Cancer Rate in Fallujah Worse than Hiroshima

sponsoredwalk

This is insanely shocking - how many of you knew about this or even
heard about it over the past two weeks, the wikileaks stuff has
kind of acted as a barrier to this story getting out...

Did any of you hear or read about this? I'd like to know.

"The Iraqi city of Fallujah continues to suffer the ghastly consequences of a
US military onslaught in late 2004.
According to the authors of a new study, “Cancer, Infant Mortality and
Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005–2009,” the people of Fallujah are
experiencing higher rates of cancer, leukemia, infant mortality, and sexual
mutations than those recorded among survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki
in the years after those Japanese cities were incinerated by US atomic
bomb strikes in 1945.

The epidemiological study, published in the International Journal of
Environmental Studies and Public Health (IJERPH), also finds the prevalence
of these conditions in Fallujah to be many times greater than in nearby
nations.
The assault on Fallujah, a city located 43 miles west of Baghdad, was one
of the most horrific war crimes of our time. After the population resisted
the US-led occupation of Iraq—a war of neo-colonial plunder launched on
the basis of lies—Washington determined to make an example of the largely
Sunni city. This is called “exemplary” or “collective” punishment and is,
according to the laws of war, illegal.

The new public health study of the city now all but proves what has long
been suspected: that a high proportion of the weaponry used in the
assault contained depleted uranium, a radioactive substance used in shells
to increase their effectiveness.

In a study of 711 houses and 4,843 individuals carried out in January and
February 2010, authors Chris Busby, Malak Hamdan, Entesar Ariabi and a
team of researchers found that the cancer rate had increased fourfold
since before the US attack five years ago, and that the forms of cancer in
Fallujah are similar to those found among the Hiroshima and Nagasaki
atomic bomb survivors, who were exposed to intense fallout radiation.

In Fallujah the rate of leukemia is 38 times higher, the childhood cancer
rate is 12 times higher, and breast cancer is 10 times more common than in
populations in Egypt, Jordan, and Kuwait. Heightened levels of adult
lymphoma and brain tumors were also reported. At 80 deaths out of every
1,000 births, the infant mortality rate in Fallujah is more than five times
higher than in Egypt and Jordan, and eight times higher than in Kuwait.
Strikingly, after 2005 the proportion of girls born in Fallujah has increased
sharply. In normal populations, 1050 boys are born for every 1000 girls. But
among those born in Fallujah in the four years after the US assault, the
ratio was reduced to 860 boys for every 1000 female births. This alteration
is similar to gender ratios found in Hiroshima after the US atomic attack of
1945.

The most likely reason for the change in the sex ratio, according to the
researchers, is the impact of a major mutagenic event—likely the use of
depleted uranium in US weapons. While boys have one X-chromosome, girls
have a redundant X-chromosome and can therefore absorb the loss of one
chromosome through genetic damage.

“This is an extraordinary and alarming result,” said Busby, a professor of
molecular biosciences at the University of Ulster and director of scientific
research for Green Audit, an independent environmental research group.
“To produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must
have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened. We need urgently to
find out what the agent was. Although many suspect uranium, we cannot
be certain without further research and independent analysis of samples
from the area.”

Busby told an Italian television news station, RAI 24, that the
“extraordinary” increase in radiation-related maladies in Fallujah is higher
than that found in the populations of Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the US
atomic strikes of 1945. “My guess is that this was caused by depleted
uranium,” he said. “They must be connected.”

The US military uses depleted uranium, also known as spent nuclear fuel, in
armor-piercing shells and bullets because it is twice as dense as lead. Once
these shells hit their target, however, as much as 40 percent of the
uranium is released in the form of tiny particles in the area of the
explosion. It can remain there for years, easily entering the human
bloodstream, where it lodges itself in lymph glands and attacks the DNA
produced in the sperm and eggs of affected adults, causing, in turn,
serious birth defects in the next generation.

The research is the first systematic scientific substantiation of a body of
evidence showing a sharp increase in infant mortality, birth defects, and
cancer in Fallujah.

In October of 2009, several Iraqi and British doctors wrote a letter to the
United Nations demanding an inquiry into the proliferation of radiation-
related sickness in the city:

“Young women in Fallujah in Iraq are terrified of having children because of
the increasing number of babies born grotesquely deformed, with no heads,
two heads, a single eye in their foreheads, scaly bodies or missing limbs. In
addition, young children in Fallujah are now experiencing hideous cancers
and leukemias.…

“In September 2009, Fallujah General Hospital had 170 newborn babies, 24
percent of whom were dead within the first seven days, a staggering 75
percent of the dead babies were classified as deformed.…

“Doctors in Fallujah have specifically pointed out that not only are they
witnessing unprecedented numbers of birth defects, but premature births
have also considerably increased after 2003. But what is more alarming is
that doctors in Fallujah have said, ‘a significant number of babies that do
survive begin to develop severe disabilities at a later stage.’” (See: “Sharp
rise in birth defects in Iraqi city destroyed by US military”)

The Pentagon responded to this report by asserting that there were no
studies to prove any proliferation of deformities or other maladies
associated with US military actions. “No studies to date have indicated
environmental issues resulting in specific health issues,” a Defense
Department spokesman told the BBC in March. There have been no studies,
however, in large part because Washington and its puppet Baghdad regime
have blocked them.

