Insomnia ([info]insomnia) wrote,
@ 2005-11-08 02:57:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
U.S. Marine comes forward, says military used white phosphorus in Fallujah.
Italian broadcasting agency RAI has released a documentary "The Hidden Massacre" that clearly indicates that the U.S. military used white phosphorus offensively during their attack on Fallujah in November, 2004. (Click here to watch the documentary, or here to download it. Democracy Now is also providing the documentary, too, along with interviews. Easier streaming.)


The broadcast shows video of a U.S. helicopter repeatedly raining down a bombardment of white phosporus across Fallujah at night. The U.S. State Department had previously released a statement categorically denying all use of white phosporus during the battle of Fallujah except for illumination purposes. This confirms several firsthand reports from news sources at the time of the invasion.

In the video, Jeff Englehart, a Marine who served in Fallujah and who maintains a weblog at http://www.ftssoldier.blogspot.com , claims that there was widespread, indicriminate use of white phosphorus in last year's attack on Fallujah.



The white phosporus hits, burning at over 3000 degrees, effecting an area approximately a quarter of a mile wide -- over a tenth of a mile in all directions. Classified as an incendiary by the US military, modern white phosphorus ordinance is often mixed with rubber or plastic to prevent its fire from being extinguished, even if doused in water. It scatters and burns indiscrimiately -- if it makes contact with skin, it will burn down to the bone.

Englehart heard officers approve requests for use of white phosphorus on a wide scale throughout the assault. "It comes across the radio as a general transmission... we have speakers in our trucks. 'We're going to drop some Willy Pete.' 'Roger. Commence bombing'"

"We were told going into Fallujah that every single person going into the combat area that was walking, talking, breatheing was an enemy combattant. . . It seemed like just a massive killing of Arabs. It looked like just a massive killing. . . Burned bodies. Burned children. Burned women. White phosphorus kills indiscriminately."

Englehart also reported that the invasion of Fallujah was intentionally delayed by the Bush administration until after the election. "It's was definitely the case. Even in the military ranks, we knew what was going on. They told us..."

-----------------------

UPDATE:

More confirmation of non-illumination use of white phosphorus during the Battle of Fallujah, this time from the Army itself, via the article "The Fight for Fallujah - TF2-2 IN FSE AAR: Indirect Fires in the Battle of Fallujah" in the March/April '05 edition of Field Artillery Magazine :

"The munitions we brought to this fight were . . . illumination
and white phosphorous (WP, M110 and M825), with point-detonating (PD), delay, time and variable-time (VT) fuzes."


"WP proved to be an effective and versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the insurgents in trench lines and spider holes when we could not get effects on them with HE. We fired “shake and bake” missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."

This according to Captain James T. Cobb, First Lieutenant Christopher A. LaCour, and Sergeant First Class William H. Hight, the authors of the article. Their article fundamentally disagrees with the statement by the U.S. State Department on the matter.

There are also numerous reports from embedded journalists that WP was fired on Fallujah, such as this one from the North County Times:

"Bogert is a mortar team leader who directed his men to fire round after round of high explosives and white phosphorus charges into the city Friday and Saturday, never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused.
...
The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call "shake 'n' bake" into a cluster of buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week."


(Post a new comment)


[info]stephenmblundon
2005-11-08 01:22 pm UTC (link)
un-fucking-believable.

(Reply to this)


[info]d_floorlandmine
2005-11-08 02:16 pm UTC (link)
They used WP? Jesus. That's obscene. Hell, it's obscene if it's used on people coming at you with guns. But using it on civilians? Memories of My Lai ...

(Reply to this)


[info]kc724
2005-11-08 03:09 pm UTC (link)
As a planner for 2-2IN who took part in the fight in Fallujah last November, here are my comments on this. As a trained artillery officer I consider myself a little more knowledged than the italian journalist. Let's start with his facts about WP...

1) Spontaneously flammable chemical used for battlefield illumination.
You can't illuminate with WP unless you consider illumination light from all the fires that ignited because of the WP. When WP explodes it's forms a large white smoke screen.

