consider anger management classes?
jeeez....

I have seen the photographs of the affect of WP. These children were burned so badly that I could barely recognize them a human. One was a infant swaddled in a blanket - the blanket somehow fused to its tiny corpse. It was horrific.

How I love informing the misinformed. I'm assuming you're misinformed through no fault of your own? (Although chances are you don't care for real facts anyway)

But here, I'll enlighten you.

Go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah%2C_The_Hidden_Massacre

And read all the info on the page.

While your at it, you can watch the video of the Falluja siege. I'm sure you'll find that it's hard to discredit images of melted children's faces due to W.Phosphorus. However, since the media in this country won't show the images to the American public, I can see why you would think your words are an effective campaign to smear the W. Phosphorus allegations.

Here's a piece of the film:
"The filmmakers interview ex US military solider Jeff Englehart of Colorado who discusses the American use of phosphorus bombs, codenamed "Whiskey Pete", in built-up areas, and describes the Fallujah offensive as "just a massive killing of Arabs."

(Yes, a U.S MARINE said that!) OH NO....NOT THE TRUTH! Republicans don't like the truth.

But it's OK, it's nothing new, we all know neo-cons are lying sacks of sh*t.

BTW, I wouldn't really consider myself an ingrate brother. I mean why should I thank Bush for letting the utility company, HMO and his oil buddies steal more of my money? Oh wait I know, I should be thankful for his bright "idea" that killed over 2000 of our soldiers, in the name OF those same oil companies and, at the expense of our economy. Oh wait, now I got it, I should be thankful that Bush is such a moron that the Repubs will lose so much public trust that there will not be another Republican President for 10 more years.

This should be his slogan.

George W. Bush: "Paving the way for a Liberal America"

Ooooh, ouch!

How I love informing the misinformed. I'm assuming you're misinformed through no fault of your own? (Although chances are you don't care for real facts anyway)

But here, I'll enlighten you.

Go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah%2C_The_Hidden_Massacre

And read all the info on the page.

While your at it, you can watch the video of the Falluja siege. I'm sure you'll find that it's hard to discredit images of melted children's faces due to W.Phosphorus. However, since the media in this country won't show the images to the American public, I can see why you would think your words are an effective campaign to smear the W. Phosphorus allegations.

Here's a piece of the film:
"The filmmakers interview ex US military solider Jeff Englehart of Colorado who discusses the American use of phosphorus bombs, codenamed "Whiskey Pete", in built-up areas, and describes the Fallujah offensive as "just a massive killing of Arabs."

(Yes, a U.S MARINE said that!) OH NO....NOT THE TRUTH! Republicans don't like the truth.

But it's OK, it's nothing new, we all know neo-cons are lying sacks of sh*t.

BTW, I wouldn't really consider myself an ingrate brother. I mean why should I thank Bush for letting the utility company, HMO and his oil buddies steal more of my money? Oh wait I know, I should be thankful for his bright "idea" that killed over 2000 of our soldiers, in the name OF those same oil companies and, at the expense of our economy. Oh wait, now I got it, I should be thankful that Bush is such a moron that the Repubs will lose so much public trust that there will not be another Republican President for 10 more years.

This should be his slogan.

George W. Bush: "Paving the way for a Liberal America"

It must be great to live in Republand, where no one tells the truth and leaders get away with murder.

How I love informing the misinformed. I'm assuming you're misinformed through no fault of your own? (Although chances are you don't care for real facts anyway)

But here, I'll enlighten you.

Go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallujah%2C_The_Hidden_Massacre

And read all the info on the page.

While your at it, you can watch the video of the Falluja siege. I'm sure you'll find that it's hard to discredit images of melted children's faces due to W.Phosphorus. However, since the media in this country won't show the images to the American public, I can see why you would think your words are an effective campaign to smear the W. Phosphorus allegations.

