Are cluster bombs WMD?

[Harper_is_Bush]

I've seen the definition of WMD as being weapons that kill indiscriminatly.

Do cluster bombs fit that description?

[TomInTib]

1. Anything more than a bullet or a knife is quite capable of indiscriminate

death.

[Selatius]

2. Cluster bombs are no more indiscriminate than napalm

And the US is accused of using napalm or some reformulated version of it and white phosphorus on Iraqis. Of the two, the only one that would fall under the legal category of a chemical weapon is white phosphorus, which means using white phosphorus in that manner constitutes a war crime.

[TomInTib]

3. Check this out..

The big crime is depleted uranium

OCALA, Fla. -- Chuck Hubert of Ocala fought in Iraq, and he said he believes he is suffering from the "new" Agent Orange.

The government said it used millions of gallons of herbicides -- which was called Agent Orange -- in Vietnam between 1962 and 1971 to remove unwanted plant life that provided cover to enemy forces.

Returning veterans reported various health problems after they returned home, which they attributed to Agent Orange, WESH 2 News reported.

Hubert said he and thousands of others who have returned from the Iraq war are battling the effects of inhaling depleted uranium yet no one's listening.

"I just want answers. I mean simple answers," Hubert said.


http://www.uruknet.com/?p=m26084&hd=0&size=1&l=e

[bananarepublican]

4. Agent Orange... Depleted Uranium... AIDS? n/t

[TomInTib]

6. AIDS? What the hell are you talking about?

I believe the subject was in reference to fighting, not fucking.

[bananarepublican]

7. Now fighting and *ucking = the same thing!

The death of 'certain people' appears to be the name of whatever global game is going on.

If your question was a genuine one, delve a little deeper into the origins of the 'AIDS-virus'. My personal-jury is still out on 'avian flu'.

[TomInTib]

9. peas in a pod

That's us.

And bird flu is just a quest for a universal fowl.

[bananarepublican]

10. Peas in a pod? Not likely!

I'll probably agree with you on some things and not on others.

Injustice is injustice. Persecution is persecution. I'm not advocating anything other than to question the crap you've been fed by the MSM. For how long have we all been served up this shit?

[TomInTib]

11. I've not been fed any crap

because I refuse to swallow same.

Where does AIDS fit in to the DU argument?

[Solo_in_MD]

14. Napalm and WP are not WMDs

their use is arguably proscribed in some situations, but they are not WMDs.

[Selatius]

20. Not in the traditional sense, but there are laws governing ABC weapons

(Atomic, Biological, Chemical) White phosphorus, if used in a non-offensive manner like illuminating an area at night, is not considered a chemical weapon; however, it is considered a chemical weapon if it is used in an offensive manner to burn, maim, or kill people, and the US stands accused of blanketing several city blocks with white phosphorus in Fallujah. If true, that is a war crime. Napalm was banned by the UN in the late 1970s or early 1980s after the international community witnessed the horrors napalm inflicted on innocent civilians in South Viet Nam. The US responded by reformulating the mixture and calling it something else to avoid the ban.

[Solo_in_MD]

21. WP is not considered WMD and its not banned in for all uses

IIRC its banned against civilian targets as are all incinderaries (no more Dresdens or Toyko firestorms)

[Swamp Rat]

5. "weapons that kill indiscriminatly"

That includes George W. Bushler.

[TahitiNut]

8. Only if "they" have them.

Our "they" du jour is Iran. :shrug:

[OneBlueSky]

12. yes . . . and so are depleted uranium weapons . . .

and white phosphorus weapons . . . and nuclear "bunker busters" . . . and probably a bunch of others we don't even know about . . .

[Solo_in_MD]

15. DU and WP are not WMD

[bananarepublican]

24. Isn't a DU shell in effect a 'dirty bomb'? How long does the radiation...

... last? Do they, or do they not, cause birth defects?

[Solo_in_MD]

13. No, not even close

Their use in populated areas is questionable, but they are in no way considered WMD

[Pavulon]

16. No (images graphic)

These are




I fear these more than any other..

[BlueCollar]

17. theoretically

any weapon designed to kill more than one person at a time could be defined as a weapon of mass destruction..


As a practical matter though, I would be inclined to resist painting with a broad brush here.

WMD are generally regarded as those which are designed to destroy all life without use of conventional explosives IMO

[AngryAmish]

18. no

[NoodleyAppendage]

19. Better yet...how many must die to be considered "mass destruction?"

Would say 2800 people killed in one incident be considered "mass destruction?" How about 5000? Or, on the low end 500?

"Mass" denotes a group or number...so, what's that number or range??

J

[FILAM23]

22. Short answer

No

[Harper_is_Bush]

23. To all who said no...

I would disagree. International agreements mention "indiscriminate killing" and that's what cluster bombs do.