US Still Using Napalm

MargaretThatcher · Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:50 am

The US categorically denied using napalm. Apparently, they used something similar, but because it was kerosine based rather than petroleum based, it was not napalm, so they did not lie.

US lied to Britain over use of napalm in Iraq war
By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor

17 June 2005

American officials lied to British ministers over the use of "internationally reviled" napalm-type firebombs in Iraq.

Yesterday's disclosure led to calls by MPs for a full statement to the Commons and opened ministers to allegations that they held back the facts until after the general election.

Despite persistent rumours of injuries among Iraqis consistent with the use of incendiary weapons such as napalm, Adam Ingram, the Defence minister, assured Labour MPs in January that US forces had not used a new generation of incendiary weapons, codenamed MK77, in Iraq.

But Mr Ingram admitted to the Labour MP Harry Cohen in a private letter obtained by The Independent that he had inadvertently misled Parliament because he had been misinformed by the US. "The US confirmed to my officials that they had not used MK77s in Iraq at any time and this was the basis of my response to you," he told Mr Cohen. "I regret to say that I have since discovered that this is not the case and must now correct the position."

Mr Ingram said 30 MK77 firebombs were used by the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force in the invasion of Iraq between 31 March and 2 April 2003. They were used against military targets "away from civilian targets", he said. This avoids breaching the 1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW), which permits their use only against military targets.

Britain, which has no stockpiles of the weapons, ratified the convention, but the US did not.

The confirmation that US officials misled British ministers led to new questions last night about the value of the latest assurances by the US. Mr Cohen said there were rumours that the firebombs were used in the US assault on the insurgent stronghold in Fallujah last year, claims denied by the US. He is tabling more questions seeking assurances that the weapons were not used against civilians.

Mr Ingram did not explain why the US officials had misled him, but the US and British governments were accused of a cover-up. The Iraq Analysis Group, which campaigned against the war, said the US authorities only admitted the use of the weapons after the evidence from reporters had become irrefutable.

Mike Lewis, a spokesman for the group, said: "The US has used internationally reviled weapons that the UK refuses to use, and has then apparently lied to UK officials, showing how little weight the UK carries in influencing American policy."

He added: "Evidence that Mr Ingram had given false information to Parliament was publicly available months ago. He has waited until after the election to admit to it - a clear sign of the Government's embarrassment that they are doing nothing to restrain their own coalition partner in Iraq."

The US State Department website admitted in the run-up to the election that US forces had used MK77s in Iraq. Protests were made by MPs, but it was only this week that Mr Ingram confirmed the reports were true.

Mike Moore, the Liberal Democrat defence spokes-man, said: "It is very serious that this type of weapon was used in Iraq, but this shows the US has not been completely open with the UK. We are supposed to have a special relationship.

"It has also taken two months for the minister to clear this up. This is welcome candour, but it will raise fresh questions about how open the Government wished to be... before the election."

The MK77 bombs, an evolution of the napalm used in Vietnam and Korea, carry kerosene-based jet fuel and polystyrene so that, like napalm, the gel sticks to structures and to its victims. The bombs lack stabilising fins, making them far from precise.

17 June 2005 01:47
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=647397

pikkolo_z · Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:56 am

yes and as long as the US can it will use stuff like this . we have long belived that we can loophole our way out of anything . sad really

DjTime · Chemical Dj

Your fuckin stupid. Thats all there is to it. first of all that picture was not from the iraq war. It was taken three days into the gulf war in 1990 IN kuwait. And that was not napalm used. The American M-1 Abrahms Main Battle tank used and uses to this day a particular round called a sabot. The sabot round is madde from D.U. (depleated Uranium) it's designed to penitrate the toughest armor on the planet, even our tanks could not stop that round. Thats the reason for ALL of the american armor fatalities. We shot our own people, it happens. Anyways the round penetrates the enemy tanks at supersonic speeds. It punches a hole about the size of a golf ball in one side and another on the other. It creats imediate death to everything inside on a purley thermal scale. That iraqi was trying to escape the coming shot. And so fuckin what, do you have ANY damn clue what these people did to there own people? to there neighbors? Please dont put out mere speculation because you have a hate for your government or anothers. I do what everyone else here does. But I dont hate my government or any one elses. Im proud to live in America. I love it here. Even though my freedoms are limited it's because of my own choices. If i didnt synth, i'd be the PERFECT citizen. Oh well, occupational hazard. Stop hating on the people that give you protection. Embrace your freedom, even fight for it. I fight for mine. Im proud to say i was part of the population of this world that helped liberate those desimated people in the middle east. God bless them all and the US.

zub · Fri Jun 17, 2005 9:01 am

its getting late for jingoistic nationalism.
the earth itself wouldn't be a bad place to love, in a patriotic way.

yay earth!
mars sucks.

