AGM114L
Topic Author
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:12 am

The Use WP In Warfare

Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:23 am

The US Military admits to using white phosphorous against enemy insurgents. Using such munitions was required when the insurgents were too well protected for high explosive rounds to be effective.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/...16/white.phosphorous.ap/index.html

It has been classified as a chemical weapon by the news agencies and some members of A.net but infact it is an incinderary weapon. But we already beat this dead horse and the merits of this statement can be and have been debated in another thead.

Rather than having lethal concussion or shrapnel effects, WP burns people to death. I can see how using this may easily maim people rather than kill them out right. Quite painful I imagine, but WP's use is not a violation of the Hague laws and Geneva Conventions. I wouldn't be suprised to see use of WP made illegal in the laws of land warfare, much along the lines of blinding lasers and 'cop-killer' bullets.

I'm still not sure what I think about the use of WP yet. I can tell you as a combat vet that 'fighting fair' is a very poor tactic and should never be stipulated that our soldiers do so, but also I think weapons that easily maim and cause life long suffering should not be used. Yes, do I realize all weapons have such maiming capability and that we can't fight a war with nerf guns either.

Just wondering what everyone else thinks about the use of WP as a weapon.

(This is not meant to incite a US/Iraq flamefest or why any war is wrong, which I'm sure it will become one, but to debate the merits of WP in warfare.)
My Boeing can blow up your Boeing
 
usnseallt82
Posts: 4727
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 4:49 pm

RE: The Use WP In Warfare

Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:28 am

Quoting AGM114L (Thread starter):
Just wondering what everyone else thinks about the use of WP as a weapon.

I support it completely.  checkmark 
Crye me a river
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: The Use WP In Warfare

Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:27 pm

Completely support it's use. . . .

That said . . . there is an extensive conversation, this subject, ongoing right here.
Chemical Weapons In Iraq (by MD-90 Nov 11 2005 in Non Aviation)

All the usual suspects are there . . . .
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
CaptOveur
Posts: 6064
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 3:13 am

RE: The Use WP In Warfare

Fri Nov 18, 2005 11:37 pm

If its use saves one American life.. go for it.
Things were better when it was two guys in a dorm room.
 
Pope
Posts: 3995
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 5:57 am

RE: The Use WP In Warfare

Fri Nov 18, 2005 11:50 pm

As soon as all terrorist organizations and insurgents agree to abide by a code of conduct, then we can begin discussing what is and is not allowable. But fighting a war with one hand tied behind our back while animals behead our citizen is just stupid.

If they want to bring it to us, then they need to be ready to get hit back - hard.
Hypocrisy. It's the new black for liberals.
 
DLPMMM
Posts: 2121
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:34 am

RE: The Use WP In Warfare

Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:05 am

From the title of the thread, I was wondering why anyone would use Word Perfect in warfare, since the DOD always specifies that all documents be in Microsoft Word.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, einsteinboricua, Mani87 and 12 guests