Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Iraq. Napalm, annata 2003

No. non č napalm, anche se "results are 'remarkably similar' to using
napalm". L'onore č salvo? Bye.
Namib
--------------
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20030805-9999_1n5bomb.html
"Officials confirm dropping firebombs on Iraqi troops"
By James W. Crawley
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
August 5, 2003
American jets killed Iraqi troops with firebombs - similar to the
controversial napalm used in the Vietnam War - in March and April as Marines
battled toward Baghdad.
Marine Corps fighter pilots and commanders who have returned from the war
zone have confirmed dropping dozens of incendiary bombs near bridges over
the Saddam Canal and the Tigris River. The explosions created massive
fireballs.
"We napalmed both those (bridge) approaches," said Col. Randolph Alles in a
recent interview. He commanded Marine Air Group 11, based at Miramar Marine
Corps Air Station, during the war. "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," he added. How
many Iraqis died, the military couldn't say. No accurate count has been made
of Iraqi war casualties.
The bombing campaign helped clear the path for the Marines' race to Baghdad.
During the war, Pentagon spokesmen disputed reports that napalm was being
used, saying the Pentagon's stockpile had been destroyed two years ago.
Apparently the spokesmen were drawing a distinction between the terms
"firebomb" and "napalm." If reporters had asked about firebombs, officials
said yesterday they would have confirmed their use.
What the Marines dropped, the spokesmen said yesterday, were "Mark 77
firebombs." They acknowledged those are incendiary devices with a function
"remarkably similar" to napalm weapons.
Rather than using gasoline and benzene as the fuel, the firebombs use
kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene.
Hundreds of partially loaded Mark 77 firebombs were stored on pre-positioned
ammunition ships overseas, Marine Corps officials said. Those ships were
unloaded in Kuwait during the weeks preceding the war.
"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.
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."
"That's clearly Orwellian," he added.
Developed during World War II and dropped on troops and Japanese cities,
incendiary bombs have been used by American forces in nearly every conflict
since. Their use became controversial during the Vietnam War when U.S. and
South Vietnamese aircraft dropped millions of pounds of napalm. Its effects
were shown in a Pulitzer Prize-winning photograph of Vietnamese children
running from their burned village.
Before March, the last time U.S. forces had used napalm in combat was the
Persian Gulf War, again by Marines.
During a recent interview about the bombing campaign in Iraq, 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.
Miramar pilots familiar with the bombing missions pointed to at least two
locations where firebombs were dropped.
Before the Marines crossed the Saddam Canal in central Iraq, jets dropped
several firebombs on enemy positions near a bridge that would become the
Marines' main crossing point on the road toward Numaniyah, a key town 40
miles from Baghdad.
Next, the bombs were used against Iraqis near a key Tigris River bridge,
north of Numaniyah, in early April.
There were reports of another attack on the first day of the war.
Two embedded journalists reported what they described as napalm being
dropped on an Iraqi observation post at Safwan Hill overlooking the Kuwait
border.
Reporters for CNN and the Sydney (Australia) Morning Herald were told by
unnamed Marine officers that aircraft dropped napalm on the Iraqi position,
which was adjacent to one of the Marines' main invasion routes.
Their reports were disputed by several Pentagon spokesmen who said no such
bombs were used nor did the United States have any napalm weapons.
The Pentagon destroyed its stockpile of napalm canisters, which had been
stored near Camp Pendleton at the Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station, in April
2001.
Yesterday military spokesmen described what they see as the distinction
between the two types of incendiary bombs. They said mixture used in modern
firebombs is a less harmful mixture than Vietnam War-era napalm.
"This additive has significantly less of an impact on the environment,"
wrote Marine spokesman Col. Michael Daily, in an e-mailed information sheet
provided by the Pentagon.
He added, "many folks (out of habit) refer to the Mark 77 as 'napalm'
because its effect upon the target is remarkably similar."
In the e-mail, Daily also acknowledged that firebombs were dropped near
Safwan Hill.
Alles, who oversaw the Safwan bombing raid, said 18 one-ton satellite-guided
bombs, but no incendiary bombs, were dropped on the site.
Military experts say incendiary bombs can be an effective weapon in certain
situations.
Firebombs are useful against dug-in troops and light vehicles, said
GlobalSecurity's Pike.
"I used it routinely in Vietnam," said retired Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard
Trainor, now a prominent defense analyst. "I have no moral compunction
against using it. It's just another weapon."
And, the distinctive fireball and smell have a psychological impact on
troops, experts said.
"The generals love napalm," said Alles, who has transferred to Washington.
"It has a big psychological effect."
James W. Crawley:
(619) 542-4559
; 
jim.c...@uniontrib.com

