US and its use of chemical weapons

reading the news and i read this

bbc news
Agent Orange was named after the colour of its container. The active ingredient was a strain of dioxin that stripped the jungle bare.

In time, some contend, the dioxin spread to the food chain causing a proliferation of birth defects.

Some babies were born without eyes or arms, or were missing internal body parts.

A group representing alleged Vietnamese victims says three million people were exposed to the chemical during the war, and at least one million suffer serious health problems today.


other links
news.bbc.co.uk...
www.lewispublishing.com...

dont see any criminal trials

[edit on 28-2-2005 by bodrul]

And you probably won't considering most of the people that made tha calls to use it are either dead or very close to it.

Also, I don't recall it being illegal to use.

I dont think it was.
It was used along side agent blue and agent white as a herbicide.
It wasent untill years later that the side effects were known to come from these herbicides.

link to side effects.
www.lyghtforce.com...

link to agent orang/white/blue
www.lyghtforce.com...

as posted by bodrul
dont see any criminal trials

You are referring to war crimes tribunals/trials?
Normally war crimes tribunals/trials are held based on malicious intent and motive.
As to your article, criminal intent must be proven. As it appears, there are no criminal suits filed. They apparently look to be going after a monetary settlement. Time will tell.

Agent Orange's primary purpose was to deprive the Communist guerilla's from utilizing the jungle foilage. Agent Orange was a defoliant. The U.S. used it for that purpose.As per your article:

Between 1962 and 1971, large quantities of Agent Orange were sprayed across parts of Vietnam to deprive communist North Vietnamese forces of forest cover.

It was not used intentionally or purposely or maliciously to adversely harm civilains. As to the allegations brought forth by the plantiffs, as to asserting numbers of those exposed, they are simply what the article implies: "allegations." Obviously credible and verifible sourcing will be required to remotely prove those alleged numbers.





seekerof