2) Eyewitnesses and ex-US soldiers say the weapon was used in built-up areas in the insurgent-held city.
What exactly is considered 'built up'? Where there are people? Where there are buildings close together? If that's the case, the entire city would be considered 'built up'. Citizens of Fallujah were warned weeks in advance that US would be sweeping through to clear the insurgents. Those that choose to stay were informed of the risks invovled.

3)Englehart heard officers approve requests for use of white phosphorus on a wide scale throughout the assault. "It comes across the radio as a general transmission... we have speakers in our trucks. 'We're going to drop some Willy Pete.' 'Roger. Commence bombing'"
American weapon system does not delivery WP through aerial means but through artillery.

4)"We were told going into Fallujah that every single person going into the combat area that was walking, talking, breatheing was an enemy combattant. . . It seemed like just a massive killing of Arabs. It looked like just a massive killing. . . Burned bodies. Burned children. Burned women. White phosphorus kills indiscriminately."
This might be something that a first line sergeant would tell his soldier to hype them up and get them to stay alert but i GURANTEE you that no commander would ever put out an order similar to 'if it moves kill it'. The liability behind would be astronomical to justify.

5)The US military denies this, but admits using white phosphorus bombs in Iraq to illuminate battlefields.
See the first line for the illumination business. But the US never denied using WP. Check this out : http://sill-www.army.mil/FAMAG/ This is the field artillery journal magazine. Go to previous edition MAR-APR05 and read the article by Captain Cobb, 1LT Lacour, and SFC Hight who were actually on the ground. We used WP, we screened with WP, we cleared trenches with WP. Where does the author get his information from? If he can't even get this right why should I take anything he say seriosuly considering we were actually there?

In a tactical sense using WP would be good to clear an open field, but to fire it into the city is suicide. Assuming you don't set half the city on fire, what does the army do after firing artillery into an area; the infantry moves in to clear and capture the ground. If you ever walked into an area that's been hit with WP you'll know that YOU'LL NEVER WANT TO DO THAT AGAIN, even after it's been settled for a few hours.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2005-11-08 07:41 pm UTC (link)
American weapon system does not delivery WP through aerial means but through artillery.

Then what is the helicopter on the video droping?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]tongodeon, 2005-11-08 07:53 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kc724, 2005-11-08 09:43 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-09 01:34 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kc724, 2005-11-09 03:06 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-09 07:57 pm UTC (Expand)
I'm confused.
[info]tongodeon
2005-11-08 07:51 pm UTC (link)
I'm not sure what you're saying in point 1 and 5. We are, but we're using it for illumination? We aren't using it for illumination because it makes a toxic smokescreen? We're using it as a weapon *and* as an illuminator?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

Re: I'm confused. - [info]kc724, 2005-11-08 09:42 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-08 09:59 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - [info]chaotic_nipple, 2005-11-09 02:07 am UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-09 07:00 am UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - (Anonymous), 2009-04-16 07:12 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - [info]insomnia, 2009-04-16 08:27 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - [info]tongodeon, 2005-11-08 11:51 pm UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-09 12:10 am UTC (Expand)
Re: I'm confused. - [info]kc724, 2005-11-09 03:13 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]insomnia
2005-11-08 07:55 pm UTC (link)
I hadn't heard of it being used from helicopters before either, but the video is pretty convincing.

That said, there were also numerous accounts in the press that WP was fired as artillery too.

From an embedded journalist reporting for the North County Times:
"Bogert is a mortar team leader who directed his men to fire round after round of high explosives and white phosphorus charges into the city Friday and Saturday, never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused."

Use of WP was also reported in numerous other reputable papers by embedded journalists.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - (Anonymous), 2005-11-09 02:24 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]insomnia
2005-11-08 08:07 pm UTC (link)
Here's the direct link to the article you cited, for those who are interested.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-08 08:23 pm UTC (Expand)

(Anonymous)
2005-11-11 04:49 pm UTC (link)
Chemical Weapons Convention

Under this Convention, any toxic chemical, regardless of its origin, is considered as a chemical weapon unless it is used for purposes that are not prohibited (an important legal definition, known as the General Purpose Criterion).

9. "Purposes Not Prohibited Under this Convention" means:

(c) Military purposes not connected with the use of chemical weapons and not dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare.