According to the authors of “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in
Fallujah,” the Iraqi authorities attempted to scuttle their survey. “hortly
after the questionnaire survey was completed, Iraqi TV reportedly
broadcast that a questionnaire survey was being carried out by terrorists
and that anyone who was answering or administering the questionnaire
could be arrested,” the study reports.

The history of the atrocity committed by American imperialism against the
people of Fallujah began on April 28, 2003, when US Army soldiers fired
indiscriminately into a crowd of about 200 residents protesting the
conversion of a local school into a US military base. Seventeen were killed
in the unprovoked attack, and two days later American soldiers fired on a
protest against the murders, killing two more.

This intensified popular anger, and Fallujah became a center of the Sunni
resistance against the occupation—and US reprisals. On March 31, 2004,
an angry crowd stopped a convoy of the private security firm Blackwater
USA, responsible for its own share of war crimes. Four Blackwater
mercenaries were dragged from their vehicles, beaten, burned, and hung
from a bridge over the Euphrates River.


The US military then promised it would pacify the city, with one unnamed
officer saying it would be turned into “a killing field,” but Operation Vigilant
Resolve, involving thousands of Marines, ended in the abandonment of the
siege by the US military in May, 2004. The victory of Fallujah’s residents
against overwhelming military superiority was celebrated throughout Iraq
and watched all over the world.

The Pentagon delivered its response in November 2004. The city was
surrounded, and all those left inside were declared to be enemy
combatants and fair game for the most heavily equipped killing machine in
world history. The Associated Press reported that men attempting to flee
the city with their families were turned back into the slaughterhouse.

In the attack, the US made heavy use of the chemical agent white
phosphorus. Ostensibly used only for illuminating battlefields, white
phosphorus causes terrible and often fatal wounds, burning its way through
building material and clothing before eating away skin and then bone. The
chemical was also used to suck the oxygen out of buildings where civilians
were hiding.

Washington’s desire for revenge against the population is indicated by the
fact that the US military reported about the same number of “gunmen”
killed (1,400) as those taken alive as prisoners (1,300-1,500). In one
instance, NBC News captured video footage of a US soldier executing a
wounded and helpless Iraqi man. A Navy investigation later found the
Marine had been acting in self-defense.

Fifty-one US soldiers died in 10 days of combat. The true number of city
residents who were killed is not known. The city’s population before the
attack was estimated to be between 425,000 and 600,000. The current
population is believed to be between 250,000 and 300,000. Tens of
thousands, mostly women and children, fled in advance of the attack. Half
of the city’s building were destroyed, most of these reduced to rubble.

Like much of Iraq, Fallujah remains in ruins. According to a recent report
from IRIN, a project of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs, Fallujah still has no functioning sewage system six years after the
attack. “Waste pours onto the streets and seeps into drinking water
supplies,” the report notes. “Abdul-Sattar Kadhum al-Nawaf, director of
Fallujah general hospital, said the sewage problem had taken its toll on
residents’ health. They were increasingly affected by diarrhea,
tuberculosis, typhoid and other communicable diseases.”

The savagery of the US assault shocked the world, and added the name
Fallujah to an infamous list that includes My Lai, Sabra-Shatila, Guérnica,
Nanking, Lidice, and Wounded Knee.

But unlike those other massacres, the crime against Fallujah did not end
when the bullets were no longer fired or the bombs stopped falling.
The US military’s decision to heavily deploy depleted uranium, all but
proven by “Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah,” was a
wanton act of brutality, poisoning an entire generation of children not yet
born in 2004.

The Fallujah study is timely, with the US now preparing a major escalation
of the violence in Afghanistan. The former head of US Afghanistan
operations, General Stanley McChrystal, was replaced last month after a
media campaign, assisted by a Rolling Stone magazine feature, accused
him, among other things, of tying the hands of US soldiers in their response
to Afghan insurgents.

McChrystal was replaced by General David Petraeus, formerly head of the
US Central Command. Petraeus has outlined new rules of engagement
designed to allow for the use of disproportionate force against suspected
militants.

Petraeus, in turn, was replaced at Central Command by General James
“Mad Dog” Mattis, who played a key planning role in the US assault on
Fallujah in 2004. Mattis revels in killing, telling a public gathering in 2005
“it’s fun to shoot some people.... You know, it’s a hell of a hoot.”"

link

:eek:

The Blackwater employee's were killed apparently after all of the following
occurred.

