Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush
administration lied to British officials about the use of napalm-type
firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by The Independent newspaper
of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not used
so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the
position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea.
They carry kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to
structures and to its victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them
far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine
Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and April 2,
2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about
allegations that the napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on
Fallujah last year, charges denied by the US.
.
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 08:36:40 PM |
|
|
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fWJse.9078$yU.770383@news20.bellglobal.com...
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied to
British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by
The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not used
so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since discovered
that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry kerosene-based
jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its victims. The bombs lack
stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st
Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the US.
Good.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 08:21:38 PM |
|
|
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush
administration lied to British officials about the use of napalm-type
firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by The Independent newspaper
of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not used
so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the
position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea.
They carry kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to
structures and to its victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them
far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine
Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and April 2,
2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about
allegations that the napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on
Fallujah last year, charges denied by the US.
URL?
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "MonsieurStat" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 08:56:14 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush
administration lied to British officials about the use of napalm-type
firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by The Independent
newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not
used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say
that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea.
They carry kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks
to structures and to its victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making
them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st
Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about
allegations that the napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on
Fallujah last year, charges denied by the US.
URL?
Please people, do your own research ;-)
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=647397
Stat.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 10:03:18 PM |
|
|
MonsieurStat wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush
administration lied to British officials about the use of napalm-type
firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by The Independent
newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not
used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say
that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea.
They carry kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks
to structures and to its victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making
them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st
Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about
allegations that the napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on
Fallujah last year, charges denied by the US.
URL?
Please people, do your own research ;-)
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=647397
Stat.
Well, you posted the article, after all ...
;-)
Woods
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 08:55:38 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied to
British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by
The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not used
so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since discovered
that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its victims.
The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were
used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and April 2,
2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the
US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003 that they
used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly effective weapon at
bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope so. 100 dead insurgents
are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 09:05:36 PM |
|
|
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied to
British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by
The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not used
so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since discovered
that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its victims.
The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were
used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and April 2,
2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the
US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003 that they
used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly effective weapon at
bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope so. 100 dead insurgents
are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial
invasion. It was all civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military.
Since these are supposedly "far from precise", it would support
allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 09:29:06 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied to
British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained
by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not used
so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since
discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its victims.
The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the
US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003 that
they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly effective
weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope so. 100 dead
insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise", it
would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists remiments
and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only the fanatically
nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know. Lot's of rumors
swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only used
against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges remained intact
around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When the 3rd arrived all
were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower uppers" got fried. hehe.
Saved countless American lives.
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs aren't
considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 09:49:21 PM |
|
|
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied to
British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained
by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not used
so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since
discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its victims.
The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the
US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003 that
they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly effective
weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope so. 100 dead
insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise", it
would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists remiments
and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only the fanatically
nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know. Lot's of rumors
swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only used
against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges remained intact
around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When the 3rd arrived all
were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower uppers" got fried. hehe.
Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs aren't
considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in
unnecessary suffering. I would think that most rational and/or
civilized people would presume that such a weapon dumped on heavily
populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate
guidance systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians,
which *is* illegal by internation law. Remember, this was during the
initial invasion when civilians were still in all the cities - well
before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the insurgency
gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best
friend about their use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 10:04:23 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied to
British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained
by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not
used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since
discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77
firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between
March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the
US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003 that
they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly effective
weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope so. 100 dead
insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise", it
would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only the
fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know. Lot's of
rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only used
against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges remained intact
around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When the 3rd arrived
all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower uppers" got fried.
hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs aren't
considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary suffering. I
would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a weapon dumped on
heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate guidance systems,
would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is* illegal by internation law.
Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians were still in all the cities - well
before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the insurgency gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 10:09:17 PM |
|
|
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied to
British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained
by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they had not
used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since
discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77
firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between
March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the
US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003 that
they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly effective
weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope so. 100 dead
insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise", it
would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only the
fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know. Lot's of
rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only used
against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges remained intact
around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When the 3rd arrived
all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower uppers" got fried.
hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs aren't
considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary suffering. I
would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a weapon dumped on
heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate guidance systems,
would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is* illegal by internation law.
Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians were still in all the cities - well
before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the insurgency gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and
then lied to our closest allies about it.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 10:18:24 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77
firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between
March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by
the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003
that they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly
effective weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope
so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise",
it would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only the
fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know. Lot's of
rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only used
against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges remained
intact around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When the 3rd
arrived all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower uppers" got
fried. hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs aren't
considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary suffering.