 United States has not agreed to a ban against possible civilian targets.
Raffaele
-- 
Strategic Blog: 
http://strategic-game.blogspot.com/
Strategic Sourceforge Homepage: 
http://strategic.sourceforge.net/
Strategic Sourceforge Project: 
http://sourceforge.net/projects/strategic/


#_Peccato che il Napalm non riesca a distinguere ( alla stessa stregua di un 
miope politicante ) una divisa da un abito civile....e quel "ad ogni modo" 
suona molto cinicamente.
Lo sanno tutti che gli USA fanno leggi non in base ad un diritto universale 
umanitario , ma commisurate alle esigenze del proprio esercito; non e` 
necessario che tu scriva "ad ogni modo" non fai altro che confermarne il 
concetto.
Giano 

 napalm". L'onore č salvo? Bye.
Si visto che sono cose diverse.  Oltre al fatto che pubblichi qualcosa
che e' gia' stato discusso qui sopra da un bel pezzo.
Finiti gli argomenti intelligenti per dover cercarne di vecchi e
stupidi? :)
-Stefano

che tu scriva "ad ogni modo" non fai altro che confermarne il concetto.
Certo, certo....
*pat pat*
:)
-Stefano

 da chi sarebbe stato sottoscritto? :)
Dalle Nazioni Unite, nel 1946 con la carta dei diritti dell'uomo, e con la 
Convenzione di Ginevra del 1949.
Era meglio se il pc oggi non lo accendevi nemmeno.

 concetto.
Non stiamo parlando di leggi americane, ma di diritto internazionale, che
non include il "napalm" tra le armi proibite. AD OGNI MODO, ti risulta che
in Iraq gli usa abbiano usato armi incendiarie contro "abiti civili"?
Raffaele
-- 
Raffaele Castagno
Petizione ADSL:
http://www.petitiononline.com/digdivit/petition.html
Strategic Game Engine:
http://strategic.sourceforge.net/
http://strategic-game.blogspot.com/
questo articolo e` stato inviato via web dal servizio gratuito 
http://www.newsland.it/news
 segnala gli abusi ad 
ab...@newsland.it

 Era meglio se il pc oggi non lo accendevi nemmeno.
...disse il bue all'asino... :)
*LOL*
-Stefano

di usare qualsiasi cosa venga loro in mente, anche se proibita.
Proibita .... DA CHI, fessacchiotto di un Aber? :)
Facci ridere ancora una volta :)
*LOL*
-Stefano

 Che non c'entra un ca**o
Si certo.
Fammi un riassuntino del genere: "USA ed Israele hanno tutti i diritti di 
usare qualsiasi cosa venga loro in mente, anche se proibita. Ottimo il 
vaiolo, l'Antrace, il Napalm la bomba atomica e i lettini elettrificati".
E ci metti sotto una bella firma, d'accordo? 

 Si, proibita.
Da chi fessacchiotto? :)
*LOL*
-Stefano

 Proibita ....
Si, proibita.
Psassi un po' di tempo in più a leggere e meno a scrivere, correresti il 
rischio di non sembrare autistico. 

 Si, come no.
?????????????
Spiegati. E' o non e' proibita? :)  E se si, da chi? :)
Forza! Al lavoro! :)
*LOL*
-Stefano


Si, come no.
Passassi un po' di tempo in più a leggere e meno a scrivere, correresti il
rischio di non sembrare autistico.
E il f/up a IFC? 

vietate dalle convenzioni.
Lo sa gia' da solo ma per tentare di evitare la figura di merda taglia
tutte le domande in tal senso e ripete la solita filastrocca :)
-Stefano

 rischio di non sembrare autistico. 
Ehm.. il napalm ( e, in generale, le armi incendiarie) non sono vietate 
dalle convenzioni.
giacinto
-- 
Ayatollah della jihad motociclistica
Suzuki Katana GSX1100S - 1982
http://www.suzukicycles.org/GSX-series/GSX1100S_Katana_a.shtml

 wrote in message 
news:41B0C444...@people.it...

#_K'hai fatto...hai trovato un altro cognato?
Ma quanti cazz' de' sorelle c~hai ?
Sono "avviabili" pure loro...o stanno attaccate al marito?
Giannozzo