Here's a piece of the film:
"The filmmakers interview ex US military solider Jeff Englehart of Colorado who discusses the American use of phosphorus bombs, codenamed "Whiskey Pete", in built-up areas, and describes the Fallujah offensive as "just a massive killing of Arabs."

(Yes, a U.S MARINE said that!) OH NO....NOT THE TRUTH! Republicans don't like the truth.

But it's OK, it's nothing new, we all know neo-cons are lying sacks of sh*t.

BTW, I wouldn't really consider myself an ingrate brother. I mean why should I thank Bush for letting the utility company, HMO and his oil buddies steal more of my money? Oh wait I know, I should be thankful for his bright "idea" that killed over 2000 of our soldiers, in the name OF those same oil companies and, at the expense of our economy. Oh wait, now I got it, I should be thankful that Bush is such a moron that the Repubs will lose so much public trust that there will not be another Republican President for 10 more years.

This should be his slogan.

George W. Bush: "Paving the way for a Liberal America"

It must be great to live in Republand, where no one tells the truth and leaders get away with murder.

Ever consider anger management classes?
jeeez....

No need for anger management classes! We have yet to hear anything of substance from you christopher.

Truthman, maybe it is time for you to believe the majority. Do you really think that all our soldier boys are so bad that only one would come out against what was done. Or do ya think that like a certain presidential candidate we know maybe he had alterior motives for spilling his guts on how horrid U.S. soldiers are. Oh that's right, Kerry is the lefts hero! Sigh...... you people are pathetic, and we all see right thru you.

Let me reitterate, We believe in our country, our government, our soldiers. We actually believe the best about them, not the worst. Are they perfect? No, there are even bad apples amongst them that cause problems and do things out of line. But we don't blame the majority. Kinda like we don't blame the majority for listening to the lies of the left(our bad apples). You guys don't give a rats ass about the world being a better place, or America being a successful democracy, or peace in the middle east. All you care about is having a world with no consciense, so you won't feel bad when your making porn in college, or smokin a dub in front of your three year old, or aborting your 2 month old, etc. etc. etc.

Beerman is just such a perfect American. He loves everyone who agrees with him and anyone else is anti-American Homosexual loving drug addicts making porn while looking for new ways to have an abortion all while aiding the terrorists...
LOL!!!
What a complete moron..
I can just imagine what your wife or girlfriend is like,
quivering and hiding in the corner worried she might set you off if she doesn't agree 100% with your opinions.
People like you are so blinded by ego that you wouldn't see the truth if it kicked you in the ass.
It you who doesn't give a crap about our country, you only want to divide it and to dismiss all criticism, that is not democracy Marine. That is tyranny.
Just because you served doesn't mean everyone has to agree with you. There are many who serve and have served who find people like you a complete embarrassment to the Marine Corps.
You dont hold any moral superiority over anyone.

That documentary seems to have Michael Moore written all over it.
The irony of it all is that if you read the Wikipedia report on WP to which the Fallujah documentary links, it debunks the whole WP as a weapon theory.
Here take a look at it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_%28weapon%29

Here's what's labeled under Applications:
Applications

Smoke-screening agent

Weight-for-weight, phosphorus is the most effective smoke-screening agent known, for two reasons:

1. It actually absorbs most of the screening mass from the surrounding atmosphere; and
2. The smoke particles are actually an aerosol, a mist of liquid droplets which are close to the ideal range of sizes for Mie scattering of visible light. This effect has been likened to three dimensional textured privacy glass—the smoke cloud does not obstruct an image, but thoroughly scrambles it. It also absorbs infrared radiation.