"On April 28, a crowd of approximately 200 people gathered outside the
school past curfew, demanding that the Americans vacate the building and
allow it to re-open as a school. The protesters became increasingly
heated, and the deployment of smoke gas canisters failed attempt to
disperse the crowd.[13] The protest escalated as gunmen reportedly fired
upon U.S. troops from the protesting crowd and U.S. Army soldiers from
the 3rd Battalion of the 325th Airborne Infantry Regiment of the 82nd
Airborne Division returned fire, killing 17 people and wounding more than 70
of the protesters. There were no Army or Coalition casualties in the
incident. U.S. forces said that the shooting took place over 30–60
seconds, however other sources claim the shooting continued for half an
hour[14]

Two days later, a protest at the former Ba'ath party headquarters decrying
the American shootings was also fired upon by U.S. troops, this time the
U.S. 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment, which resulted in three more deaths.
[12][15] Following both incidents, the US soldiers asserted that they had
not fired upon the protesters until they were fired upon first.

The 82nd Airborne troops were replaced by forces from the 3rd Armored
Cavalry Regiment and 101st Airborne Division, and on June 4 the 3rd
Armoured Cavalry was forced to request an additional 1,500 troops to help
quell the growing resistance faced in Fallujah and nearby al-Habaniyya.[16]



Fallujah, December 2003
In June, U.S. forces began confiscating motorcycles from local residents,
claiming that they were being used in hit-and-run attacks on US
troops.[17]
On June 30, a large explosion occurred in a mosque in which the imam,
Sheikh Laith Khalil and eight other people were killed. While the local
population claimed that Americans had fired a missile at the mosque, U.S.
forces claimed that it was an accidental detonation by insurgents
constructing bombs.[18] "
link

and that was justification enough for locking people inside the city
& using white phosphorous on them.

What do you think???

Anyone shed more light on the story?

starbelgrade

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

What do you think???

Sorry, I fell asleep by just editing your post to one sentence.

big b

doesn't sound a suitable place for a sponsored walk

we'llallhavetea_old

that is extremely long for this hour of the night, so i just read the highlighted parts, but oh my fcuk!
why is this not major news?

Witcher

The white phosphorus sheds enough light as it is:pac:

Is there any evidence to back up the many..many points your post makes?

starbelgrade

Too Long; Died Reading.

W.Shakes-Beer

well, the figures are certainly shocking.

Uranium is used for nuclear fusion so is highly radioactive.

And the use of phosphorus for "illumination". my arse, they probably knew damn well what it would do.

The damage has essentially been done, sadly that uranium will hang around for a good few years.

oh look at me being nerdy.

http://cellar.org/2009/Aliensimpsons.png

i bring you love

jd007

How much of that did you copy and paste?

sponsoredwalk

W.Shakes-Beer wrote: »

And the use of phosphorus for "illumination". my arse, they probably knew damn well what it would do.

It's the same stuff that Israel were using on Palestinian civilians in 2006,
unbelievable stuff!!!

sponsoredwalk

jd007 wrote: »

How much of that did you copy and paste?

Obviously everything in the big oversized inverted comma's

Witcher

W.Shakes-Beer wrote: »

And the use of phosphorus for "illumination". my arse, they probably knew damn well what it would do.

Militaries do use WP for illumination you do know that?

jackiebaron

I could have told you this back in 2006. I tried, nobody listened. Women are afraid to have children because of the horrific birth defects...kids born with no anuses, etc. American soldiers who were part of that campaign are complaining that their sperm is now acidic and burning their wives when they shag.

Nothing new here. Just another war crime.

If you liked the DU story, you'll really love the amputation weapons Israel used in Gaza.

starbelgrade

jackiebaron wrote: »

kids born with no anuses,

That's taking the term, 'full of sh*t', a bit too literally.

W.Shakes-Beer

Blay wrote: »

Militaries do use WP for illumination you do know that?

Yes but in this case it was more or less used as a weapon.

sponsoredwalk

W.Shakes-Beer wrote: »

Yes but in this case it was more or less used as a weapon.

It was being used as a weapon

piby

I actually do remember reading about this a few months ago for college. All over southern Iraq there's problems caused by all the waste left over from the war. The (UK) Times actually ran some stories in June about the failure of the Western Armies to clean up after. Although I should point out that it wasn't a case of the US or UK deliberately ignoring it but rather passing it on to unscrupulous third parties who just dump it anywhere.

Yet another example of just how overlooked and how far the consequences of modern warfare can stretch.

jackiebaron

Blay wrote: »

Militaries do use WP for illumination you do know that?

