Napalm in Fallujah ???

Lucid Dragon

Junior Members
Reaction score
Bath, UK
the stories that have come out of iraq, and more recently falluja, have been getting more and more shocking. although, as you say, this should be taken with a pinch of salt, it does ring more genuine than some things i've heard :no:

it appears that as the war/occupation goes on american soldiers are... losing their grip on reality? (for want of a better expression). i can't believe there wan't more international condemnation over the killing of a wounded, unarmed iraqi.
Should we be so surprised?

They used it on their own citizens in Waco, were caught on camera and still had the balls to deny it all to this day. :no:

Results are 'remarkably similar' to using napalm

By James W. Crawley

August 5, 2003

American jets killed Iraqi troops with firebombs – similar to the controversial napalm used in the Vietnam War – in March and April as Marines battled toward Baghdad.

Marine Corps fighter pilots and commanders who have returned from the war zone have confirmed dropping dozens of incendiary bombs near bridges over the Saddam Canal and the Tigris River. The explosions created massive fireballs.

Mark 77 Firebomb
"We napalmed both those (bridge) approaches," said Col. Randolph Alles in a recent interview. He commanded Marine Air Group 11, based at Miramar Marine Corps Air Station, during the war. "Unfortunately, there were people there because you could see them in the (cockpit) video.

"They were Iraqi soldiers there. It's no great way to die," he added. How many Iraqis died, the military couldn't say. No accurate count has been made of Iraqi war casualties.

The bombing campaign helped clear the path for the Marines' race to Baghdad.

During the war, Pentagon spokesmen disputed reports that napalm was being used, saying the Pentagon's stockpile had been destroyed two years ago.

Apparently the spokesmen were drawing a distinction between the terms "firebomb" and "napalm." If reporters had asked about firebombs, officials said yesterday they would have confirmed their use.

What the Marines dropped, the spokesmen said yesterday, were "Mark 77 firebombs." They acknowledged those are incendiary devices with a function "remarkably similar" to napalm weapons.

Rather than using gasoline and benzene as the fuel, the firebombs use kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene.

Hundreds of partially loaded Mark 77 firebombs were stored on pre-positioned ammunition ships overseas, Marine Corps officials said. Those ships were unloaded in Kuwait during the weeks preceding the war.

"You can call it something other than napalm, but it's napalm," said John Pike, defense analyst with, a nonpartisan research group in Alexandria, Va.

"They were Iraqi soldiers there. It's no great way to die."

Col. Randolph Alles

Although many human rights groups consider incendiary bombs to be inhumane, international law does not prohibit their use against military forces. The United States has not agreed to a ban against possible civilian targets.

"Incendiaries create burns that are difficult to treat," said Robert Musil, executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility, a Washington group that opposes the use of weapons of mass destruction.

Musil described the Pentagon's distinction between napalm and Mark 77 firebombs as "pretty outrageous."

"That's clearly Orwellian," he added.

Developed during World War II and dropped on troops and Japanese cities, incendiary bombs have been used by American forces in nearly every conflict since. Their use became controversial during the Vietnam War when U.S. and South Vietnamese aircraft dropped millions of pounds of napalm. Its effects were shown in a Pulitzer Prize-winning photograph of Vietnamese children running from their burned village.

Before March, the last time U.S. forces had used napalm in combat was the Persian Gulf War, again by Marines.

During a recent interview about the bombing campaign in Iraq, Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Jim Amos confirmed aircraft dropped what he and other Marines continue to call napalm on Iraqi troops on several occasions. He commanded Marine jet and helicopter units involved in the Iraq war and leads the Miramar-based 3rd Marine Air Wing.

Miramar pilots familiar with the bombing missions pointed to at least two locations where firebombs were dropped.

Before the Marines crossed the Saddam Canal in central Iraq, jets dropped several firebombs on enemy positions near a bridge that would become the Marines' main crossing point on the road toward Numaniyah, a key town 40 miles from Baghdad.

Next, the bombs were used against Iraqis near a key Tigris River bridge, north of Numaniyah, in early April.

There were reports of another attack on the first day of the war.

Two embedded journalists reported what they described as napalm being dropped on an Iraqi observation post at Safwan Hill overlooking the Kuwait border.

Reporters for CNN and the Sydney (Australia) Morning Herald were told by unnamed Marine officers that aircraft dropped napalm on the Iraqi position, which was adjacent to one of the Marines' main invasion routes.

