Tuesday, November 08, 2005
More on WP
I jump into the fray at Balloon Juice here. And for some reason, a bunch of people comment on it.
Go figure.
Jason
Go figure.
Jason
Comments:
Jason, I'm not going to comment on their silly site, but I'll make this point for you to pass on: If WP is considered a chemical weapon, then we've got all the proof we need that Saddam had WMD. We have recovered and destroyed tens of thousands of Iraqi WP mortar and artillery rounds. We recovered and destroyed tens of thousands of them by the time I left in July 03. We have probably recovered hundreds of thousands by now.
Your patience with the ones screeching about WP is impressive.
I think the one that got me irritated was the scoffing about how they'd trust a 22 (23?) year old with those rounds.... but they support the troops!
I think the one that got me irritated was the scoffing about how they'd trust a 22 (23?) year old with those rounds.... but they support the troops!
# posted by 
: 10:21 PM
: 10:21 PM
I commented on the previous WP discussion - I'm an ex-artilleryman (13A), and like MAJ D, I'm not going to go bother with those guys. A few points:
The CWC defines chemical weapons as those that kill by toxicity. WP is incendiary. If it's chemical, than so is HE. WP is NOT listed in the CWC's "banned substances" section.
Kos may have been an artilleryman, but I distinctly remember him identifying himself as an MLRS crewman. He would have to have been a cannon crewman or FDC troop to have received an training whatsoever on WP shells and effects: MLRS doesn't shoot WP rounds. Kos probably knows as much about WP as a beauty queen. You can probably contact someone at the FA Center at Ft Sill to ask the question, but I sincerely doubt the 13M and 13P courses give a troop any training whatsoever on WP.
WP is a NATO-standard round. If it's an atrocity to possess or use it, then every NATO nation with 155mm howitzers is in violation of the Chemical Convention.
The CWC defines chemical weapons as those that kill by toxicity. WP is incendiary. If it's chemical, than so is HE. WP is NOT listed in the CWC's "banned substances" section.
Kos may have been an artilleryman, but I distinctly remember him identifying himself as an MLRS crewman. He would have to have been a cannon crewman or FDC troop to have received an training whatsoever on WP shells and effects: MLRS doesn't shoot WP rounds. Kos probably knows as much about WP as a beauty queen. You can probably contact someone at the FA Center at Ft Sill to ask the question, but I sincerely doubt the 13M and 13P courses give a troop any training whatsoever on WP.
WP is a NATO-standard round. If it's an atrocity to possess or use it, then every NATO nation with 155mm howitzers is in violation of the Chemical Convention.
# posted by : 12:51 PM
: 12:51 PM
This is precisely the same argument the Communists made about the US military in Vietnam. Precisely! The US was accused of "chemical warfare" in Vietnam because we used napalm, WP, tear gas, and Agent Orange.
Did you see that BBC story where some guy complained that WP caused "absolutely irreversible damage" to flesh and bone? Hmmm, as opposed to the "reversible" damage that occurs when a 5.56 round hits your skull...
Post a Comment
Did you see that BBC story where some guy complained that WP caused "absolutely irreversible damage" to flesh and bone? Hmmm, as opposed to the "reversible" damage that occurs when a 5.56 round hits your skull...
# posted by : 5:48 PM
: 5:48 PM
