The Irony...Israel...Chemical Warfare...What?

I'm not going to say much, since I will admit that I am biased on the issue, so I'm just going to post a link and the article and then let you discuss:

LONDON, Jan 08, 2009 (AFP) - Israel is using white phosphorus shells in its offensive on the Gaza Strip, the Times newspaper reported on Thursday, citing what it said was photographic evidence despite Israeli denials.

The daily said it had identified stockpiles of white phosphorus (WP) shells from photographs taken of Israel artillery units on the border with Gaza this week.

The report said Palestinian citizens had suffered burns caused by the weapons.

"The use of WP against civilians is prohibited under international law," the newspaper noted. It said it had identified pale blue shells marked with the designation M825A1 as a US-made WP munition.

Phosphorus ignites on contact with oxygen and, according to the Times, is being used by the Israeli military to create smokescreens to allow its ground forces to operate.

Medics in Gaza told the newspaper they had been struggling to treat patients with unusual burns, which they suspected had been caused by white phosphorus.

"The burns are very unusual. They don't look like burns we have normally seen. They are third-level burns that we can't seem to control," the Times quoted medic Muhammad Azayzeh, 28, as saying in Gaza City.

It cited an Israeli military spokeswoman as insisting the M825A1 identified by the paper was not a WP shell: "This is what we call a quiet shell -- it is empty, it has no explosives and no white phosphorus. There is nothing inside it.

"We shoot it to mark the target before we launch a real shell. We launch two or three of the quiet shells which are empty so that the real shells will be accurate. It's not for killing people."

But Neil Gibson of Jane's Missiles and Rockets told the Times that the M825A1 was a WP round.

"The WP does not fill the shell but is impregnated into 116 felt wedges which, once dispersed (by a high-explosive charge), start to burn within four to five seconds.

"They then burn for five to ten minutes. The smokescreen produced is extremely effective," he said.

http://zawya.com/Story.cfm/sidANA20090108T132508ZEGL59/Israel%20using%20phosphorus%20shells%20in%20Gaza:%20report

Do you really think that the US will let the UN do anything to Israel? With the US backing them like a pet dog, they can pull anything stupid there and get away with it.aliblabla2007

sadly your right with America in there corner Israel can do what ever the hell they want the United Nations Security Council member states are growing tierd of Israels aggressive attitude even the UK which in the past has been one of Israels strongest supporters is starting to turn there back on them yet America continues to let them do what ever the hell they want .

White phosphorus doesn't classify as chemical warfare....LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]White phosphorus doesn't classify as chemical warfare....II_Seraphim_II

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]White phosphorus doesn't classify as chemical warfare....LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] Well, it is a chemical....it is illegal....its being used in warfare....so.....:?II_Seraphim_II

[QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]It's not classified as chemical warfare. It's not illegal it's controversial.LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="II_Seraphim_II"] Read my OP: "The use of WP against civilians is prohibited under international law" seems pretty illegal to me >.>II_Seraphim_II

to me it looks like civilians are cought in the crossfire between crazy hamas and israeli army

both are responsible arabs think that its allways Israels fault but its their fault (Israel because its beeing too aggressive, and Hamas for being reckless )

I really don't understand all of this anit israel sentiment. If you lived in a country that is relentlesely attacked after making several "concessions for peace" you would be pretty livid as well. Is Israel supposed to just allow hamas shoot rockets at its civilians from land they gave to the palastinians in a peace agreement. thegrimpeeper

theres no difference between this conflict and the russia georgia conflict in the summer. yet everyone was all over russia to get out

so what, thats war. I can assure you if they had all the plethora of modern warfare they would use it.

but of course you expect Israel to do absolutly nothing to protect itself, cause really us Israelies arent allowed to hit back, maybe we can pack up our suitcases and go somewhere else.

if they could, they would be dancing over our dead bodies, and thats why Israel cant stop until Hamas is defeated, if Hamas decides to hide behined unarmed civilians, then its Hamas's responsibility not Israel.

next time someone starts a fight with you, I expect you not to hit back, cause if you do, youre too aggressive.

and dont talk about proportionality, cause in war, it doesnt exist and you know it, the point of a war is to defeat your enemy

imo, i don't believe war should have certain rules. but if the media can flood the airwaves about iraq and iran being insane and evil for using chemicals and then down play it when israel uses them.....what type of message is that sending to the rest of the world? ppl in that area of the world need to get their act together. itz been centuries and they're still fighting...wth. shyskillz

I'm seeing words like "mark target" and "smokescreen". How exactly does this qualify as chemical warfare?

This is terrible, but what can you do, and listening to people justify it because it is not considered "chemical warfare" seriously, get your head out of your ass and show a little humanity.Yongying

This is terrible, but what can you do, and listening to people justify it because it is not considered "chemical warfare" seriously, get your head out of your ass and show a little humanity.Yongying

Read the topic title. Determining whether or not Israel is partaking in chemical warfare is kind of relevant, wouldn't you say?