According to the Army Battle Book ST 100-3, 5-11. FIELD ARTILLERY AMMUNITION s (http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/army/docs/st100-3/c5/5sect3.htm)
such usage is against U.S. and international law.

Burster Type White phosphorus (WP M110A2) rounds burn with intense heat and emit dense white smoke. They may be used as the initial rounds in the smokescreen to rapidly create smoke or against material targets, such as Class V sites or logistic sites. It is against the law of land warfare to employ WP against personnel targets.

Some questions:
If the civilians were cleared out of Fallujah, then how do you explain multiple corroborated reports of up to 1/3 of the population being trapped, especially after the cordons were enforced and the city sealed ?

Men aged 15-65 were not allowed to leave at all. How many of them were non-combatant civilians ?


Do you consider Fallujah's population suffered collective punishment for the acts of some insurgents, an act in breach of the Laws of War and the Geneva Conventions ?

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]swingland
2005-11-08 04:20 pm UTC (link)
i was there, attached to IMEF in camp baharia. they told us ahead of time to expect white phosphorus, and i observed many flares being lit. i don't know if they were used as weapons, though. i remember alot of WP was used because it was night-time and...well...we needed to see what was going on because night-vision goggles only cover just so much.

i know that as for commanders telling us to kill anything that moves, i've never heard that. i HAVE heard them tell us that if it seems like a threat then act accordingly. they never talk in definites. definites are terms used to describe a definite course of action, like "if you see him, shoot him". stuff like that is said by NCOs and possibly junior officers. i've never been told by a colonel (or even a major for that matter) to open fire on anything that moves.

i can say, that for all my suspicions of agendas and motives, i honestly don't believe they were using WP as a chemical agent against insurgents. in fact, i remember rolling through downtown fallujah long after the battle and walking amongst the people there and never seeing burned faces or limbs amongst the crowds. that is just one observer, though. i'm sure they were there. i remember seeing holes in walls where tanks just blew through three buildings to hit a target. i just don't think we'd be using chemical weapons like WP. WP is very handy for night illumination. i am pretty set in believing that it was used solely for that purpose.

of course, i could be wrong.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]insomnia
2005-11-08 08:40 pm UTC (link)
From this article from Field Artillery Magazine, an Army publication:

"We fired “shake and bake” missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."

Apparently, the WP did a bit more than just flush them out, judging from the photos on the documentary site of people -- including women and children -- burnt to the bone, many with their clothes still mostly intact.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]swingland, 2005-11-08 09:01 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]jamesla
2005-11-08 05:05 pm UTC (link)
i find this hard to believe because i got briefed as well. I don't deny the use of white phosporus, i saw it myself but not for killing purposes. I also never heard of aerial WP bombs. Artillery shells yes, but not areial sorties.

As far as crazy orders like that, i find super hard to believe unless it was those crazy ass Blackwater ex-special forces bastards who do the private security for Halliburton. We never received orders to wipe out the entire city like that, that kind of stuff belongs in the movies

I did see massive burning but nowhere did I see the typical white phosporus residue. Besides, if you go into a zone where WP has been used you'll come out half dead and burned. I would not put too much faith into this story.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]enlabelleaurore
2005-11-08 05:38 pm UTC (link)
I live in new orleans, and I can seriously say that the blackwater guys creep me the fuck out. We had a bunch staying at the hotel i work at until a couple weeks ago, and they would go down to the bar every night, and have a few drinks, and proceed to tell people at the bar (who were not blackwater, mostly insurance types, but a few locals) how they would do it if they were going to kill them right this minute.
They also set up an armory in their rooms, and got unreasonably angry when the maids refused to clean it because they weren't comfortable cleaning around the guns.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]swingland, 2005-11-08 09:03 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]tongodeon, 2005-11-08 11:56 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]swingland, 2005-11-09 01:58 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]tongodeon, 2005-11-09 02:09 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]swingland, 2005-11-09 06:33 am UTC (Expand)

[info]insomnia
2005-11-08 08:47 pm UTC (link)
From this article from Field Artillery Magazine, an Army publication:

"We fired “shake and bake” missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."

Apparently, the WP did a bit more than just flush them out, judging from the photos on the documentary site of people -- including women and children -- burnt to the bone, many with their clothes still mostly intact.