Illegal to use it in populated areas. Doesn't stop the Americans. Torture....illegal. Doesn't stop the Americans. Collective punishment....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Use of banned weapons...war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Targeted assassination.....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Murder or intimidation of press correspondents....(Mazan Dana, Nicola Calipari, ad infinitum)....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. War of aggression....crime against humanity. Doesn't stop the Americans. Refusal to care for war refugees......war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Use of high calibre rounds and incendiary munitions on civilians....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans.

Do you have another hour?

bleg

Rates of cancer in Hiroshima aren't much higher than the average...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727715.800-whos-afraid-of-radiation.html

Poccington

That article makes it sound like both Battles of Fallujah were just an assault on civilians.

It was far from that.

sponsoredwalk

jackiebaron wrote: »

Illegal to use it in populated areas. Doesn't stop the Americans. Torture....illegal. Doesn't stop the Americans. Collective punishment....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Use of banned weapons...war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Targeted assassination.....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Murder or intimidation of press correspondents....(Mazan Dana, Nicola Calipari, ad infinitum)....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. War of aggression....crime against humanity. Doesn't stop the Americans. Refusal to care for war refugees......war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans. Use of high calibre rounds and incendiary munitions on civilians....war crime. Doesn't stop the Americans.

Do you have another hour?

Only if you had credible links to back all of that up, then I would

jackiebaron

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

It was being used as a weapon

Gas, isn't it? And the Americans cry foul when the Iraqis develop a new method of piercing their armour with molten copper bombs, yet have no qualms about poisoning an entire vicinity with chemicals that will ensure generations of kids, much like the Vietnamese Agent Orange babies, will be hideous mutants. What a bunch.

sponsoredwalk

Poccington wrote: »

That article makes it sound like both Battles of Fallujah were just an assault on civilians.

It was far from that.

Well the original report I quoted says that the soldiers fired indiscriminately
into the crowd while the wikipedia quote has the soldiers saying they
were fired on first. However, the soldiers first gassed the crowd &
wouldn't listen to the civilians pleading to re-open a school.

It was all the murdering of civilians that led to Fallujah, this is what
fostered resistance in the eyes of the people. Them fighting back
against the murders and bombs led to a ring of troops surrounding
the city & attacking all inside.

Is that right or do you have something to add?

Oh, and none of this justifies them using, and lying about using, white
phosphorous - especially on civilians & then just telling the civilians
to use detergents to clean up the dust that was going to cause
cancer, genetic & birth defects etc...

TanG411

This is absolutely terrible news.

We should do a sponsered walk for these people.

Witcher

jackiebaron wrote: »

<Snip>Do you have another hour?

Em..what regulation says WP is illegal for illumination use over populated areas?

Also what do you class as "high calibres"?

Poccington

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Well the original report I quoted says that the soldiers fired indiscriminately
into the crowd while the wikipedia quote has the soldiers saying they
were fired on first. However, the soldiers first gassed the crowd &
wouldn't listen to the civilians pleading to re-open a school.

It was all the murdering of civilians that led to Fallujah, this is what
fostered resistance in the eyes of the people. Them fighting back
against the murders and bombs led to a ring of troops surrounding
the city & attacking all inside.

Is that right or do you have something to add?

Oh, and none of this justifies them using, and lying about using, white
phosphorous - especially on civilians & then just telling the civilians
to use detergents to clean up the dust that was going to cause
cancer, genetic & birth defects etc...

What has listening to civilians pleading with soldiers got to do with the incident? Yes they used tear gas to disperse the crowd, if you were in the middle of insurgent Iraq and a large protesting crowd is gathering you have to disperse it. It would be tactically stupid to allow a large crowd to gather in front of your troops. It should be noted that a US PSYOPS team first tried to persuade the civilians to disperse but the civilians wouldn't.

US troops say they were fired on first, other sources disagree. Can you prove they weren't fired on? Unfortunately, civilians died in an incident where neither side can prove the other wrong.

The first Battle of Fallujah occured after the Blackwater deaths and an increasing surge in Insurgent activity. The battle ended when US forces handed control of the city over to the Fallujah Brigade(Which were armed and equipped by the US) but by September the Brigade had dissolved and all arms and equipment handed over to the insurgency. With increasing control of the city by the insurgency, the second Battle followed.

When did they lie about using WP? The article you posted about WP use in Iraq from Wikipedia has direct quotes from US military personnel(Including a Lt. Colonel) admitting to the use of WP in Fallujah.

jackiebaron

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Only if you had credible links to back all of that up, then I would

Well this covers a few points:

http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/section_ihl_weapons?OpenDocument

As does this:

http://www.icrc.org/web/eng/siteeng0.nsf/html/genevaconventions#a2

I like the part about those being cared for.

