I had discounted these reports when I first read of them because I “considered the source” of both the accusations and the denial.
Unfortunately, I was wrong:
US used white phosphorus in Iraq
The Pentagon has confirmed that US troops used white phosphorus during last year’s offensive in the Iraqi city of Falluja.
“It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants,” spokesman Lt Col Barry Venable told the BBC - though not against civilians, he said.
The US earlier denied it had been used in Falluja at all.
Col Venable denied that the substance - which can cause burning of the flesh - constituted a banned chemical weapon.
Washington is not a signatory of an international treaty restricting the use of white phosphorus devices.
Col Venable said a statement by the US state department that white phosphorus had not been used was based on “poor information”.
The BBC’s defence correspondent Paul Wood says having to retract its denial has been a public relations disaster for the US military.
I’m not going to debate whether the use of this weapon is legal or illegal; since the US has not signed the treaty banning the weapon, then regardless of the effects of the substance on the human body it is not correct to say that we used an “illegal” weapon.
However, the use of this weapon in areas where there may be non-comabatants is not a way to make friends and influence people, and incorrectly claiming that we did not use weapons of this nature and then later saying we did does not enhance our already shaky credibility.