05-08-2003 23:40									#1
	Marines: We used something like Napalm in Iraq Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/st...p-8113624c.html

quote: Report: Marines dropped devices similar to Napalm on Iraqi troops The Associated Press Last Updated 11:18 a.m. PDT Tuesday, August 5, 2003 SAN DIEGO (AP) - Marine Corps fighter pilots and commanders say they dropped firebombs similar to napalm on Iraqi troops earlier this year, according to a report published Tuesday. The Marines say that in March, U.S. warplanes dropped dozens of incendiary bombs near bridges over the Saddam Canal and the Tigris River in central Iraq to clear the way for troops headed to Baghdad. "We napalmed both those (bridge) approaches," said Col. James Alles, commander of Marine Air Group 11, told the San Diego Union-Tribune. "Unfortunately, there were people there because you could see them in the (cockpit) video. "They were Iraqi soldiers there. It's no great way to die," Alles added. He could not provide estimates of Iraqi casualties. "The generals love napalm," said Alles. "It has a big psychological effect." The firebombs were used again in April against Iraqis near a key Tigris River bridge, north of Numaniyah, the Marines said. There were reports of another attack on the first day of the war. During the war, Pentagon spokesmen denied that napalm was being used, saying the Pentagon's stockpile had been destroyed two years ago. Napalm, a thick, burning combination of polystyrene, gasoline and benzene, was used against people and villages in Vietnam. Its use drew widespread criticism. The newspaper said the spokesmen were apparently drawing a distinction between the terms firebomb and napalm. The Marines dropped "Mark 77 firebombs," which use kerosene-based jet fuel and a smaller concentration of benzene. Marine spokesman Col. Michael Daily acknowledged the incendiary devices were "remarkably similar" to napalm weapons, but said they had less of an impact on the environment. "You can call it something other than napalm, but it's napalm," said John Pike, defense analyst with GlobalSecurity.org, a nonpartisan research group in Alexandria, Va. Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Jim Amos confirmed aircraft dropped what he and other Marines continue to call napalm on Iraqi troops on several occasions. He commanded Marine jet and helicopter units involved in the Iraq war and leads the Miramar-based 3rd Marine Air Wing. Although many human rights groups consider incendiary bombs to be inhumane, international law does not prohibit their use against military forces. The United States has not agreed to a ban against possible civilian targets. "Incendiaries create burns that are difficult to treat," said Robert Musil, executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility, a Washington group that opposes the use of weapons of mass destruction. Musil described the Pentagon's distinction between napalm and Mark 77 firebombs as "pretty outrageous." Before March, the last time U.S. forces had used napalm in combat was the Persian Gulf War, again by Marines.

They said it best -- not a great way to die, and doesn't feature the same level of control as GPS-guided smart bombs. Not such a great idea when a tyrant like Saddam puts his military installations in civilian areas, but (hopefully) they're only using it in open areas, like those bridges.

But we're against a ban on using these things on "possible civilian targets"?

	05-08-2003 23:43									#2
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

There is already a post on this.

	06-08-2003 00:16									#3
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

COPY CATTTTT SAVA + 11 1!!!!!!11!!!

	06-08-2003 00:19									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

the U.S. is very non-committal about banning certain types of warfare.

hell we still have chemical and biological weapons stocks.

As if the U.S. sees a situation in which we would use those.

I wonder...

	06-08-2003 00:27									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

We point our WoMD at other nations to stop them from building their own. It's rather hypocritical, but it works and instills our emperialistic fist over them...

	06-08-2003 00:32									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Dissident the U.S. is very non-committal about banning certain types of warfare. hell we still have chemical and biological weapons stocks. As if the U.S. sees a situation in which we would use those. I wonder...

hi ,

stocklevels please of bio weapons , .....

have a nice day

	06-08-2003 00:33									#7
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dissident the U.S. is very non-committal about banning certain types of warfare. hell we still have chemical and biological weapons stocks. As if the U.S. sees a situation in which we would use those. I wonder...