Then you'll have the "distinctive emblem" clausë:

http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e636b/f6c8b9fee14a77fdc125641e0052b079


.....so a helicopter pilot 500 feet in the air can positively make out an RPG and riddle a cameraman yet a tank crew, having being told that Al Jazeera and Reuters personnel are in the Palestine Hotel, can't make out the word "PRESS" on their flak vests from 100 yards and so blasts them to atoms.



You gotta just love it.

gizmo

Oh ****, did I stumble into CT again? :eek:

Also, since when did Wikipedia become an acceptable source to quote? I know you CT nuts usually use the whole "I'M NOT TELLING YOU MY SOURCES, GO LOOK THEM UP FOR YOURSELF!!" but isn't this taking the piss a little?

OutlawPete

Unfortunately this will just be labeled as 'collateral damage'.

They didn't give a fcuk about their own soldiers getting Gulf War Syndrome / CFIDS, so why would they give a crap about people suffering in a foreign country.

sponsoredwalk

gizmo wrote: »

Oh ****, did I stumble into CT again? :eek:

Also, since when did Wikipedia become an acceptable source to quote? I know you CT nuts usually use the whole "I'M NOT TELLING YOU MY SOURCES, GO LOOK THEM UP FOR YOURSELF!!" but isn't this taking the piss a little?

What's your problem?

A) If you think there's something wrong with the material in the wikipedia
post then please try to show us the error.

This isn't conspiracy theory stuff, this is all true. Read the report this is
in all of the bloody medical journals ffs, also the U.S. admitted
that they were using phosphorous & there's video evidence in the
movie quoted on "wikipedia" :eek: proving that they were attacking people.

C) You're a victim of hype & are willing to confuse real reporting with
conspiracy theories because you haven't a clue how to judge accurately,
failing to look at the material because of some
pre-conceived notions is really a shame & is the prefect submission to
unquestioned authority - enjoy it.

Poccington

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

This isn't conspiracy theory stuff, this is all true. Read the report this is
in all of the bloody medical journals ffs, also the U.S. admitted
that they were using phosphorous & there's video evidence in the
movie quoted on "wikipedia" :eek: proving that they were attacking people.

You said they lied about using WP?

jackiebaron

Poccington wrote: »

What has listening to civilians pleading with soldiers got to do with the incident? Yes they used tear gas to disperse the crowd, if you were in the middle of insurgent Iraq and a large protesting crowd is gathering you have to disperse it. It would be tactically stupid to allow a large crowd to gather in front of your troops. It should be noted that a US PSYOPS team first tried to persuade the civilians to disperse but the civilians wouldn't.

US troops say they were fired on first, other sources disagree. Can you prove they weren't fired on? Unfortunately, civilians died in an incident where neither side can prove the other wrong.

The first Battle of Fallujah occured after the Blackwater deaths and an increasing surge in Insurgent activity. The battle ended when US forces handed control of the city over to the Fallujah Brigade(Which were armed and equipped by the US) but by September the Brigade had dissolved and all arms and equipment handed over to the insurgency. With increasing control of the city by the insurgency, the second Battle followed.

When did they lie about using WP? The article you posted about WP use in Iraq from Wikipedia has direct quotes from US military personnel(Including a Lt. Colonel) admitting to the use of WP in Fallujah.

It doesn't matter what US troops "said". The stupid cünts lie about everything anyway. It doesn't MATTER that people were gathered in the streets looking for trouble. It doesn't MATTER that a bunch of trigger-happy scumbags from Blackwater were pushed, screaming back into their burning SUV and then dismembered because they liked to roam the streets acting as if they were bulletproof and harassing people.

US military persons and their mercenary sidekicks from DynCorp, Blackwater and Triple Canopy have invaded and are occupying a country. You can talk till you're blue in the face about insurgencies or terrorists or whatever. The fact remains that Iraq is a country that was INVADED by foreign powers. If you don't want to accept this, or if you have a problem with them bombing and killing the occupiers in order to get them out then I really don't give a toss. Iraq....invaded. Iraqis...resisting. End of story.

And please, spare me the "we're building schools" crap or the "Saddam is gone" nonsense.


I laughed when I saw a charred leg hanging from that bridge in Fallujah. The standard US Army guy loathes these Blackwater assholes. They drink a bottle of Jack and then go out, armed to the teeth, crashing their armoured hummers into people, they shoot without provocation, and they are unaccountable. May MANY more die screaming.

sponsoredwalk

Poccington wrote: »

You said they lied about using WP?