DjTime · Chemical Dj

I unbderstand you point of view, however any america bees out there? tell them it's never to late.

MargaretThatcher · Fri Jun 17, 2005 4:27 pm

zub · Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:26 pm

yesterday, i was surprised to see that the u.s. military still has enough spare national guardsmen to send helicoptors and humvees over the hills and hollows of appalachia, looking for marijuana.
its almost comical. this has been going on for years, with hardly a murmur of protest.
if i was a right winger, i'd be furious at how inept these heavy-handed invasions of privacy are. the cost to tax-payers is extreme. the pot crop is never affected much.

when will 'the people' decide that we've had enough of this nonsense?

and
how about that downing street memo on iraq?

joe_aldehyde · huxleys associate

not to say anything about these armor-breaching projectiles primarily being used as means of getting rid of nuclear waste! iraq is being polluted with radioactivity, and we all know what are the hazards of this invisible pollution. so much for "liberation"...saddam was a bad man in a small country with limited capabilities (of course not taking into account all these weapons of mass distruction he was pointing towards the rest of the world), but then wtf is BUSH?
ah and concerning "liberation", does it occur to anybody that the process of integrating democracy into a national system simply can not happen in a matter of a few years? look at africa, best example. but as we all know, there is no "policy of slight adjustments" when it comes to foreign affairs involving the US.

i have to agree with ms. thatcher on your point of view, djtime.

the US don't give us protection, neither their own citizens nor anybody in the whole world. they are causing major trouble and use the world as their playground. you and your government aren't any better than al k--aida terrorists, you're all a bunch of fundamentalists with limited ability to think about the consequences of your actions. propagating your ideals doesn't necessarily make the world a better place to live, because your society and your wealth is based on exploiting the rest of the world. not that "my" society is any different (it readily adopted your lifestyle), but i'm fighting from the inside to prevent the spreading of this mentality.

pikkolo_z · Sat Jun 18, 2005 4:42 am

you know what i am from the us . but DJ i am a firm beliver that the only way a person should kill another is while looking into there eyes . not from a mile away pushing a button . BTW war is dumb as hell

let iraq or where ever settle there own shit .../

Lief · Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:36 am

Hey jihad woman, Britain will never adapt Sharia law. Islam is doomed. Its makes itself look worse everyday.

Britain vows to back US on Euro force
By David Wastell in Washington
(Filed: 04/02/2001)

THE Government will throw preparations for the European Rapid Reaction Force into confusion this week by threatening to undermine any operations that conflict with American wishes.

In an attempt to calm United States concerns about a split from Nato, Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary, will promise the new Republican administration that Britain would not let the new defence force act without US support.

The pledge, however, will put Britain at odds with other European allies. While the Government can refuse to send British troops, warships and aircraft to any Rapid Reaction Force operation it opposes, it will have no power to veto action by other members.

Mr Cook flies to Washington tomorrow to meet Dick Cheney, the Vice-President, and General Colin Powell, the Secretary of State. He will tell them that the Government regards the Nato alliance as so fundamental to Britain's national interest that it would not agree to anything that was against America's wishes, a senior official at the Foreign Office said last night.

While insisting that Mr Cook's pledge would not amount to giving America a veto, the official said that it was "impossible to envisage" the Government backing an operation in the face of American opposition. Asked whether other European countries could go ahead without American support, the official said: "None of us can envisage a situation in which that would happen, and we would not let it happen."

The official failed to explain how, other than by persuasion, Britain could prevent its European allies from launching an action of their own. Mr Cook's visit will be the first face-to-face meeting by any foreign minister with General Powell since George W Bush became president. He will also meet Mr Cheney and Condi Rice, Mr Bush's new national security adviser, for talks that will pave the way for Tony Blair's visit to Washington later this month.

Although General Powell and Miss Rice have both signalled that the Bush administration supports the new defence force, as long as it does not weaken Nato, other senior Republicans including members of Congress have doubts. Mr Cook will be "extremely robust" in addressing their concerns, the official said.