Their reports were disputed by several Pentagon spokesmen who said no such bombs were used nor did the United States have any napalm weapons.

The Pentagon destroyed its stockpile of napalm canisters, which had been stored near Camp Pendleton at the Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station, in April 2001.

Yesterday military spokesmen described what they see as the distinction between the two types of incendiary bombs. They said mixture used in modern firebombs is a less harmful mixture than Vietnam War-era napalm.

"Many folks (out of habit) refer to the Mark 77 as 'napalm' because its effect upon the target is remarkably similar."

Col. Michael Daily
"This additive has significantly less of an impact on the environment," wrote Marine spokesman Col. Michael Daily, in an e-mailed information sheet provided by the Pentagon.

He added, "many folks (out of habit) refer to the Mark 77 as 'napalm' because its effect upon the target is remarkably similar."

In the e-mail, Daily also acknowledged that firebombs were dropped near Safwan Hill.

Alles, who oversaw the Safwan bombing raid, said 18 one-ton satellite-guided bombs, but no incendiary bombs, were dropped on the site.

Military experts say incendiary bombs can be an effective weapon in certain situations.

Firebombs are useful against dug-in troops and light vehicles, said GlobalSecurity's Pike.

"I used it routinely in Vietnam," said retired Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard Trainor, now a prominent defense analyst. "I have no moral compunction against using it. It's just another weapon."

And, the distinctive fireball and smell have a psychological impact on troops, experts said.

"The generals love napalm," said Alles, who has transferred to Washington. "It has a big psychological effect."
Don't read on if you're easily upset.

Yes - its true - your Prime Minister supports the use of napalm on living humans.

The US Defense Dept. denied using napalm but admitted using "Mark 77 incendiaries" - the difference being negligible.

The term "napalm" is derived from the original gelling agents - napthalene and palmeate - which were mixed with petrol to make it sticky.

"Mark 77'"s are 650 gallon aluminium tanks filled with a mixture of aviation fuel, benzene, polystyrene and various oxidants. The benzene is to disolve the polystyrene, the polystyrene is to make the mixture sticky, and the oxidants are added to make the mixture impossible to extinguish - this stuff carries on burning even under water. Attempting to wipe it off you only spreads it about.

The aluminium tanks are not fitted with stabilising fins so that they "tumble" when dropped from an aircraft, causing the incendiary mixture to be spread over an area of approx 2500 square metres.

The bodies of people burned to death by this stuff exhibit what is known as the "shrunken corpse" characteristic, brought about by the extreme temperatures that are developed. They shrink to approx 1/3 their normal size.

A more hideous weapon I can scarcely imagine.

Take a look at and see if you can spot the tell-tale melted bodies and shrunken corpses. This site is not for the faint hearted.

I repeat, the US have openly admitted to using this stuff in Iraq, and our government supports them.
What the f**k!!

Hoon avoids 'napalm in Iraq' quiz
Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon will not be asked to clarify reports that coalition forces used napalm during recent operations in the rebel Iraqi stronghold of Fallujah.
A Labour MP submitted an emergency question to Mr Hoon asking him to make a statement on the reports in the Commons but Speaker Michael Martin has disallowed the question.
Alice Mahon, Labour MP for Halifax said: "There are reports from people who were in Fallujah that they have seen lots of burnt bodies that bear the hallmarks of napalm having been used.
"We are signed up to the UN protocol that napalm will not be used again, but America never signed it, yet we are part of the coalition and equally responsible."
Napalm is a deadly and flammable jelly and its use was blamed for widespread civilian casualties during the Vietnam War.

Ah.... ok proof that the government will not answer a representative of the public thus making a complete mockery of our so called democracy. Fascism moves a step closer!!

Also on search engine result for Alica Mahon falluja napalm:

... is giving to the Iraqi civilians who left Fallujah in advance of ... 59, Alice Mahon
(Halifax): To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether napalm or a ...

Which strangely has no page.

Are the ideas that could arise from this missing page :runaway:
of course the coalition has ALREADY admitted to, and refused to end, the use of illegal cluster munitions... so this is nothing new.

Geoff Hoon likes to dodge these questions with all the skill and bravado of a talking-head lawyer with a conscience impediment.

sleep easy, Geoff.

sleep easy.