On people...

a U.S. official release of December 2004 denied any WP use:
U.S. forces have used [phosphorus shells] very sparingly in Fallujah, for
illumination purposes. They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy
positions at night, not at enemy fighters.[8] This U.S. Department of
State website carried an addendum in November 2005, replacing the
previous statement with the comment:

We have learned that some of the information we were provided [in the
above paragraph] is incorrect. White phosphorus shells, which produce
smoke, were used in Fallujah not for illumination but for screening
purposes, i.e., obscuring troop movements and, according to an article in
Field Artillery[9] magazine , "as a potent psychological weapon against the
insurgents in trench lines and spider holes…."
The article states that U.S. forces used white phosphorus rounds to flush
out enemy fighters so that they could then be killed with high explosive
rounds.


The specific aspect of use against humans was highlighted[10] after the
documentary film Fallujah, The Hidden Massacre by Sigfrido Ranucci was
aired on Italy's RaiNews24 and released on the internet.[5] In the film,
Giuliana Sgrena quotes city refugees testimonies from Fallujah about the
reported danger of weapons effects:

In particular, some women had tried to enter their homes, and they had
found a certain dust spread all over the house. The Americans themselves
had told them to clean the houses with detergents, because that dust was
very dangerous. In fact, they had some effect on their bodies, leading to
some very strange things." The film also shows U.S. soldiers on film
confirming to WP use against insurgents. U.S. ambassador to UK Robert
Holmes Tuttle stated in November 2005, that U.S. forces "do not use
napalm or white phosphorus as weapons".[11]

However, within a week of ambassador Tuttle's statement, on November
15, Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant-Colonel Barry Venable stated to the
BBC that WP had been used as an antipersonnel weapon, and was quoted
as stating: "It has been used as an incendiary weapon against enemy
combatants".[12] In particular,

Venable pointed out that WP was effective against enemy forces in
covered positions that were protected from high explosives. "One
technique is to fire a white phosphorus round into the position because the
combined effects of the fire and smoke—and in some case the terror
brought about by the explosion on the ground—will drive them out of the
holes so that you can kill them with high explosives.[13] WP use is legal for
purposes such as illumination and obscuring smoke, and the Chemical
Weapons Convention does not list WP in its schedules of chemical
weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus#Use_in_Iraq_.282004.29

jackiebaron

Blay wrote: »

Em..what regulation says WP is illegal for illumination use over populated areas?

Also what do you class as "high calibres"?

Third Geneva Protocol bans the use of incendiaries in civilian areas.
It also bans the use of fragmentation, cluster or .50 calibre weapons for use against civilians OR combatants.
Again...doesn't stop the Americans.

sponsoredwalk

Poccington wrote: »

What has listening to civilians pleading with soldiers got to do with the incident? Yes they used tear gas to disperse the crowd, if you were in the middle of insurgent Iraq and a large protesting crowd is gathering you have to disperse it. It would be tactically stupid to allow a large crowd to gather in front of your troops. It should be noted that a US PSYOPS team first tried to persuade the civilians to disperse but the civilians wouldn't.

US troops say they were fired on first, other sources disagree. Can you prove they weren't fired on? Unfortunately, civilians died in an incident where neither side can prove the other wrong.

This sounds very apologetic I mean you're arguing that I'm blaming the U.S.
for everything & challenging me to prove they didn't do it aggressively
even though you know there is no proof so that you can continue
your argument.

I think you need to stop apologising for them & look at what happened

"Following the collapse of the Ba'ath infrastructure in early 2003, local
residents had elected a town council led by Taha Bidaywi Hamed, who
kept the city from falling into the control of looters and common criminals.

The town council and Hamed were both considered to be nominally
pro-American, and their election originally meant that the United States
had decided that the city was unlikely to become a hotbed of activity,
and didn't require any immediate troop presence. This led to the United
States committing few troops to Fallujah from the start.[12]
Although Fallujah had seen sporadic air strikes by American forces, public
opposition was not galvanized until 700 members of the 82nd Airborne
Division first entered the city on April 23, 2003, and approximately 150
members of Charlie Company occupied al-Qa'id primary school. On April 28,
a crowd of approximately 200 people gathered outside the school past
curfew, demanding that the Americans vacate the building and allow it to
re-open as a school. The protesters became increasingly heated, and the
deployment of smoke gas canisters failed attempt to disperse the crowd."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Fallujah


and you know the rest...


Basically you're argument is that they had to employ tactical methods
on an insurgent population even though the evidence says that the city
was functional, the people had no opposition to the U.S. even though they
had already been bombing the f'ing city.


Then the U.S. came in, i.e. invaded, a functional city, took over the local
school to house their soldiers intead of allowing the community to
educate their kids & then when the people told the U.S. soldiers to
get out of their school things got hectic.


You're defending all of this, I hope you know that...

Poccington

jackiebaron wrote: »

Third Geneva Protocol bans the use of incendiaries in civilian areas.
It also bans the use of fragmentation, cluster or .50 calibre weapons for use against civilians OR combatants.
Again...doesn't stop the Americans.

The US never signed up to the Third Protocol.

