A couple of weeks ago I highlighted the fact that declassified documents analyzed by Foreign Policy proved that the U.S. government knew about Saddam Hussein’s egregious use of chemical weapons and in fact we helped him be more effective in their deployment. Well unfortunately that’s just the tip of the American chemical weapons iceberg.
From white phosphorus and depleted uranium (DU) usage in Iraq, to secret radioactive tests in poor black neighborhoods within the U.S. itself (something I previously covered here), the list is pretty horrific. While you might be able to say that this is the reality of war, then what the heck are we doing entering a civil war in a country where chemical weapons are being used that poses no threat to us? Absolutely insane and criminal.
I summarized the Top 10 list here, but I highly suggest also checking out the entire post with pictures from PolicyMic. Summary below:
Washington doesn’t merely lack the legal authority for a military intervention in Syria. It lacks the moral authority. We’re talking about a government with a history of using chemical weapons against innocent people far more prolific and deadly than the mere accusations Assad faces from a trigger-happy Western military-industrial complex, bent on stifling further investigation before striking.
1. The U.S. Military Dumped 20 Million Gallons of Chemicals on Vietnam from 1962 – 1971
Vietnam estimates that as a result of the decade-long chemical attack, 400,000 people were killed or maimed, 500,000 babies have been born with birth defects, and 2 million have suffered from cancer or other illnesses.
2. Israel Attacked Palestinian Civilians with White Phosphorus in 2008 – 2009
White phosphorus is a horrific incendiary chemical weapon that melts human flesh right down to the bone.
In 2009, multiple human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and International Red Cross reported that the Israeli government was attacking civilians in their own country with chemical weapons.
The Israeli military denied the allegations at first, but eventually admitted they were true.
3. Washington Attacked Iraqi Civilians with White Phosphorus in 2004
In 2004, journalists embedded with the U.S. military in Iraq began reporting the use of white phosphorus in Fallujah against Iraqi insurgents. First the military lied and said that it was only using white phosphorus to create smokescreens or illuminate targets. Then it admitted to using the volatile chemical as an incendiary weapon.
4. The CIA Helped Saddam Hussein Massacre Iranians and Kurds with Chemical Weapons in 1988
CIA records now prove that Washington knew Saddam Hussein was using chemical weapons (including sarin, nerve gas, and mustard gas) in the Iran-Iraq War, yet continued to pour intelligence into the hands of the Iraqi military, informing Hussein of Iranian troop movements while knowing that he would be using the information to launch chemical attacks.
5. The Army Tested Chemicals on Residents of Poor, Black St. Louis Neighborhoods in The 1950s
In the early 1950s, the Army set up motorized blowers on top of residential high-rises in low-income, mostly black St. Louis neighborhoods, including areas where as much as 70% of the residents were children under 12. The government told residents that it was experimenting with a smokescreen to protect the city from Russian attacks, but it was actually pumping the air full of hundreds of pounds of finely powdered zinc cadmium sulfide.
6. Police Fired Tear Gas at Occupy Protesters in 2011
The savage violence of the police against Occupy protesters in 2011 was well documented, andincluded the use of tear gas and other chemical irritants. Tear gas is prohibited for use against enemy soldiers in battle by the Chemical Weapons Convention.
7. The FBI Attacked Men, Women, and Children With Tear Gas in Waco in 1993
8. The U.S. Military Littered Iraq with Toxic Depleted Uranium in 2003
In Iraq, the U.S. military has littered the environment with thousands of tons of munitions made from depleted uranium, a toxic and radioactive nuclear waste product. As a result, more than half of babies born in Fallujah from 2007 – 2010 were born with birth defects. Some of these defects have never been seen before outside of textbooks with photos of babies born near nuclear tests in the Pacific.
Napalm is a sticky and highly flammable gel which has been used as a weapon of terror by the U.S. military. In 1980, the UN declared the use of napalm on swaths of civilian population a war crime. That’s exactly what the U.S. military did in World War II, dropping enough napalm in one bombing raid on Tokyo to burn 100,000 people to death, injure a million more, and leave a million without homes in the single deadliest air raid of World War II.
10. The U.S. Government Dropped Nuclear Bombs on Two Japanese Cities in 1945
It seems odd that the only regime to ever use one of these weapons of terror on other human beings has busied itself with the pretense of keeping the world safe from dangerous weapons in the hands of dangerous governments.
Donate bitcoins: 35DBUbbAQHTqbDaAc5mAaN6BqwA2AxuE7G
Follow me on Twitter.
Wow you’re off your rocker and I am not even American. The problem with your whole position is that based on one’s actions in the past, they lack the moral authority to take action in the future. Based on that premise no person, government or corporation should ever have the moral authority to take action ever again. If that is the case then moral authority ceases to exist.
I don’t have a problem with soldiers and rebels shooting it out in a civil war. But when civilians start are getting gassed. Should the US say well I can’t do anything because we did this in the past? Well who then shall stand up for those civilians? Nobody because if you reach back far enough every country has committed and atrocity of some form. What about the atrocities being committed here and now? The problem with your logic is, it would have allowed the holocaust to continue to it’s fullest form.
I think what you are pointing to relates to the logical fallacy sometimes called ‘tu quoque’. This logical fallacy consists of an attempt to discredit the opponent’s position by asserting the opponent’s failure to act consistently in accordance with that position. For instance, if a smoker tells you that you should quit smoking to improve your health, it is fallacious to argue that their advice is incorrect since they themselves smoke. In fact, their advice to quit smoking is perfectly appropriate, in that it is empirically valid, despite the fact that the adviser smokes.
Similarly, although the U.S. has used chemical weapons in the past, their assertion that the use of chemical weapons is an evil is valid despite the fact that they have used such weapons themselves. So, your point, as far as it goes, is taken.