When phosphorus burns in air, it first forms phosphorus pentoxide:

P4 + 5 O2 → 2 P2O5

However phosphorus pentoxide is extremely hygroscopic (actually, deliquescent) and quickly absorbs even minute traces of moisture to form liquid droplets of phosphoric acid:

P2O5 + 3 H2O → 2 H3PO4

Since an atom of phosphorus has an atomic mass of 31 but a molecule of phosphoric acid has a molecular mass of 98, the cloud is already 68% by mass derived from the atmosphere. (To put that another way, you have 3.2 kilograms of smoke for every kilogram of WP you started with.) But it can still absorb more; phosphoric acid itself is hygroscopic. Given time, the droplets will continue to absorb more water, growing larger and more dilute, until they reach equilibrium with the local water vapour pressure. In practice the droplets quickly reach a range of sizes very suitable for scattering visible light, and then start to dissipate due to wind or convection.
USS Alabama hit by a white phosphorus bomb in bombing tests by General Billy Mitchell, September 1921.
Enlarge
USS Alabama hit by a white phosphorus bomb in bombing tests by General Billy Mitchell, September 1921.

Because of the great weight efficiency of WP smoke, it is particularly suited for applications where weight is highly restricted, such as hand grenades and mortar bombs. An additional advantage for hand smoke grenades—which are more likely to be used in an emergency—is that the WP smoke cloud forms very quickly, in fact in a fraction of a second. Because WP is also pyrophoric, most munitions of this type have a simple burster charge to split open the casing and spray fragments of WP through the air, where they ignite spontaneously and leave a trail of rapidly thickening smoke behind each particle. The appearance of this cloud forming is easily recognised; one sees a shower of burning particles spraying outward, followed closely by distinctive streamers of white smoke, which rapidly coalesce into a fluffy, very pure white cloud (unless illuminated by a coloured light source).

Various disadvantages of WP are discussed below, but one which is particular to smoke-screening is "pillaring". Because the WP smoke is formed from fairly hot combustion, the gasses in the cloud are hot, and tend to rise. Consequently the smoke screen tends to rise off the ground relatively quickly and form aerial "pillars" of smoke which are of little use for screening. Tactically this may be counteracted by using WP to get a screen quickly, but then following up with emission type screening agents for a more persistent screen. Some countries have begun using red phosphorus instead. Red phosphorus ("RP") burns cooler than WP and eliminates a few other disadvantages as well, but offers exactly the same weight efficiency. Other approaches include WP soaked felt pads (which also burn slower, and pose a reduced risk of incendiarism) and PWP, or plasticised white phosphorus.
[edit]

Incendiary

It is commonly believed that white phosphorus ignites spontaneously on contact with air at room temperature. This is not quite true; the autoignition temperature is actually about 30°C in humid air, and slightly higher in dry air. However at slightly lower temperatures WP will slowly surface oxidise, effectively smouldering, and will often warm up to the point where it will ignite. At any rate, the slightest degree of friction will easily ignite it, and it is practically guaranteed to be ignited by a burster charge, so for all intents and purposes it is pyrophoric.

Because of this, WP has long had a secondary role as an incendiary, either directly or more usually as a "first fire" material. Contrary to another popular myth, it does not burn particularly fiercely, especially in comparison to other incendiaries like thermite. As an incendiary, it is most effective against highly flammable targets like very dry vegetation or petrol, oils and lubricants. However a WP fire does have the special difficulty that if extinguished with water, even to the point of being quite cold, it may reignite later when it dries out and exposes the WP to the air again.
Also read the effects on humans, WP actually burns quite less then napalm and mostly the worst effects described as inhailining the smoke rather then the burns,so basically, yeah, I think RAI's Italian state channel is bull-shiting us.

Christopher, A verbal hitting match with you would be a complete waste of time! Not to mention I'd win. You my friend are entitled to your opinion, you are also entitled to a beating when you come on a conservative blogsite spewing B.S. from both ends. Can't handle the name calling, well go somewhere else then teenager, what are you a bored freshman or something. Man I get called much worse things on KOS and Huffpo, oh you know the usual, baby killer, marine fag etc. etc. What's a blog without emotion(boring). I stand by my earlier assertions Christopher, If you can't come with some kind of evidence for your wild theories, then maybe you should be in class.