Witcher

jackiebaron wrote: »

Third Geneva Protocol bans the use of incendiaries in civilian areas.
It also bans the use of fragmentation, cluster or .50 calibre weapons for use against civilians OR combatants.
Again...doesn't stop the Americans.

The use of .50cal ammunition is not prohibited for use against combatants:rolleyes:

Have a look at this thread.

You're clearly bitter against the US, take a step back from the thread and take a breather, because you're making things up as you go along.

Poccington

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

On people...

Thanks for clearing that up, I wasn't sure if you made a typo or something.

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

This sounds very apologetic I mean you're arguing that I'm blaming the U.S.
for everything & challenging me to prove they didn't do it aggressively
even though you know there is no proof so that you can continue
your argument.

I think you need to stop apologising for them & look at what happened

"Following the collapse of the Ba'ath infrastructure in early 2003, local
residents had elected a town council led by Taha Bidaywi Hamed, who
kept the city from falling into the control of looters and common criminals.

The town council and Hamed were both considered to be nominally
pro-American, and their election originally meant that the United States
had decided that the city was unlikely to become a hotbed of activity,
and didn't require any immediate troop presence. This led to the United
States committing few troops to Fallujah from the start.[12]
Although Fallujah had seen sporadic air strikes by American forces, public
opposition was not galvanized until 700 members of the 82nd Airborne
Division first entered the city on April 23, 2003, and approximately 150
members of Charlie Company occupied al-Qa'id primary school. On April 28,
a crowd of approximately 200 people gathered outside the school past
curfew, demanding that the Americans vacate the building and allow it to
re-open as a school. The protesters became increasingly heated, and the
deployment of smoke gas canisters failed attempt to disperse the crowd."


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Fallujah


and you know the rest...


Basically you're argument is that they had to employ tactical methods
on an insurgent population even though the evidence says that the city
was functional, the people had no opposition to the U.S. even though they
had already been bombing the f'ing city.


Then the U.S. came in, i.e. invaded, a functional city, took over the local
school to house their soldiers intead of allowing the community to
educate their kids & then when the people told the U.S. soldiers to
get out of their school things got hectic.


You're defending all of this, I hope you know that...

I'm not apologising for anyone or anything. However, you'll have to forigve me if I don't just act like everything is America's fault or like one poster, rejoice at the thoughts of Blackwater personnel being burned and hung from a bridge.

Of course they had to enter Fallujah, they were in the middle of occupying Iraq?

They took over the school along with the Ba'ath party office and mayors office, using the latter as an FOB. Troops have to occupy buildings within a city they're occupying and have to pick strategic buildings which offer good fields of fire, good view of the surrounding area etc. and I can only imagine the school fitted the bill. The crowd ignored a curfew, wouldn't listen to a PSYOP team telling them to disperse, tear gas was fired and then as you say, things got hectic.

I'm not defending anything, there's something wrong when a number of civilians die. However, I'm just trying to make the point that it wasn't just a case of US soldiers randomly opening fire on a crowd of civilians.

Poccington

jackiebaron wrote: »

It doesn't matter what US troops "said". The stupid cünts lie about everything anyway. It doesn't MATTER that people were gathered in the streets looking for trouble. It doesn't MATTER that a bunch of trigger-happy scumbags from Blackwater were pushed, screaming back into their burning SUV and then dismembered because they liked to roam the streets acting as if they were bulletproof and harassing people.

Roam the streets acting as if they're bulletproof and harassing people?

The 4 Blackwater personnel who were murdered that day were conducting a food delivery.

You're full of **** and haven't got the slightest idea what you're talking about. Keep ranting though, it's highly amusing.

sponsoredwalk

Yeah I know, I don't want this to be another anti-U.S. diatribe but
here we see clear evidence of horrible things.

The people of Fallujah wanted the soldiers to gtfo of their school,
they went their & justifiably got angry.

If the people really fired shots first then that's messed up big time
but to claim that they were occupying insurgents and tactically
had to resort to what they did when they clearly invaded their
community is not the truth.

I can imagine this is a heavily contested subject & I'm gonna try read up on
it more, if anyone has anything to add please do!

As for the main topic in the thread, the cancer rates...

This is so unbelievably messed up & it's still continuing, i.e. the use
of white phosphorous. We don't know if there was anything else
being used that was causing this, the report makes that clear.

This horror story should be more than enough to convince people that
tactics should be changed - the effects on innocent people is
so drastically horrible that even if the whole war was not based on lies to
begin with they shouldn't be messing up people's lives as bad as this has!!!

Jesus Juice

I was about to post my opinion but I'm afraid Poccington will take me down too :pac:

Poccington

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Yeah I know, I don't want this to be another anti-U.S. diatribe but
here we see clear evidence of horrible things.

The people of Fallujah wanted the soldiers to gtfo of their school,
they went their & justifiably got angry.