[QUOTE="shyskillz"]imo, i don't believe war should have certain rules. but if the media can flood the airwaves about iraq and iran being insane and evil for using chemicals and then down play it when israel uses them.....what type of message is that sending to the rest of the world? ppl in that area of the world need to get their act together. itz been centuries and they're still fighting...wth. LJS9502_basic

i know what it is? itz made from chemicals that causes fire. just because another country chooses to use a chemical that chokes you instead of burn shouldn't be a big difference. itz wrong and baffle me when you are told not to use certain weapons to fight your enemy, huh? the ppl that makes these rules are the same ppl not fighting in these wars....they just watch from the comfort and safty of their home,office or what have you. wars today are stupid in so many ways. shyskillz

There's a mighty big difference between "mark target and set up a smokescreen" (permitted), and "blanket the enemy with WP and watch them burn to death" (forbidden).

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="shyskillz"]imo, i don't believe war should have certain rules. but if the media can flood the airwaves about iraq and iran being insane and evil for using chemicals and then down play it when israel uses them.....what type of message is that sending to the rest of the world? ppl in that area of the world need to get their act together. itz been centuries and they're still fighting...wth. shyskillz

[QUOTE="shyskillz"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Again white phosphorus is not considered chemical warfare. It's an incendiary. Read up on chemical warfare....LJS9502_basic

if a person throws incendiary nades in an area. and some other guy sprayed anthrax in another, but both kills the same amount of ppl, more or less whats the difference? itz war, anything should go. how you mix your chems to get a different effect shouldn't be an issue. that's really the point i'm making, i'm not trying to debate with you on chemistry.... besides i'm a little busy right now i'm just saying in war no one should dictate what is chemical or what to use to defend your self. thats like saying i'm going to go into your house and cause chaos but you can't use certain weapons at your disposal to fight me off, itz just ridiculous.

oh, i know some chems have lasting effects on ppl and their surroundings, but thats the price of war. if i have a weapon that can be very effective then i'm going to use it. there's nothing really humane about war.....just kill the enemy.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="shyskillz"] i know what it is? itz made from chemicals that causes fire. just because another country chooses to use a chemical that chokes you instead of burn shouldn't be a big difference. itz wrong and baffle me when you are told not to use certain weapons to fight your enemy, huh? the ppl that makes these rules are the same ppl not fighting in these wars....they just watch from the comfort and safty of their home,office or what have you. wars today are stupid in so many ways. shyskillz

if a person throws incendiary nades in an area. and some other guy sprayed anthrax in another, but both kills the same amount of ppl, more or less whats the difference? itz war, anything should go. how you mix your chems to get a different effect shouldn't be an issue. that's really the point i'm making, i'm not trying to debate with you on chemistry.... besides i'm a little busy right now i'm just saying in war no one should dictate what is chemical or what to use to defend your self. thats like saying i'm going to go into your house and cause chaos but you can't use certain weapons at your disposal to fight me off, itz just ridiculous.

oh, i know some chems have lasting effects on ppl and their surroundings, but thats the price of war. if i have a weapon that can be very effective then i'm going to use it. there's nothing really humane about war.....just kill the enemy.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="shyskillz"] i know what it is? itz made from chemicals that causes fire. just because another country chooses to use a chemical that chokes you instead of burn shouldn't be a big difference. itz wrong and baffle me when you are told not to use certain weapons to fight your enemy, huh? the ppl that makes these rules are the same ppl not fighting in these wars....they just watch from the comfort and safty of their home,office or what have you. wars today are stupid in so many ways. shyskillz

if a person throws incendiary nades in an area. and some other guy sprayed anthrax in another, but both kills the same amount of ppl, more or less whats the difference? itz war, anything should go. how you mix your chems to get a different effect shouldn't be an issue. that's really the point i'm making, i'm not trying to debate with you on chemistry.... besides i'm a little busy right now i'm just saying in war no one should dictate what is chemical or what to use to defend your self. thats like saying i'm going to go into your house and cause chaos but you can't use certain weapons at your disposal to fight me off, itz just ridiculous.

oh, i know some chems have lasting effects on ppl and their surroundings, but thats the price of war. if i have a weapon that can be very effective then i'm going to use it. there's nothing really humane about war.....just kill the enemy.

you do realise that normal bombs work based on chemical reactions right? By your logic basicly every war since somewhere around the first world war is one where chemical weapons were used.

besides this really isn't the forum to debate military tactics and uses of military equipment since most people here have no idea about it.

White phosphorus shells are not illegal so long as they are used as a smoke screen...like in these pictures (both were from Gaza, I believe)

WP shells are legal if they are used to block or shield troop movements.