I would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a weapon dumped
on heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate guidance
systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is* illegal by internation
law. Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians were still in all the cities -
well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the insurgency gained so much
support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and then lied to our closest
allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All of Iraq? A part of Iraq?
You are one hysterical *****.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 10:24:09 PM |
|
|
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30 MK77
firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between
March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by
the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003
that they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly
effective weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say. Hope
so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise",
it would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only the
fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know. Lot's of
rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only used
against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges remained
intact around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When the 3rd
arrived all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower uppers" got
fried. hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It basically
crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs aren't
considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary suffering.
I would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a weapon dumped
on heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate guidance
systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is* illegal by internation
law. Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians were still in all the cities -
well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the insurgency gained so much
support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and then lied to our closest
allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All of Iraq? A part of Iraq?
You are one hysterical *****.
From the article:
"Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush
administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in
Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then
writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
"
Sheesh. Can't you read?!?
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
17 Jun 2005 11:17:26 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message news:ttMse.18723$g5.341@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him
they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say
that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30
MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq
between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by
the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003
that they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly
effective weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say.
Hope so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise",
it would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only
the fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know.
Lot's of rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only
used against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges
remained intact around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When
the 3rd arrived all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower
uppers" got fried. hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It
basically crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs
aren't considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary suffering.
I would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a weapon
dumped on heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate
guidance systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is* illegal by
internation law. Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians were still in
all the cities - well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the insurgency
gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their
use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and then lied to our closest
allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All of Iraq? A part of Iraq?
You are one hysterical *****.
From the article:
"Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in
Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then
writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
"
Sheesh. Can't you read?!?
Woods
Read what? Where in Iraq did the US drop firebombs on civillians? Where? Sheesh.
.
|
|
|
| User: "MonsieurStat" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
18 Jun 2005 02:48:39 AM |
|
|
"dreamwalker" <backfromthe@dead.com> wrote in message
news:dab2c$42b3a05b$40762857$17146@powerweb.allthenewsgroups.com...
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:ttMse.18723$g5.341@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the
Bush administration lied to British officials about the use of
napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter obtained by
The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US
originally told him they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at
any time but then writes "I regret to say that I have since
discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the
position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and
Korea. They carry kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that
the gel sticks to structures and to its victims. The bombs lack
stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30
MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in
the invasion of Iraq between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions
about allegations that the napalm-like firebombs were used in the
US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines
acknowledged back in 2003 that they used Mark77's during the
initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly effective
weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I
can't say. Hope so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one,
slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the
initial invasion. It was all civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi
military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise", it would
support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out
of towners. Bathists remiments and civillians were long gone by the
time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only the fanatically nut
cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't
know. Lot's of rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs
swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor.
The firebombs were only used against fortified or stategic areas such
as bridges. Why do you think the bridges remained intact around
Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached.
When the 3rd arrived all were intact and the exposives were still
wired. The designated "blower uppers" got fried. hehe. Saved
countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not
accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo
of a weapon. It basically crushes your guts out every open orfice
when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international
law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are.
Fuel/air and firebombs aren't considered chemical weapons in the same
way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result
in unnecessary suffering. I would think that most rational and/or
civilized people would presume that such a weapon dumped on heavily
populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate
guidance systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by
civilians, which *is* illegal by internation law. Remember, this was
during the initial invasion when civilians were still in all the
cities - well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the
insurgency gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his
best friend about their use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and
then lied to our closest allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All
of Iraq? A part of Iraq? You are one hysterical *****.
From the article:
"Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush
administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in
Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then
writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
"
Sheesh. Can't you read?!?
Woods
Read what? Where in Iraq did the US drop firebombs on civillians? Where?
Sheesh.
http://www.rense.com/general40/secret.htm
Stat
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
18 Jun 2005 11:03:05 AM |
|
|
"MonsieurStat" <monsieurstat@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:qlQse.13056$Qr3.1376872@news20.bellglobal.com...
"dreamwalker" <backfromthe@dead.com> wrote in message
news:dab2c$42b3a05b$40762857$17146@powerweb.allthenewsgroups.com...
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:ttMse.18723$g5.341@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration
lied to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private
letter obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally
told him they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret
to say that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the
position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30
MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq
between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied
by the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003
that they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly
effective weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say.
Hope so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from
precise", it would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only
the fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know.
Lot's of rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only
used against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges
remained intact around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached.
When the 3rd arrived all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated
"blower uppers" got fried. hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It
basically crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs
aren't considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary
suffering. I would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a
weapon dumped on heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have
adequate guidance systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is*
illegal by internation law. Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians
were still in all the cities - well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the
insurgency gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their
use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and then lied to our
closest allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All of Iraq? A part of
Iraq? You are one hysterical *****.