He will also discuss measures to tighten the sanctions regime against Saddam Hussein, including a possible crackdown on the smuggling of oil and other goods through Syria, which The Telegraph revealed last month is now running at an unprecedented level. Officials refused to say what steps could be taken ahead of Mr Cook's talks on Tuesday. General Powell said when accepting his new post that he would seek ways to "re-energise" sanctions against Iraq.

Meanwhile, European ministers yesterday were attempting to prevent a further widening of the rift with America over plans for a new missile defence system. At an international conference on defence in Munich, Gerhard Schroder, the German chancellor, said that the European allies should be ready to discuss the proposals with the US.

3 February 2001: Britain will help 'Son of Star Wars' to mature
2 February 2001: [UK News] Cook tries to calm US fears over EU army
31 January 2001: General admits EU army will be rival to Nato
26 January 2001: Kissinger urges Bush to shore up Nato
14 January 2001: [UK News] Eurofighter snub as Britain buys US jets
11 January 2001: EU defence force 'could lead to the break-up of Nato'
27 December 2000: EU army 'will pose no threat to Nato'
23 December 2000: [UK News] Prince says sorry in EU army row
14 November 2000: 20,000 British troops to serve in Euro-army

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$YN2VYTDM4NLYLQFIQMGCFGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2001/02/04/werrf04.xml

Lief · Sun Jun 19, 2005 6:37 am

http://www.apostatesofislam.com

http://www.faithfreedom.org

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/forum/index.php

http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/index.php

According to these links the Quran has been changed over time.

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-myths-koran-manuscripts.htm

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter8/3.html

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Text/

http://www.jodkowski.pl/re/MBright.html

http://cremesti.com/amalid/Islam/Yemeni_Ancient_Koranic_Texts.htm

http://imrepublican.topcities.com/Islam/islam.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2829059.stm

http://atheism.about.com/cs/islamandviolence/

http://www.twin-towers.net/al-farooq_photos.htm

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/southeast/08/17/martyr.culture/index.html

http://muslim-quotes.netfirms.com/jihad.html

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/amil30611.htm

http://www.domini.org/openbook/home.htm

http://www.persecution.org

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9583

http://www.danielpipes.org/

http://www.angelfire.com/hi5/kafirdomunity/action.htm

http://www.geocities.com/khola_mon/BTaliban/Bangla_Taliban_Photos.html

http://www.bwoi.cjb.net

http://www.chechentruth.cjb.net/

http://www.anti-cair-net.org/

http://www.arabsforisrael.com/pages/1/index.htm

http://www.rotter.net/israel/

http://www.geocities.com/the_awful_truth_about_islam/index.htm

http://www.geocities.com/khola_mon/Islam.html

http://www.atcoalition.net/

http://www.taliban-online.info/

http://www.geocities.com/milkmandan2003/TalibanOnline1.html

http://www.truthtree.com/Debating/posts/755.html

2spun · The Resistor

swiy,

knows that pic most likly came from the hwy to hell.
and there was no lie to the UK from the US,(mYBE SOMEthing like arkangle)
ask the Kwaities what they underwent by saddam's men.
swiy stays out of talks like this for many reasons.
kill'n sucks.
but we as people do it.
ask someone that was there and clean'd up that mess.
talk'n one thing live'n it's another.
No disrespect to anyones views or say.
but if you can be a world leader and make things better
then you have swiys support

icecool · Insistent Chemist

BTW IIRC napalm doesn't consist petroluem neither diesel or anything.
It is white phosphorous and it will burn when it heats up to room temperature.
They save it in their airplanes in an icebath and dump it on top of a forest or something else and it will heat up in the sky and start burning.
In the anarchist crapbook there is told about soap and gasoil or diesel and it burns and then call this napalm.
Well it isn't.
Never thrust anything at all from the anarchist cookbook if you got it from there.

anime · Mon Jun 20, 2005 2:37 am

Lief, keep your Christian right-winged proganda to yourself. (I haven't seen so much proganda in one posting before.) We, the INTELLEGENT, can get our unbias views from sources that are not from the Amerikan Kristian right-wing. It is not really the UK that backs the US..it is Tony Blair, who unfortunately represents the liberals of the UK. I suppose to election was the lessor of two evils.

I'm not sure exactly how your links on the Quran are related to the topic of this thread. I assume you wish to make this an issue of religion, unfortunately you fail to see this thread is about politics and NOT religion.

Star-light · Blacklight bulb

Lief, you seem like Polythene Sam!