this post was submitted on 09 Jun 2024
343 points (95.0% liked)

World News

39004 readers
3592 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] TxzK@lemmy.zip 35 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's not a war crime if it's done by Israel apparently

[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The US used the same weapons in Fallujah and likely elsewhere. They called it "shake and bake" when they first fired WP artillery to draw enemy fighters out, then followed up with conventional artillery to kill them.

Nobody can hold the US accountable, so they're not going to hold their rabid dog accountable either.

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

WP artillery is legal illumination round, and it's use in war is not this automatic war crime that people often believe.

You just described a legal application of WP:

Illumination of battle space to enable artillery spotters to coordinate indirect fire missions using standard munitions e.g. 155mm, mortars, etc.

However, intentional use of WP as an incendiary munition is where it does become a war crime.

I'm not saying US Forces in Iraq did, or didn't, illegally use WP, but I am saying you described it's intended and legal application.

Legal doesn't mean moral, justified, or right, it just means it's not a criminal act under the legal frameworks we currently use to manage warfare.

[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago

No, they absolutely used it as a ground-attack incendiary and have admitted as such. They were not flushed out by being illuminated, they were flushed out with choking smoke and burning shit raining down on their positions.

Even if they did only use illumination flares, there are considerations against using them in civilian areas in ways that can start fires or otherwise cause injury to civilians.

The legal issue is moot because the US was not an adherent to these laws until 2009.