However, it is still possible to recognize the perverse hypocrisy in either example – especially when the U.S (or the smoker) tries to assume the moral high ground. So, although their assertion that the use of chemical weapons is bad (morally wrong) may be true; their attempt to deny their own responsibility and assert their moral superiority is absurdly misguided. For example, what would you say to the smoker who insisted on punishing you so long as you continue smoking, but had no thought to try to quit themselves?
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Matthew 7:3-5
Will Congress Now Save Obama’s Face By Selling Out Democracy and the Syrian People and Setting the Stage for World War III ?
Paul Craig Roberts
It is clear that the American people overwhelming oppose an attack on Syria. Whether Americans have caught on over the years to Washington’s endless war lies or whether they simply see no point to the wars and no gain to America from 12 years of costly war, I cannot say. At a time when a large percentage of Americans are having difficulty paying their mortgages, car payments, and putting food on the table, Washington’s wars seem an expensive luxury.
It is not only the civilian populations of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Syria who have suffered. Tens of thousands of America’s young have either been killed, maimed for life, or are suffering permanent post-traumatic stress. Washington’s wars have caused thousands of divorces, alcoholism, drug addiction, and homelessness for veterans who were deceived and had their humanity abused by the criminals that rule in Washington.
For Congress, allegedly the representatives of the American people, not the backstop for the executive branch’s undeclared agenda, to ignore the people’s will and to endorse a war that the American people do not support would be another decisive blow against democracy. If Congress endorses obama’s war, it will prove that American democracy is a hoax.
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/09/04/the-high-cost-of-saving-face-for-obama-paul-craig-roberts/
Starting with an ad hominem attack and following on with completely illogical statements makes it clear that you are either a troll or that your understanding of these matters is very childish and limited.
Given that the USA has been responsible for the deaths of at least 20 million innocent civilians in all the wars that have been waged by the USA (either directly or by their funded proxies) since the 1890s onwards, it is quite clear that any claims by the USA of being interested in saving civilian lives are hypocrisy in the extreme.
If by “standing up for these civilians” you mean bomb the crap out of them then sure, the USA will do well at “standing up for them” in Syria – just as the USA has “stood up” for all the other civilians they have blown apart en masse with the bombs and bullets they have used in all the other dozens of countries that the USA has attacked over the past 115 years.
Yes, what about the atrocities being committed here and now, such as the USA slaughtering hundreds of innocent women and children with bombs from unmanned robotic drone strikes in countries far from the USA itself that pose zero threat to the USA itself. Oh, guess you don’t want to talk about any of that given the naked hyprocisy of the stance that you are taking.
I didn’t realize that the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 1. chemical attacks or 2. supposed to be a secret.
You’re making the MSM look good.
‘making the MSM look good’.
Hardly!
The message of the article rings loud and clear:
The US has no standing to be the policeman, and cannot justify armed intervention in Syria, given its own use of chemical weapons. And, I might add, its track record of lying to get into wars: USS Maine, Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Gulf of Tonkin, Iraq WMD…
Only the US and its close allies believe US propaganda. Most of the world sees right through the lies. So, sadly, US prestige in the world is at an all-time low.
I am revolted by the hypocrisy of the American stance, not just in Syria now but everywhere, everywhen.. Doctor Goebles, the only Minister for Propaganda honest enough to use the title, protested that the Nazis couldn’t come close to matching Hollywood.
the Japanese bombings happened after a aggression on American soil by the Japanese at pearl harbor. the Syrians have not attacked us perse but we are being attacked by terrorists and who knows where they are all from! But I do not believe this is the same as pearl harbor. but Russia and iran are working on destroying petro dollar and Saudi Arabia helps in that regard.they are enemies the problem is muslim brotherhood takes over they are not in support of freedoms and Sunnis either,HELP JR
Uh, the Japanese attacked after the U.S. illegally seized/held their U.S. assets…
If there ever was or is an “Evil Empire”, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (a corporation, by the way) is the best qualified example. And the morons that believe in its lies and blow into the same horn are the biggest threat to humanity. The Mexican – American war, the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima & Nagasaki, Gulf of Tonkin, WWII, the Liberty attack, Iraq, the Oklahoma bombing, Waco, the WTC 9/11, Afghanistan, Libya, Connecticut School attack, Murder of Allende, etc., etc.All these atrocities are documented to be true aggressive acts perpetrated by the US Government, its handlers and its CIA operatives, and now they want to convince the world that they have a moral obligation to circumvent all international laws and commit another act of violence against a sovereign nation, Syria. Viewing the foregoing account, how can one believe that this time, the nerve gas attack on the Syrians is not another of those dastardly acts of the CIA? It just makes no sense that Assad would be so stupid and challenge the world by bombing his own people.However, if it can be 100% proven that Assad is the psychopath behind this murderous act, then he, not Syria and its people, should face justice, just as the psychopaths that have occupied the White House and Pentagon lately.
Why do you criticize Israel in your article which questions the moral standing of America?
Many countries have used chemical weapons at some time, but you chose not to mention them. Only Israel.
It seems you can’t resist an opportunity to attack the Jewish State even if it has nothing to do with American use of chemical weapons.
First of all, I didn’t write the article, as is made clear in the blog post. I reposted parts of it. Second of all, considering Israel is a puppet-state colony of America in the Middle East, the region where we are showing so much offense to chemicals weapons, I think it is fair the author added them to the list.
If you had actually spent time reading any of my articles from the past 3+ years, you’d know that I criticize the Saudis and Bahrain more than any other states in the region. So please do some homework before lashing out with preposterous and inaccurate claims.
Michael Krieger