From the article:
"Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in
Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then
writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
"
Sheesh. Can't you read?!?
Woods
Read what? Where in Iraq did the US drop firebombs on civillians? Where? Sheesh.
http://www.rense.com/general40/secret.htm
Stat
ROTFLMAO.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
18 Jun 2005 04:36:17 PM |
|
|
I still think DU swamps just about every dirty act in combat
operations.
Cluster bombs, etc too but know goes around comes around, and when
these weapons are used on you and yours you will have no cause for
complaint eh?
Good enough for Goose, good enough for Gander
LB
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woodswun" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
18 Jun 2005 06:18:35 PM |
|
|
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message news:ttMse.18723$g5.341@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally told him
they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret to say
that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30
MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq
between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied by
the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003
that they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly
effective weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say.
Hope so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from precise",
it would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only
the fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know.
Lot's of rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only
used against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges
remained intact around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached. When
the 3rd arrived all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated "blower
uppers" got fried. hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It
basically crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs
aren't considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary suffering.
I would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a weapon
dumped on heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have adequate
guidance systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is* illegal by
internation law. Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians were still in
all the cities - well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the insurgency
gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their
use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and then lied to our closest
allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All of Iraq? A part of Iraq?
You are one hysterical *****.
From the article:
"Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in
Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then
writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
"
Sheesh. Can't you read?!?
Woods
Read what? Where in Iraq did the US drop firebombs on civillians? Where? Sheesh.
Reread the article:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush
administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs
in Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him
they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but
then writes "I regret to say
that I have since discovered that this is not the case and
must now correct the position."
We dropped these, which did NOT have guidance systems, during the
initial invasion.
There's a lot more to it that you aren't absorbing (resistance to the
truth, perhaps), but that's about as far down as I can water it for you.
Woods
.
|
|
|
| User: "dreamwalker" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
18 Jun 2005 09:15:57 PM |
|
|
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:fZ1te.22322$g5.17770@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:ttMse.18723$g5.341@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration
lied to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private
letter obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally
told him they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret
to say that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the
position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30
MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq
between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied
by the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003
that they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly
effective weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say.
Hope so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from
precise", it would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only
the fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know.
Lot's of rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only
used against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges
remained intact around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached.
When the 3rd arrived all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated
"blower uppers" got fried. hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It
basically crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs
aren't considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary
suffering. I would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a
weapon dumped on heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have
adequate guidance systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is*
illegal by internation law. Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians
were still in all the cities - well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the
insurgency gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their
use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and then lied to our
closest allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All of Iraq? A part of
Iraq? You are one hysterical *****.
From the article:
"Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in
Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then
writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
"
Sheesh. Can't you read?!?
Woods
Read what? Where in Iraq did the US drop firebombs on civillians? Where? Sheesh.
Reread the article:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs
in Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him
they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but
then writes "I regret to say
that I have since discovered that this is not the case and
must now correct the position."
We dropped these, which did NOT have guidance systems, during the initial invasion.
There's a lot more to it that you aren't absorbing (resistance to the truth, perhaps), but that's
about as far down as I can water it for you.
Woods
It's a lot about nothin. The Marines admitted back in "03 that they used them to clear bridges. I
have a .wav in which firebomb munition is seen being used againt a fortified bunker. It looks to be
a MK79 or MK80 as the plume is much larger than a MK77. I downloaded it off of the Fox news channel
site. It was dropped during the initial push into country.
Christ, I feel like a broken record. There's no evidence what so ever that the firebombs were used
on civillians. Americans didn't target any civillians on a wholesale basis with any weapon. Woods,
you either don't or won't understand. I don't have a problem with field commanders ordering the use
of firebombs or FA munitions to eliminate the bad guys. Why is that so difficult for you to grasp?
As for the unguided part. Mk77-80 firebombs aren't dropped from 10,000 ft. They're designed to be
dropped on low level bomb runs. Usually one or two at a time. There's no need for guidance.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: U.S. Lied About 'Napalm' Use in Iraq |
18 Jun 2005 09:32:03 PM |
|
|
DW wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:fZ1te.22322$g5.17770@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:ttMse.18723$g5.341@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:xfMse.18600$g5.12690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:RYLse.18581$g5.1558@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:QjLse.18377$g5.12589@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
dreamwalker wrote:
"Woodswun" <woodswun@tepidmail.com> wrote in message
news:CGKse.18313$g5.9783@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
MonsieurStat wrote:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration
lied to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in Iraq. In a private
letter obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says the US originally
told him they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then writes "I regret
to say that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the
position."
The MK77 bombs are an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea. They carry
kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that the gel sticks to structures and to its
victims. The bombs lack stabilizing fins, making them far from precise. Ingram said 30
MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq
between March 31 and April 2, 2003.
