NeoCon Central





Ever been called a Neocon? Sure you have! If you've ever taken an exotic safari into the jungle that is Media Matters for America or, if you are really daring, Democrats.org, you have been called a neo-conservative. The very term sends fear down a liberals' spine: Neeeooooccooooooonnn! Don't know about you, but I am sick and tired of being ashamed to be a neocon. I'm a neocon and I'm proud of it.

This website will hopefully serve as an HQ for all the ammunition any neocon could ever ask for. Proudly wear the tag of neocon!

Discuss anything political here!
   

<< November 2005 >>
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
 01 02 03 04 05
06 07 08 09 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30


If you want to be updated on this weblog Enter your email here:



rss feed

Nov 22, 2005
Liberal Idiots Promote Idea that "White Phosphorus" is a WMD

It certainly has been a huge story. Liberals are so happy to find that the U.S. was using "WMD"'s, proving once and for all that the U.S. is more evil that any other country, no matter what we do.

From a Daily Kos-er, commenting on one of the countless Kos posts about WP:

...when you think about the fact the administration took our country to war over WMD, and the only WMD turns out to be our own


Only one problem: white phosphorus isn't a WMD. Wikipedia says:

Use of white phosphorus against military targets (and outside civilian areas) is not specifically banned by any treaty. However, there is a debate on whether white phosphorus is a chemical weapon and thus outlawed by the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) which went into effect in April of 1997. The CWC is monitored by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. The spokesman for that organization, Peter Kaiser, stated that the use of white phosphorus was not prohibited under the convention if it was used for " (m)ilitary purposes not connected with the use of chemical weapons and not dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare"(Chemical Weapons Convention, Article II, Definitions, 9, "Purposes not Prohibited" c.)). The Chemical Weapons Convention specifically defines a "toxic chemical" as a chemical "which through its chemical action on life processes can cause death, temporary incapacitation or permanent harm to humans or animals".(CWC, II). Following that definition, the convention defines chemical weapons as "(t)oxic chemicals and their precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under this Convention, as long as the types and quantities are consistent with such purposes". Strictly speaking, since white phosphorus's primary effects are not actually due to its toxicity, but its spontaneous ignition in the presence of oxygen, many believe it has more in common with incendiary weapons instead. [4]
Doesn't sound much like a WMD to me...

Posted at 12:35 pm by NeoConCentral

JEGjr
November 26, 2005   02:18 PM PST
 
can't read the "blue" man!
 

Leave a Comment:

Name


Homepage (optional)


Comments




Previous Entry Home Next Entry