What will the Blair/Bush say if the Israelis are found to be using phosphorus bombs against Lebenon?

Question

There are reports that the Israelis may have been using phosphorus bombs against the Lebonese...I'm just wondering if this turns out to be true (nothing proved as yet) what will our leaders say? Will it be pushed under the carpet...because no chemical weapons have been found in Iraq, yet they are backing Israel who 'may be' using them...
If this is proved and pushed under the carpet/ignored surely something seriously wrong is going on and the citizens of Britain/The USA should tell our leaders to get the hell out of office!

This is not intended as a question of who started what or who is right, it's a question of the USA starting a war with another country re: chemical weapons and then defending another country who may be using them on civilians.

Just wondering also...is Napalm still legal to use??

Answer 1

NOTIHNG!!!!!

ISRAEL IS BELOVED SON OF US AND UK IN MIDDLE EAST..........BILLIONS OF DOLLARS AID TO ISRAEL EVERY YEAR FROM UNITED STATES!!!!!!!!!

THIS IS WHERE SOLVING THE 39 YEARS OF ISRAELI OCCUPATION COMES IN!!!!!!

AMERICAN BIASED HAS REACHED ITS LIMIT!!!!!!!

ISRAEL IS LIKE A SPOILED SON OF US.


BRANDKYGIER:

READ MORE ABOUT MIDDLE EAST

PS: 10000 PALESTINIANS HAVE JAILED , SOME WITH OUT TRIAL.......DONT TELL ME WHO STARTED THIS!!!!!
WHAT IS AMERICA DOING !!!! NOTHING!!!!!


WATCH TOO MUCH AMERICAN MEDIA CRAP!!! GO LIVE IN REAL WORLD!!!!

Answer 2

Bush will probably ask Israel to supply more phosphorus bombs.
You seem unaware that the USA was confirmed in National press as using phosphorus bombs/shells over civilian populations to terrorise the citizens of some Iraqi towns. As their skin burned to the bone before their eyes it rather did the job very well, particularly on child victims.
You may also be unaware that USA signed an international agreement to outlaw the use of Napalm as a weapon despite dropping it on Iraqi soldiers in the first Gulf war (with the excuse of igniting trenches of oil used as a defence against advancing US troops)..
The only chemical weapons in Iraq under current occupation of Iraq belong to the USA and British military.
Before the illegal invasion of Iraq more that 1 million people demonstrated on the streets in the UK against the impending invasion. Blair was not voted out of office because the main opposition party wanted blood also so we were left with the devil that we know.

Answer 3

According to the Law of Land Warfare, the use of white phosphorus as a smoke generating weapon or as a flame expedient is legal. As long as the Israeli's are using the weapons within their intended use, there would be no violation of the Laws of War (or the Geneva or Hague Conventions).

If it can be proved, in an international court (such as the Hague) that the Israeli's explicitly used the weapons against protected targets or humans (not the buildings the humans were using as shields / cover / shelter), then this would be a violation of the Laws of War.

Obviously, if there was a blatant violation of the Laws of War or International Law, one would expect ALL nation's leaders (to include Bush and Blair) to speak in outrage.

Answer 4

So what if they're using phosphorous? American warships use phosphorous all the time. It's just a really hot burning weapon that can't be put out. One more very effective firepower attack. I was on a ship that shot phosphorous rounds less than 20 miles from San Diego. It was never on the news... not because of some conspiracy to hush it up, but because it isn't newsworthy.

Phosphorous bombs being used in the middle of a war are about as breathtaking as gunshots being heard in the middle of a shooting range.

Chemical weapons, as their primary purpose, produce toxic gasses. Phosphorous is not considered a chemical weapon. any more than the exhaust pipe of a tank.

Answer 5

I vote for Bush and i am afraid i made one heck of a mistake i have no love for Blair either but if they are using that type of weapon they will just pick their nose's and scratch their a--.i've never been so disappointed in any adminstration as this one. No weapons of mass destruction,no Bin ladedn,high gas prices, attacking social security after they haved robbed it,browing money from China what a mess and still talking about the(NWO) new world order. They are flushing us down the sh--ter!!!

Answer 6

Blair and Bush have proved they dont give a rats ***
they dismiss anything else anyone else has to say and have made the UN Redundant
I dont see anyone making Israel pay for bombing the UN Building and killing their reps

Answer 7

israel does have the right to defend itself. how come no one complains about the 100's of missles being fired into israeli towns indiscriminately?!?!? and who started this war after all!! NOT Israel.
If the war escalates too much, and Hebollah bastards dont back down and give back the soldiers they wrongly kidnapped, they shoud and will be wiped off this earth.

Answer 8

Blair/Bush would probably give Israel a mild reprimand (solely so that others can see) and then state that Israel have the "right to defend herself."

Answer 9

i agree that israel has the right to defend itself against terrorists if this is a big problem why do will still have troops in northern ireland when the ira has supposedly disarmed same same i would take no **** either

Answer 10

For sure, they will have no regret on that, since it is preparable since to liquidate Hezbollah and those who support it. Whatever kind of weapon is used on them will be right on the side of US/UK. But beyond that no any other country (except Isreal, US/UK) could use such weapons again. They are exceptional since they are fighting terrorism.

Answer 11

Whatever is said publically, the exact opposite will be muttered over what they think are closed off microphones a week later.