If the people really fired shots first then that's messed up big time
but to claim that they were occupying insurgents and tactically
had to resort to what they did when they clearly invaded their
community is not the truth.

I can imagine this is a heavily contested subject & I'm gonna try read up on
it more, if anyone has anything to add please do!

As for the main topic in the thread, the cancer rates...

This is so unbelievably messed up & it's still continuing, i.e. the use
of white phosphorous. We don't know if there was anything else
being used that was causing this, the report makes that clear.

This horror story should be more than enough to convince people that
tactics should be changed - the effects on innocent people is
so drastically horrible that even if the whole war was not based on lies to
begin with they shouldn't be messing up people's lives as bad as this has!!!

Unfortunately, occupying the likes of a school, Ba'ath party office, mayors office or anything else is a result of occupying a city. When you occupy an area, your troops have to go somewhere. In that location, they need to have good fields of fire, easily defendable avenues of approach, good observation of the surrounding area, easy to resupply etc.

I can only assume the school was one of those buildings that was ideal for placing troops, otherwise they wouldn't have been there. Ideally they shouldn't have been in Fallujah in the first place but unfortunately, they were in the middle of occupying Iraq. If you're gonna occupy a country, you need to have a foothold in it's cities, towns etc.

In an ideal world they wouldn't have been there in the first place but once they're there, they have to go somewhere. They happened to use the school and the events that unfolded were tragic.

I fully agree that what happened to the civilians is horrible but it's the same consequence of war that can be seen throughout history.

pablo_escobar

The US dropped tonnes of depleted uranium on Iraqi people to make them healthier.

clearly, the US military have acheived those objectives successfully.

Iraqis have never had it better, thanks to US truth, justice and the American way.

God bless america.

Poccington

pablo_escobar wrote: »

The US dropped tonnes of depleted uranium on Iraqi people to make them healthier.

clearly, the US military have acheived those objectives successfully.

Iraqis have never had it better, thanks to US truth, justice and the American way.

God bless america.

Is that you Bill O Reilly? :pac:

pablo_escobar

Poccington wrote:

Is that you Bill O Reilly?

All I can say is this report proves healthcare in Iraq has drastically improved since US invasion.

Detection methods are more advanced now.

Depleted Uranium, although radioactive and cancerous is actually quite good for the body.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Nothing new here, it's widely known they use depleted uranium, I even remember seeing a program on BBC2 about it a few years back.

Sheeps

i dont care about iraq anymore

Four Blackwater
mercenaries were dragged from their vehicles, beaten, burned, and hung
from a bridge over the Euphrates River.

That made my morning. Blackwater or Xe Services as they're called now are a shower of ****. If it was 4,000, i'd be smiling till the weekend.. Fuking mercenaries.

nice1franko

They showered the city with depleted uranium shells as they were withdrawing too. I remember reading this in the Indo years ago.

They're war criminals - no two ways about it.

Wibbs

War is a nasty filthy immoral business. It always has been and always will be. Talk of smart bombs and surgical strikes and all that has led people who've never experienced it to think it's cleaned up. It hasn't. The US forces aren't any better or worse than anyone else you care to mention. The Russians would be as bad or worse, look at chechnya.

biko

AH -> CT

I hope to "god" that one day Dick and George will stand trial for the war crimes the US committed in the ME.

Terry

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

It's the same stuff that Israel were using on Palestinian civilians in 2006,
unbelievable stuff!!!

They only pledged to stop using it a couple of weeks ago.
They had still been using it recently in Gaza.
Take your pick.

Poccington wrote: »

What has listening to civilians pleading with soldiers got to do with the incident? Yes they used tear gas to disperse the crowd, if you were in the middle of insurgent Iraq and a large protesting crowd is gathering you have to disperse it. It would be tactically stupid to allow a large crowd to gather in front of your troops. It should be noted that a US PSYOPS team first tried to persuade the civilians to disperse but the civilians wouldn't.

US troops say they were fired on first, other sources disagree. Can you prove they weren't fired on? Unfortunately, civilians died in an incident where neither side can prove the other wrong.

The first Battle of Fallujah occured after the Blackwater deaths and an increasing surge in Insurgent activity. The battle ended when US forces handed control of the city over to the Fallujah Brigade(Which were armed and equipped by the US) but by September the Brigade had dissolved and all arms and equipment handed over to the insurgency. With increasing control of the city by the insurgency, the second Battle followed.

When did they lie about using WP? The article you posted about WP use in Iraq from Wikipedia has direct quotes from US military personnel(Including a Lt. Colonel) admitting to the use of WP in Fallujah.

That term really pisses me off.
You cannot call the victims of an invasion "Insurgents".
If Ireland was invaded in the morning, and you fought against the invading force, would you refer to yourself as an insurgent? I think not.