The Independent said that the revelation raises new questions about allegations that the
napalm-like firebombs were used in the US assault on Fallujah last year, charges denied
by the US.
URL?
Woods
US Marines dropped over 500 firebombs during Gulf 1. The Marines acknowledged back in 2003
that they used Mark77's during the initial push into country during Gulf II. It's a highly
effective weapon at bridges and river banks. Whether it was used in Floosie I can't say.
Hope so. 100 dead insurgents are better than one, slightly wounded Marine. ;-)
Um .... except that there weren't any "insurgents" during the initial invasion. It was all
civilian and the shreds of the Iraqi military. Since these are supposedly "far from
precise", it would support allegations of extremely high civilian casualities.
Are you that dense? Floosie is fallugia. The assualt was against out of towners. Bathists
remiments and civillians were long gone by the time the 3rd bat at 5th corps hit town. Only
the fanatically nut cases remained. Crazies. Did they get fried? Like I said, I don't know.
Lot's of rumors swirling..........or should I say fireballs swirling?
I was referring to the following quote, which you apparently missed:
Wow. You're real piece of work.
"Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs
were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of
Iraq between March 31 and
April 2, 2003."
The initial invasion had no "insurgents" such as we see now.
As for the fuel/air ordinance. It's used only against heavy armor. The firebombs were only
used against fortified or stategic areas such as bridges. Why do you think the bridges
remained intact around Baghdad square? Saddam ordered all be blown if they were breached.
When the 3rd arrived all were intact and the exposives were still wired. The designated
"blower uppers" got fried. hehe. Saved countless American lives.
Did you even read the article? It said the weapons used were not accurate.
So? What's your point?
Air/fuel bombs were also used in Gulf II. Now that's one nasty mofo of a weapon. It
basically crushes your guts out every open orfice when it detonates. Yuck!
I thought chemical weapons use was in violation of international law?
Woods
By your logic all weapons are chemicals...........which they are. Fuel/air and firebombs
aren't considered chemical weapons in the same way nerve and mustard agents are.
Okay, I looked it up. Napalm is permitted only if it does not result in unnecessary
suffering. I would think that most rational and/or civilized people would presume that such a
weapon dumped on heavily populated areas full of civilians, and which also do not have
adequate guidance systems, would results in "unnecessary suffering" by civilians, which *is*
illegal by internation law. Remember, this was during the initial invasion when civilians
were still in all the cities - well before the insurgents started showing up. No wonder the
insurgency gained so much support!!!
Besides, you seem to have missed the bit about how Bush lied to his best friend about their
use.
Yup, Bush lied, Americans died.
Woods
Sure Woods. America firebombed downtown Baghdad. Unfuckingreal.
We firebomed civilian populations during our initial attack on Iraq, and then lied to our
closest allies about it.
Woods
Where's the proof? Show where America intentionally firebombed Iraq. All of Iraq? A part of
Iraq? You are one hysterical *****.
From the article:
"Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs in
Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him they
had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but then
writes "I regret to say that I
have since discovered that this is not the case and must now
correct the position."
"
Sheesh. Can't you read?!?
Woods
Read what? Where in Iraq did the US drop firebombs on civillians? Where? Sheesh.
Reread the article:
Britain's Armed Forces Minister Adam Ingram has admitted that the Bush administration lied
to British officials about the use of napalm-type firebombs
in Iraq. In a private letter
obtained by The Independent newspaper of London, Ingram says
the US originally told him
they had not used so-called MK77s in Iraq at any time but
then writes "I regret to say
that I have since discovered that this is not the case and
must now correct the position."
We dropped these, which did NOT have guidance systems, during the initial invasion.
There's a lot more to it that you aren't absorbing (resistance to the truth, perhaps), but that's
about as far down as I can water it for you.
Woods
It's a lot about nothin. The Marines admitted back in "03 that they used them to clear bridges. I
have a .wav in which firebomb munition is seen being used againt a fortified bunker. It looks to be
a MK79 or MK80 as the plume is much larger than a MK77. I downloaded it off of the Fox news channel
site. It was dropped during the initial push into country.
Christ, I feel like a broken record. There's no evidence what so ever that the firebombs were used
on civillians. Americans didn't target any civillians on a wholesale basis with any weapon. Woods,
you either don't or won't understand. I don't have a problem with field commanders ordering the use
of firebombs or FA munitions to eliminate the bad guys. Why is that so difficult for you to grasp?
As for the unguided part. Mk77-80 firebombs aren't dropped from 10,000 ft. They're designed to be
dropped on low level bomb runs. Usually one or two at a time. There's no need for guidance.
DW, these Liberal pukes don't want the truth, they want an Islamic
victory.
Nothing would make them happier.
Tony
.
|
< | | | | | | | | | | | | |