I don't think that all of Fallujah was treated like this, certainly, but it is a big city, and the evidence from military commanders, from video, from photographs, and from firsthand accounts of embedded journalists clearly suggests that part of it was treated in this way, contrary to what the State Department claims. Even the documentary points out the fact that areas were covered in white phosphorus residue, and that civilians were told to clean it up with detergents, as it was dangerous. Some witnesses even cite health problems from doing so.

It's good to hear from you, btw. Hope you're doing well in your studies.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]mstry777
2005-11-08 05:07 pm UTC (link)
Added you to friends. I'm a Fallujah vet as well...

kc724 is correct...

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]insomnia
2005-11-08 09:11 pm UTC (link)
Welcome.

I don't think that all of Fallujah was attacked with WP on such a wide scale, but it is a big city, and the evidence from military commanders, from video, from photographs, and from firsthand accounts of embedded journalists clearly suggests that part of it was treated in this way, contrary to what the State Department claimed.

From this article from Field Artillery Magazine, an Army publication:

"We fired “shake and bake” missions at the insurgents, using WP to flush them out and HE to take them out."

This is also confirmed by what embedded journalists heard from soldiers doing the firing, such as in this article.

"Bogert is a mortar team leader who directed his men to fire round after round of high explosives and white phosphorus charges into the city Friday and Saturday, never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused.
...
The boom kicked dust around the pit as they ran through the drill again and again, sending a mixture of burning white phosphorus and high explosives they call "shake 'n' bake" into a cluster of buildings where insurgents have been spotted all week."


(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]imlac
2005-11-08 05:23 pm UTC (link)
"The U.S. State Department had previously released a statement categorically denying all use of white phosporus during the battle of Fallujah except for illumination purposes."

Yeah, I'm sure they used a chemical weapon that can burn through steal for "illumination purposes." Hasn't the State Department ever heard of a flare gun? (Perhaps they have a ban on any kind of gun that can't kill people.)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]kc724
2005-11-08 09:49 pm UTC (link)
Yeah. I really need to see that offical report from the state department denying the use. WP does nothing for to improve your night vision. In fact WP fuks up your NVG.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-08 10:11 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]tongodeon, 2005-11-08 11:59 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-08 10:12 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]swingland, 2005-11-09 02:01 am UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]kc724, 2005-11-09 03:08 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]pecunium
2005-11-10 08:04 pm UTC (link)
WP is an illum round. It burns very brightly, and can be dangled from a parachute. It has the advatange that should it hit the ground the light isn't put out/lost.

And it has a very good hang-time.

TK

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-10 10:52 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]voiceandsalt
2005-11-08 05:47 pm UTC (link)
democracy now has an exclusive interview on this. http://democracynow.org

(Reply to this)


[info]phlyto
2005-11-09 02:28 am UTC (link)
Our 120mm mortar platoon fired nonstop durring the entire battle... we fired something to the order of 800 fire missions... Call it 5 to 15 volleys per mission.

That battle began 1 year ago today if my memory isn't obliterated. Its sad that I don't feel much in the way of sympathy for the enemy... but then, I had a few friends die and saw far too many wounded Marines come through my aid station.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]insomnia
2005-11-09 06:55 am UTC (link)
There were several reports from embedded reporters of mortar groups firing "shake and bake"... a little HE, a little WP. Now, even if an embedded reporter is smart enough to recognize white phosphorus, they don't know jack about such terms. Some soldier told them that was what they were firing, and didn't think there was anything wrong with it.

The obvious thing to ask from my point of view is whether you heard anything about WP being used in Fallujah, of course. I admit I'm curious, but I'm sure as hell not going to ask.

As I said here, if I were in the position of having to invade a rat's nest like Fallujah, I probably wouldn't mind much whether the city was leveled first before my friends went in to face thick fire, ambushes, etc. I completely understand the motivation.

I would hope that if I were in such a situation, I would decide not to fire WP into a city, but since when in the military do soldiers really have much of a choice about anything? That said, no matter what decision I made, I would still hate the fact that my country and my leaders put me in such a f'ed up position in the first place, lying to me and to Congress in order to get their damned war. I would hate the dishonor and disrespect they've heaped upon those who try to do their best and who try to serve their country to the best of their abilities.

