Is white phosphorous a chemical weapon?

So , as above, something that has been used by both the US and Israel in battle, do ATS readers think this is a CW and why do we not hear massive coverage and outrage all over the media when it is used? Why has it not been the catalyst for threats of conflict and global condemnation?

" It's [WP] not forbidden if it is used within the context of a military application which does not require or does not intend to use the toxic properties "-who decides that then? If it's used during conflict, it's a military application. Are we saying it's like depleted uranium, ok if the intention is not to poison the land, just kill people, that's secondary right?
news.bbc.co.uk...

When 'they' use it, it's a CW, when 'we' use it, it's for other reasons.
www.independent.co.uk...

HRW has criticized Syria for CW violations. This HRW:
www.hrw.org... Where were the warmongers then? Where were the sanctions and missiles?

WP in Syria:
www.nytimes.com...

There is also potential for munitions containing WP to be considered chemical weapons, which are prohibited under the 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC). The Convention defines chemical weapons as:"
"
www.weaponslaw.org...= see Treaty law and Customary International humanitarian law.

Just throwin' that into the pot.

a reply to: Fermy

Well it is a chemical. Then again so is everything (including AIR).

Its acute effects are worse than any 'proper' "CHEMICAL WEAPON" than I've ever 'seen' in either stock footage, documentaries or even depicted in fiction.

Any one who doubts it go do a quick image search and you'll see.

And "we" annihilate Falluja with it.

But are going to FREAK OUT if someone else allegedly deploys the equivalent of household bleach mixed with ammonia?!?

There is no nobility in war. It is dirty, ugly and sometimes completely necessary. In war, the only acceptable outcome is to win. Pretending there are ‘rules’ is the luxury of the winner.

A lot of people confuse the use of white phosphorous as a weapon against personal to a smoke screen.

It puts off a tremendous amount of smoke and it either is or is related to smoke ordinance to screen movements.

I think anyway, I'm not an expert in this.

I guess burning the hell out of people is all right, same with blowing them into pieces or shooting people. I think a lot of weapons used nowadays should be banned. I do not think we should let greedy power hungry people exist. It seems these weapons are used against us, the regular people, and not against the ones who start things. Population control I guess. Just bomb the hell out of the leaders instead of against citizens and military people who are told to go kill others.

Yeah right, I suppose I can get in severe trouble by telling them to target leaders who are starting the wars and conflict. War is to kill regular people.

White phosphorous is racist.
Black phosphorous is socially acceptable.

Mainly White Phosphorus is strictly used in the US military as a ammo type to destroy enemy equipment, kill or injury enemy personnel. This type of ammunition has been used since world war 2 and has been one of the many ammo types used in certain situations due to its unique properties. It can also be used as a diversionary tactic, a light source due to its brightness or as a "light" smoke screen even though the us military has smoke grenades for that.

It is not a chemical weapon by any means. It does not cause skin irritation or inhibit oxygen intake. I've been in the military 13 years so I would know.

White Phosphorus will burn for a very long time though and I would not recommend going near it.

High Explosive / Depleted Uranium / Low Yield Nuclear / White Phosphorus / Standard Ammo / Incendiary / Radioactive - Pick you're poison, they are all bad but war is hell.

double post. Delete

originally posted by: Metallicus
There is no nobility in war. It is dirty, ugly and sometimes completely necessary. In war, the only acceptable outcome is to win. Pretending there are ‘rules’ is the luxury of the winner.

Finally, someone who 'Gets It'. War is to decimate the enemy so badly that they surrender or are annihilated.

a reply to: WarPig1939


This:
There is also potential for munitions containing WP to be considered chemical weapons, which are prohibited under the 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)

originally posted by: Fermy
a reply to: WarPig1939


This:
There is also potential for munitions containing WP to be considered chemical weapons, which are prohibited under the 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)

Even then it isn't as effective as VX Poison gas / Serin Gas / Mustard Gas / Chlorine Gas/ Hydrogen Sulfide. That is probably why it isn't used as often

a reply to: WarPig1939

used in the US military as a ammo type to destroy enemy equipment, kill or injury enemy personnel

It is not a chemical weapon by any means. It does not cause skin irritation or inhibit inhalation of oxygen.

White Phosphorus will burn for a very long time though and I would not recommend going near it..

No offense, but you sound like you're trying to have it both ways. On one hand, you're admitting that it's used to kill or injure enemies, that it has unique properties as a smoke creator, and that it burns for a long time. But then you say it doesn't count as a chemical weapon though because of the arbitrary qualifications that chemical weapons "cause skin irritation or inhibit inhalation of oxygen", even though white phosphorus causes severe burns if it touches your skin.


This second video is graphic, so I'll just post the youtube info for it.
WY0dpyKiW34

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: WarPig1939

used in the US military as a ammo type to destroy enemy equipment, kill or injury enemy personnel

It is not a chemical weapon by any means. It does not cause skin irritation or inhibit inhalation of oxygen.

White Phosphorus will burn for a very long time though and I would not recommend going near it..

No offense, but you sound like you're trying to have it both ways. On one hand, you're admitting that it's used to kill or injure enemies, that it has unique properties as a smoke creator, and that it burns for a long time. But then you say it doesn't count as a chemical weapon though because of the arbitrary qualifications that chemical weapons "cause skin irritation or inhibit inhalation of oxygen", even though white phosphorus causes severe burns if it touches your skin.

This second video is graphic, so I'll just post the youtube info for it.
WY0dpyKiW34

It burns people. That is the point of it. I've never seen it cause seizures or cause skin to create a blistering effect (not like a fire burn reaction) or cause people to bleed out of their orphases or cause sever vomiting.

originally posted by: WarPig1939

originally posted by: Fermy
a reply to: WarPig1939


This:
There is also potential for munitions containing WP to be considered chemical weapons, which are prohibited under the 1992 Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC)

Even then it isn't as effective as VX Poison gas / Serin Gas / Mustard Gas / Chlorine Gas/ Hydrogen Sulfide. That is probably why it isn't used as often

Oh, that's ok then It isn't banned, how often are the others used?

originally posted by: WarPig1939


It is not a chemical weapon by any means. It does not cause skin irritation or inhibit oxygen intake. I've been in the military 13 years so I would know.

It burns right through bone and uses up so much oxygen it kills by suffocation also. The US commited a few war crimes in Iraq with it by actively using as a weapon (which killled many civillians in densely populated urban areas) instead of intended/standard use as a smokescreen/illumination tool.

a reply to: WarPig1939

Who said all of that? You said "It is not a chemical weapon by any means. It does not cause skin irritation or inhibit inhalation of oxygen." But clearly it causes a lot more than just skin irritation because it burns through the flesh itself.

a reply to: bastion



The ammo type is still used to this very day. Although we have different rules now concerning the use of that type of ammunition. It is not considered a chemical agent by US military standards.

Rules make sure war has no winner or at least no end. They make everything last longer costing more lives on both sides.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: WarPig1939

Who said all of that? You said "It is not a chemical weapon by any means. It does not cause skin irritation or inhibit inhalation of oxygen." But clearly it causes a lot more than just skin irritation because it burns through the flesh itself.

It isn't defined a chemical weapon by US mil standard. It burns through pretty much everything which is the point. If there is a large enemy force that we think may have the ability to overrun our position. WP will be the best way to get rid of that problem and maybe some HE rounds.

WP is not used against enemy personnel or equipment by the US armed forces.

It is strictly used for screening troop movements from enemy observation.
Or for signaling or marking locations at sea.