Oh yah, in response to the whole spewing of "He loves everyone who agrees with him and anyone else is anti-American Homosexual loving drug addicts making porn while looking for new ways to have an abortion all while aiding the terrorists..." "I can just imagine what your wife or girlfriend is like,
quivering and hiding in the corner worried she might set you off if she doesn't agree 100% with your opinions."

well, shows how truly narrowminded you are to assume that I don't love others of whom aren't in total agreemnet with me. A little background(only because these issues are important to me). My lovely little wife is a brilliant & accomplished 25 year musician specializing in piano & 1st trumpet. Being that she is a woman trumpet player(not real common) she is surrounded by men all the time. Boy, does she have a mind of her own. Fortunately in the eight years we have been married, there is not much we disagree on. If we did I would lose the battle. 98lbs. of pure attittude. Her family is wonderful, I get along with them better than I do my own. Her homosexual father and older brother are exceptional human beings and are welcome in our house anytime. Fortunately for us they know our beliefs and convictions and have always respected them by not forcing their lifestyles on us, we return that respect! In referance to the other things you said about porn, abortion, drugs and so forth, Well aren't those the issues for the demoRATS, we are still waiting for you guys to come up with some real issues, and real solutions! Maybe that's why you get no respect when you come on here spouting crap! Let's see, you guys are real good at hmmmmm....... feeding the poor(and keeping them dependant), making sure young ladies know that there is no consequence for promiscuity(ahh just get an abortion it's your body), Oh yah, and turning the world against the U.S. with your inccessant lying(thanks for reminding me of why I don't like you)! You can disagree with me all day Christopher, but quit crying & whining about being called names(oh yah, that's a liberal trademark). Hey at least I didn't come up with some other nickname for you as you did me! But thanks I actually like the name you gave me! Beerman, kool! Peace

Truthman,

Now, let me see - whom to believe? Do I believe one disgruntled ex-Marine who has signed up with a bunch of anti-American leftists, or do I believe the United States military and my own military experience?

Hmmm...this is tricky. I just don't know whom to believe....

Hehehe. You guys are clever I'll give you that. Now, lets play a little game here shall we?

Let's go to any local park and, one of you Repubs stand still while I shower you with your "non chemical" white phospherous.

If it's not dangerous then, you should have no worries about standing in it's killzone. If it turns out that I am wrong and you happen to survive unscathed, I will join the Republican party and devote myself to your limp-d*ck President and, call him daddy.

That's how sure I am of W.P effects on human beings.

Oh and to quote Carlos. "Also read the effects on humans, WP actually burns quite less then napalm."

Uhh? and is that uh......supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing when contacting human skin? I mean I'm no rocket scientist but chemical burns may not melt the skin off my bones but, I'm sure they still hurt like hell.

Hehehe. You guys are clever I'll give you that. Now, lets play a little game here shall we?

Let's go to any local park and, one of you Repubs stand still while I shower you with your "non chemical" white phospherous.

If it's not dangerous then, you should have no worries about standing in it's killzone. If it turns out that I am wrong and you happen to survive unscathed, I will join the Republican party and devote myself to your limp-d*ck President and, call him daddy.

That's how sure I am of W.P effects on human beings.

Oh and to quote Carlos. "Also read the effects on humans, WP actually burns quite less then napalm."

Uhh? and is that uh......supposed to be a good thing or a bad thing when contacting human skin? I mean I'm no rocket scientist but chemical burns may not melt the skin off my bones but, I'm sure they still hurt like hell.

If it's not dangerous then, you should have no worries about standing in it's killzone.

Sorry truthman, I don't see where it says that it is not dangerous. We are just putting this thing called perspective on it. You wouldn't know what that means. That's o.k. tho we understand your kind now, you all don't take no for an answer.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4440664.stm

The truth is that WP was used as an incendiary weapon. Supporters are going to say that it was used against enemy combatants, who deserved no mercy. But the bottomline is: who determined (with absolute certainty) that the targets were indeed enemy combatants? Using what criteria did they determine that they were enemy combatants? If a building was bombed or burned, did anyone make sure that there were no innocents in that building?

