Odd Happenings in Fallujah (Dahr Jamail: chemical weapons cleanup?)

[Barrett808]

“The soldiers are doing strange things in Fallujah,” said one of my contacts in Fallujah who just returned. He was in his city checking on his home and just returned to Baghdad this evening.

Speaking on condition of anonymity he continued, “In the center of the Julan Quarter they are removing entire homes which have been bombed, meanwhile most of the homes that were bombed are left as they were. Why are they doing this?”

According to him, this was also done in the Nazal, Mualmeen, Jubail and Shuhada’a districts, and the military began to do this after Eid, which was after November 20th.

He told me he has watched the military use bulldozers to push the soil into piles and load it onto trucks to carry away. This was done in the Julan and Jimouriya quarters of the city, which is of course where the heaviest fighting occurred during the siege, as this was where resistance was the fiercest.

“At least two kilometers of soil were removed,” he explained, “Exactly as they did at Baghdad Airport after the heavy battles there during the invasion and the Americans used their special weapons.”

He explained that in certain areas where the military used “special munitions” 200 square meters of soil was being removed from each blast site.

In addition, many of his friends have told him that the military brought in water tanker trucks to power blast the streets, although he hadn’t seen this himself.

(more)

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/archives//000173.php

[Ironpost]

1. It does't suprise me

amazing what this WH will do.

[Tempest]

2. Seymour Hersh reported on this in November

And the Arab press has been all over it.

www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0412/S00002.htm


So much for the "Liberal" media.

[kohodog]

6. Question about your link

When I go to it my computer tries to download a file called acvcpd.aspx. I'm on a mac and it doesn't download, but I haven't come across this kind of thing before.

[Tempest]

14. Don't know, sorry

I searched Google and got no hits.

I'm ignorant when it comes to Macs.

Try doing a search on the subject matter and you should be able find an alternative link.

[Monkie]

19. mostly harmless (to a mac) its microsoft server "junk"

asp Active Server Page or something like that,so programmers can add program like features to a webpage without the customer having to download anything..maybe you are using a older browser?your browser should just display the output not download the page.
anyways its not harmfully to your mac and its not a virus or other nasty
and i get to kick this important topic!lol

[LynnTheDem]

3. Asked my resident Nuke/Bio/Chem expert...

He says that wouldn't be done in case of chems, but if bio agent weapons had been used. Also areas of heavy DU would be bulldozed, the soil carted away, and the area power-blasted with water.

[happyslug]

9. Some comments

Bio Weapons make no sense in Iraq (and rarely make sense in most combat situations). The primary reason for this is Bio agents by their very nature will affect BOTH sides of a conflict. The few cases where bio-agents were used, the using nation made sure their own forces were very far away from the infection (For example when the Germans in WWI infected the Romanian Horses with Anthrax, this was done on the strategic scale i.e. agents affected horses in the horses stables, NOT at the front.)

Depleted Uranium (DU) also does not make sense, DU is used as a deep penetrator. Given the nature of the target the pilot shooting the DU would not know if the round would over penetrate i.e. hit the building and than continue deep underground, doing almost no damage in the building itself. Remember DU was designed as an anti-tank round, to penetrate the armor of a TANK. DU can also penetrate steel re-enforced Concrete but that is NOT the targets in Iraq. In Iraq most of the Buildings are Concrete, but concrete for construction purposes NOT protection from weapons. Over penetration will happen against such targets. As to removing such residue when DU does break up (upon penetrating a target) it basically stays together but parts will break off. The small amount "lost" in such situation would be lost into the atmosphere (where it may be breathed in by both enemy and friendly forces) but to dig it up and wash it away, to much effort for very little gain. Remember DU was developed not as an EXPLOSIVE round but as a super heavy penetrating solid round. It causes its damage by the speed it breaks through armor, not by exploding. No, you would NOT wash away DU.

Napalm? Napalm is nothing but Gasoline mixed with gelatin. The gelatin hold the gasoline together as the shell explodes. The explosion causes the Gasoline to ignite. Thus you get that big burst of flame you see in the movies. Looks impressive, but of limited military use. People have been known to survive it (Through with severe burns). The primary use of Napalm is to hit bunkers with the napalm and sap out all of the air in the bunker killing the people in the bunker do to lack of Oxygen (Flame Throwers work on the same principals, when flamethrowers are used it is NOT to burn the people in the bunker, but to suffocate them). The flames of Napalm (and flame throwers) use up all of the Oxygen in the area of a bunker. While the use of Napalm in areas where they are civilians is a violation of the Geneva Convention what makes up Napalm is very common materials that in a war crimes trial could be dismissed as a combination of house hold goods as opposed to evidence of a Weapon. Again no reason to "clean up" after napalm (and the same with the more modern "Fuel-Air Munitions" made with better combination of ingredients than WWII era Napalm).

That leaves Chemical Weapons. Chemical Weapons fall into two broad categories, Persistent and Non-persistent Gases. Non-Persistent gases are as the name suggests do not last long 3-6 hours tops. After about 3 hours their are design to either break down or be carried by the wind to far to be effective Chemical weapons. Non-Persistent Weapons are used when you expect to go over the area hit with the Chemical Agents within a few hours of the Chemical Attacks. American Nerve Gas is generally non-persistent Chemical Weapon.