Nope, bio stocks were eliminated by US presidential directive under Nixon. The CIA had some, which lead to the Church hearings in the Senate.

	06-08-2003 00:33									#8
	Increase Your PM Length

The other thread is at http://www.apolyton.net/forums/show...&threadid=93938

	06-08-2003 00:35									#9
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

naw, we need two threads for this topic

I was under the impression that we have chemical and bio weapons in storage in Minnesota (or was it Montana). But perhaps that is only chemical weapons.

	06-08-2003 00:36									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by gopher Nope, bio stocks were eliminated by US presidential directive under Nixon. The CIA had some, which lead to the Church hearings in the Senate.

Oh, please.

The US has a ton of bio/chemical weapons, I'm sure. I would be surprised if there isn't a developed country that doesn't.

	06-08-2003 00:37									#11
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dissident naw, we need two threads for this topic I was under the impression that we have chemical and bio weapons in storage in Minnesota (or was it Montana). But perhaps that is only chemical weapons.

Yep, only chems. And actually, IIRC, there are 12 states with stockpiles, virtually all schedualed for destruction. I think most of the chem weapons were created before 86 or so, except for CS (teargas, always in demand).

	06-08-2003 00:39									#12
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by gopher Yep, only chems.

And what do you call smallpox and anthrax? They've always been quick to point out how tight the security is around these bio-weapons during all the terrorist scares.

	06-08-2003 00:41									#13
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

they were talking about russian bio weapons.

We only have samples of smallpox locked in a lab somewhere. As far as I know we don't have weapons equipped to deploy smallpox and anthrax.

	06-08-2003 00:43									#14
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The US maintains the ability to make more germ weapons, but storing them isn;t worth the effort, or the political fallout. I doubt the Us would have much doubts using them anyhow, if a situation arose.

And the US never got even a tenth of the way the Soviets did in mass manufacturing the stuff, both germ and chemical.

	06-08-2003 00:45									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Dissident they were talking about russian bio weapons.

And american. Of course, american media no doubt focused primarily on the russian samples.

quote: We only have samples of smallpox locked in a lab somewhere. As far as I know we don't have weapons equipped to deploy smallpox and anthrax.

No envelopes or needles?

Not even some modifiable missles? I'm sure they've got a few especially designed for it tucked away somewhere, anyways.

	06-08-2003 00:46									#16
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Osweld And what do you call smallpox and anthrax? They've always been quick to point out how tight the security is around these bio-weapons during all the terrorist scares.

We were talking about the US stockpile. As for the Russians, I have had some experiance dealing with the Russian bio weapon system, called Biopreparat. And they are in NO WAY secure with their sites. Only a few are up to western standards (Thankfully, their main site for smallpox, the Vector Complex, is one of those), but most of their storage and testing sites are unsecured, and even worse, located in the new Central Asian countries that are dealing with Muslim Fundys. They need lots of $ for this, but most of the US money to Russia for WMD safety thru the Nunn-Lugar act goes to Nukes.

	06-08-2003 00:49									#17
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Osweld And american. Of course, american media no doubt focused primarily on the russian samples.

Where have you heard of US biological weapon samples? Hell, even the Russians admitted that the US is out of the Biological Weapons trade, and for years they have always tried to overestimate our weapons for justification of billions of rubles for their own systems.

	06-08-2003 00:56									#18
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by gopher We were talking about the US stockpile.

So am I.


Please tell me that your media isn't THAT biased, that they would not even acknowledge that the US has anthrax and smallpox aswell. Always in the news, it was the USA and Russia with the only possible sources. I even remember a reprentive of the american government saying such.

	06-08-2003 01:00									#19
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Dissident naw, we need two threads for this topic I was under the impression that we have chemical and bio weapons in storage in Minnesota (or was it Montana). But perhaps that is only chemical weapons.

hi ,

no more offensive program for 30 years , ....

have a nice day

	06-08-2003 01:00									#20
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Osweld So am I. Please tell me that your media isn't THAT biased, that they would not even acknowledge that the US has anthrax and smallpox aswell. Always in the news, it was the USA and Russia with the only possible sources. I even remember a reprentive of the american government saying such.