The killing of even a single innocent life is abhorrent. Writing off innocents as collateral damage is even worse. It is ludicrous that often times, those hypocrites who call themselves pro-life are the most raucous proponents of this war that has simply written off thousands of innocent children killed during its course. It is those hypocrites who call themselves family-centric that have no empathy for those familes that have simply been in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is those hypocrites who think that they are devout believers of God that are often the most violent, intolerant, howling fanatics. Abysmal hypocrisy is the hallmark of the right wing. (Turns out that Bin Laden is also a conservative right winger who happens to follow Islam instead of Christianity.)

The Bush administration loves to use sweeping religious invectives such as "evil" to describe people that it suspects to be enemy combatants. If only they had access to the mirror of introspection would they see in themselves what they see in others.

In the end, it is not possible to have an objective discussion at a web site that says that it's explicitly pro-Bush. In response to my post, I am expecting an ad hominem response, calling me an un-christian, immoral (or amoral) liberal. That's okay. It hardly makes a difference. The damage has been done. Violence will beget violence, hate will only beget more hate. It will be our children who will pay the price of our actions, when those orphaned or psychologically damaged by this war will pick up arms. As we sow shall our children reap.

The war on terror is not a war against a nation or race or people. It is a war against an ideology of virulent religious fundamentalism. Enemy combatants (or whatever you wish to call them) are but manifestations of this ideology. You can kill as many enemy combatants (and collateral innocents) as you want. But as long as the ideology persists, the war will go on.

Hence, the war on terror cannot be fought with guns or violence. It has to be fought with reason. Violence may temporarily treat the symptoms, but only reason can cure the cause.

However, let us not forget that the Bush administration itself direly needs the medicine of reason. If only they could see their own hypocrisy would they really understand the problem at hand.

Oh boy, we got ourselves a bonified KOS/DU subscriber boys and girls. VN, #1 you probably believe it's a womans right to kill a REAL innocent. #2 I will still break down your door and rescue you from the hands of the enemy if needs be. If you want to call me a baby killer, go ahead, cause I don't see you every morning in the mirror. I'm O.K. with that!

The war on terror is not a war against a nation or race or people. It is a war against an ideology of virulent religious fundamentalism. Enemy combatants (or whatever you wish to call them) are but manifestations of this ideology. You can kill as many enemy combatants (and collateral innocents) as you want. But as long as the ideology persists, the war will go on.

O.K. this is a very true statement. That being said, you go try to convince your so called enemy combatants to mend their ways. Meanwhile I will try to keep the TERRORISTS from chopping your friggin head off! Would you like to be our ambassador to our so called enemy combatants V.N? We can not guaranty your safety, but your more than welcome to try.

I`ve thrown one or two WP and Red Phosphorus for real in Iraq and it was the most abhorent and sickening weapon I ever had to use. fair enough kill if you have to but not like that it`s just cruel and it really should never be used if there is a risk that there are non-combatants around. (yes gentlemen civilians get hurt in war and in large quantities.) do you really condone the use of such things? If so you should really ask yourselves who the terrorist`s really are?
OIF Veteran

http://pub28.bravenet.com/guestbook/2348337024 Interracial
http://messageboard699146.aimoo.com/ Interracial Sex
http://messageboard699149.aimoo.com/ Interracial Dating
http://spiritbooks.thesitefights.com/cgi-bin/gbview.cgi?owner=cqgenosg Interracial porn
http://spiritbooks.thesitefights.com/cgi-bin/gbview.cgi?owner=jaxxfvmn gay interracial
http://kelning457.journalspace.com/ Interracial sex
http://eteamz.active.com/interracialdating Interracial Dating
http://eteamz.active.com/interracialporn Interracial Porn