On the other hand Persistent Chemical Weapons are designed to last for hours, even days (and some have been know to last decades). Mustard Gas of WWI fame was not only the most effective of the Gases used during WWI it has been retained in many countries chemical warfare stock piles do to its effectiveness AND its persistence. Mustard will break down after a while but that may be days or weeks later (Every so often a child in France playing in an area of WWI Battlefield comes down with a rash caused from Mustard leaching from old WWI concrete bunkers which had been hit with Mustard when their concrete was drying, Mustard is a very persistent gas). Technically the US claims not to have Mustard anymore. On the other hand if you mix oil with American Nerve Gas, you change the characteristics of the Nerve Gas from a Non-persistent Gas to a Persistent Gas. Thus if chemical weapons were used in Iraq it was a oil mixed persistent weapon that was dumped on someone to kill them AND TO MAKE THE AREA UNINHABITABLE. To deny the enemy the use of an area you have no intention of using is where the use of persistent gas would be the most effective. In open country the US uses its "Route-denial" munitions (i.e. Bombs that drops hundreds of small land mines over an area. These Land mines tend to be brightly colored for the purpose is to show the enemy that the area is mined and if they go through the area people will get hurt. These are the "Land mines" killing most people today NOT the conventional land mines laid in mine fields. These route denial munitions just bounce all over the place and since there are brightly colored often are picked up by children. The US is very Dependent on Route Denial Munitions as part of its concept of using more Air Power than Infantry when the US fights wars. It is to retain the use of Route-Denial munitions that the US opposed the land-mine treaty ban.)

I am sorry for getting off track, but I mention Route-Denial Munitions for the Simple reason that in Build up urban areas they would be almost ineffective. The Streets could be covered with them, but since every one is one foot you could walk around the mines. Furthermore many of the mines will be on roof tops AND PEOPLE COULD AVOID THE STREETS BY WALKING FROM ONE BUILDING TO THE NEXT. Thus route denial munitions would be almost ineffective in Urban warfare (and may increase effectiveness of the enemy by giving them extra bombs that they can use if very careful). On the other hand chemical weapons will seep into those same buildings making them as uninhabitable as the nearby streets. Chemical Weapons against people without protective masks can be VERY effective. On the other hand once the fighting has moved on, the chemicals are still there (remember we are talking about persistent Chemicals, non-persistent Chemicals would just degrade on their own). How do you get rid of persistent Chemicals? You wash them away. If you can NOT wash them away you tear down the building, dig up the sand and depose of contaminate material.

One last comment, during WWII it was suggested to drop Radioactive Material on the farm lands of Germany to reduce Germany's ability to feed itself. Again in Korea MacArthur made a similar Suggestion of dropping Radioactive material on the Korean-Chinese's Border to prevent the Red Chinese Army from crossing into Korea. Radiative material like this would also be "Persistent" and would need to be washed and/or carried away. While I do not think Radioactive Material were used for the simple reason Chemicals would act faster and thus be more effective on the enemy. I also do not lean to Radioactive do to the ease it can be detected (i.e. anyone with film). On the other hand if Radioactive material was used the US Army will do the same things as if Chemicals were used (wash it away, haul away the contaminated buildings). In addition to Chemicals greater usefulness in the close combat that is happening in Iraq I also lean to Chemicals for the simple reason Chemicals are harder to trace. This is especially true for the Nerve Agents. While some minor chemical difference exist between Nerve Agents and Insecticide, the main difference is concentration. As to the minor chemical differences, by the time someone sent a sample to a lab and that lab determined it was Nerve Agent not Insecticide, the area contaminated would have been clean and when it comes to check up on the claim no evidence would still exist. Thus not only are Chemicals more effective than radioactive material, they are easier to clean up so no evidence remains to show Chemicals were used.

[Barrett808]

16. Very informative -- thanks! n/t

[merwin]

4. Cleaning up the depleted uranium?

I guess you could call them the DU Cleanup Crew :-)

[cornfedyank]

5. too much of that (DU) already floatin' to clean up...something else?

if was chem .. they would sound it loud.

[DukeBlue]

7. DU is

a heavy metal, like lead. That is its primary toxicity. As a radiological it is not like a fissile metal. You can handle it with no protection in theory. I wear a resperator and gear up on the rare times I have been around it.

You could scoop it up if shot into the ground and bury it in a hole somewhere away from people. It is toxic on ingestion and inhalation.

[BUSHOUT]

11. So pulverizing it into ingestible/inhalable material was a bad idea?

That meets the standards for a WMD.

WMD's are primarily weapons that will kill indiscriminately. The DU powder that is created by using DU shells is the likely cause of increased birth defects and cancer rates in Iraq.

[Monkie]

17. DU is a WMD and its toxicity is not to be taken lightly

the damage it has done to iraq cannot be underestimated..
the birthdefects from the first gulf war alone are horrific enough

WARNING EXTREME GRAPHIC PHOTOS OF DEFORMED (DEAD) IRAQI BABIES:

http://www.web-light.nl/VISIE/extremedeformities.html

and the same blog dahrjamailiraq posted photos taken on November 19th, 2004 in fallujah that show bodies people claim are "burnt" from chemical weapons

ALSO GRAPHIC (DEAD) IRAQI PEOPLE:

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=album32

[aquart]

8. I'm actually shocked that they even bother.

Doesn't seem natural to this admin.

[ebayfool]

10. DU Cleanup Crew ? lol n/t

[Must_B_Free]

12. remove your post

cleanup crew is trademarked by bev :)

[ebayfool]

15. Not the dreaded Bev lawsuit, anything but that! I'll be good!

(damb peoples around here makin' me sputter liquid 'freshments on my damb puter makin' the damb keyboard keys stuck makin' me mutter to meself all alone lookin' like a damb fool laughing like a loon walkin' through the valley ain't skeered of no damb bevs ....)

I just love DUers!

[daleo]

13. They wanted to get Fallujah lookin' good for the election.

A little scrubbing and removal of that nasty dirt and you've got a nice clean election. Maybe someday Bush will try it in the States.

[DoYouEverWonder]

18. Jeez, I'm impressed

that they're even trying to clean up after themselves. They must have dropped some nasty shit around there.