Our two samples are registered with WHO as being for defensive and testing purposes only, and under WHO and foreign verification and not in any weapon form.
WHO has verified this fact many times for the US. This has been known since 76' or so, when WHO reduced all smallpox stocks to 2 samples, one in the USA and one in Russia.

	06-08-2003 01:05									#21
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by gopher Our two samples are registered with WHO as being for defensive and testing purposes only, and under WHO and foreign verification and not in any weapon form. WHO has verified this fact many times for the US. This has been known since 76' or so, when WHO reduced all smallpox stocks to 2 samples, one in the USA and one in Russia.

hi ,

france , the uk and belgium still have samples also , ....

believed to have ; Israel ( figures ) china , brazil , india , italy , syria , and one khaddafi

found in Iraq after GWI

have a nice day

	06-08-2003 01:10									#22
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by gopher Our two samples are registered with WHO as being for defensive and testing purposes only, and under WHO and foreign verification and not in any weapon form. WHO has verified this fact many times for the US. This has been known since 76' or so, when WHO reduced all smallpox stocks to 2 samples, one in the USA and one in Russia.

First of all, if the US has two samples along with Russia having it's own, that is atleast three samples.

As for WHO - whatever that is - WHO cares? All the possible sources of chemical weapons in Iraq can also double as something else - and not even just 'defensive and testing' purposes either, but actual practical things like providing clean water and medicine - but no one seemed to care about that.


Anyways, did you just recover from amnesia? Only a few minutes ago you where doubting that the US had samples, and now you seem to know all about it.

	06-08-2003 01:12									#23
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

hi ,

dont forget that both countries have a small sample also in the vaults of the un ( who ) in vienna , .....

and who knows what other crap , ....

have a nice day

	06-08-2003 01:18									#24
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Osweld First of all, if the US has two samples along with Russia having it's own, that is atleast three samples. As for WHO - whatever that is - WHO cares? All the possible sources of chemical weapons in Iraq can also double as something else - and not even just 'defensive and testing' purposes either, but actual practical things like providing clean water and medicine - but no one seemed to care about that. Anyways, did you just recover from amnesia? Only a few minutes ago you where doubting that the US had samples, and now you seem to know all about it.

1) Two samples overall, one in Atlanta in the US, one in St Petersburg, Russia.

2) World Health Orginization, who were in charge of the famous assault against smallpox, eliminating it as a natural disease in the late 70's. One of the finest moments in Humanity (and the UN). They are the only ones trusted in the Cold War and after to be verifiers for the Biological Weapons inspections

3) I said that the US has no OFFENSIVE or WEAPONS capible Biological weapons. All we have are a sample of smallpox and anthrax for anti-weapons testing. In no way does the US have any biological weapons. Big difference. A smallpox bomb can infect tens of thousands with as little as 5 cells, in purified form. The sample the US have are all natural, ie. the same from the wild, and thus have a small chance of infection from the few thousand cells left. Big difference.

	06-08-2003 01:23									#25
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by panag hi , france , the uk and belgium still have samples also , .... believed to have ; Israel ( figures ) china , brazil , india , italy , syria , and one khaddafi found in Iraq after GWI have a nice day

The Euros got rid of theirs a while back, when the WHO got involved. As for the rest, they got it from Russia, who secretly split their WHO alloted smallpox sample in half, and began to breed smallpox, starting in 75 with the creation of Biopreparat. Russia has admitted giving samples to India and China, and recent NYT reports have indicated that Iraq recieved some from the USSR and the USA (the USA during the Iran-Iraq war). The WHO still maintains that the rest of these samples are virtually all weapons-grade, and thus not self-perpetuating.

	06-08-2003 01:24									#26
	Remove this text

BTW, a good site for some basic info on the bioweapon/chem systems for countries with sources belongs to the Federation of American Scientists at www.fas.org under the WMD section.

Edit: The comma in the url.

	06-08-2003 01:28									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

http://www.apolyton.net/forums/show...38&pagenumber=2