The unfortunate people of Fallujah who didn't, couldn't, or chose not to leave that city didn't need to die. Fallujah was a city nearly as large as New Orleans. In a city that big, it's obvious that not every non-combattant is going to leave. Presumably, the people who stayed behind and died needed to die in order to establish US dominance over that city, or to allow the new US-backed Iraqi government to be able to establish control over Iraq. The US government obviously don't believe that the Sunni people have the right to violently oppose us and our vision of what we want not only for their country, but also for their cities and homes. Our way or the highway. With us or against us.

Frankly, it just wasn't that necessary in my book, and it did the US little good. It didn't reduce US casualties, certainly. If it was necessary, however, the Iraqi people should've done the dirty work themselves.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]pecunium, 2005-11-09 05:02 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-09 08:14 pm UTC (Expand)

[info]pecunium
2005-11-09 04:59 pm UTC (link)
I don't know where WP falls in the categorization, since every thing more than muscle driven could be classed as a chemical weapon.

It's still not legitimate for use against persons (though collateral damage is acceptable). On the other hand some of the oddities of the Hague Conventions would make it a crime for the Army/Gov't to use it, but not for the troops (issued ammo is legal for the troops, even if it's a crime for the issuing nation. If they issue hollow-point ammo, you can use it, but you can't, "clip" your own).

Since it has no persistent effect (once it burns out, it's done, unlike Mustard, or Sarin, which can linger), and isn't a area weapon (any more than an HE round) I suspect it doesn't actually count as "chem," and certainly not in the way it is being compared to the gas attacks on the Kurds (whomever committed them).

TK

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]insomnia
2005-11-10 07:42 pm UTC (link)
Actually, I hear that there is a potential longterm health impact from being exposed to the dust of white phosphorus.

That said, I'm not really interested in whether it was a chemical weapon by definition or not. My argument is that the U.S. State Department, at a minimum, lied to the American public by saying it was used only for illumination purposes, and fired safely into the sky.

I also strongly suspect that the DoD is not being honest about its use in Fallujah. If it was strictly used for creating smokescreens, maybe... but that's contradicted by the reports of it being used for "shake and bake".

The use of white phosphorus in Vietnam pissed people off back home, even if it wasn't a chemical weapon, per se. Why would the DoD / State Department think that it would do any less in Iraq?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]pecunium, 2005-11-10 08:01 pm UTC (Expand)

(Anonymous)
2005-11-10 02:43 am UTC (link)
"Bogert is a mortar team leader who directed his men to fire round after round of high explosives and white phosphorus charges into the city Friday and Saturday, never knowing what the targets were or what damage the resulting explosions caused.

So? If you are in the mortar pit, you don't usually see the target. That's the FO's job. You fire what they tell you to fire.

Maj B

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]insomnia
2005-11-10 07:22 pm UTC (link)
I don't disagree with your assessment. Those shells were targeted by a FO. That said, if they were firing into/at buildings as claimed, in the middle of a city, that's definitely a danger to any civilians in the area, especially if the clouds of white phosphorus build to lethal strength.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)(Expand)

(no subject) - [info]pecunium, 2005-11-10 08:02 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-10 10:53 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]pecunium, 2005-11-10 11:00 pm UTC (Expand)
(no subject) - [info]insomnia, 2005-11-11 02:13 am UTC (Expand)
U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine: Detailed Facts About White Phosphorou
(Anonymous)
2005-11-10 02:15 pm UTC (link)
"White phosphorous is spontaneously flammable and is an extremely toxic inorganic substance.
It is used primarily as a smoke agent and can also function as an antipersonnel flame compound capable of causing serious burns."

http://chppm-www.apgea.army.mil/dts/docs/detwp.pdf

There, the US Army itself states that it is an anti-personnel weapon.

Now let's all stop this pathetic word twisting. The US is guilty as hell of war crimes, genocide, crimes agaisnt humanity.

(Reply to this)

*shudder*
[info]matuso
2005-11-21 09:13 am UTC (link)
It's so scary...really, it gives me the chills to think of all those women and children, and infants and fathers and young men and old men and women all alike, suddenly having fire bursting into their living room, exterminating their existance...

GAH.

(Reply to this)


Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…