M825A1, smokescreens and empty shells

[FireGarden]

The Times:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5470047.ece

quotes an expert (Neil Gibson, technical adviser to Jane’s Missiles and Rockets) saying that shells marked with M825A1 are white phosphorus shells. The IDF says that the shells photographed near an Israeli howitzer are empty shells used as an aid in targetting. The smokescreen is created with "what other armies use".

Palestinians are being taken to hospital with burns the staff haven't seen before.

 

[INRM]

That ain't right

White Phosphorous shells are illegal according to international law right?

 

[mrn838]

That ain't right

White Phosphorous shells are illegal according to international law right?

As far as being illegal, the CCW specifically says incendiary weapons are illegal when used in the presence of civilians. It does, however, specifically exempt illumination and smoke systems whose incendiary effects are incidental, such as WP.

And yes, M825A1's are WP shells.

 

[Darth Rotor]

That ain't right

White Phosphorous shells are illegal according to international law right?

No. Not quite. WP is most commonly used as a marking or spotting agent for air and artillery fires. It is not illegal to use it for that.

The use of WP came up over four years ago in Fallujah, which is a similarly built up area to some of the areas in Gaza. A criticism of that use is that, even though it is legit to use it to mark a target, when combatants and non combatants are so closely packed, it ought not to be used. A variety of military observers and pundits had disagreements aplenty on that, for varying reasons.

I expect the IDF to come under similar criticism for operations in urban terrain if Willy Pete is used other than sparingly. Given the microscope slide nature of this war in Gaza, even sparing use may draw fire. (hey, Wp is used to help direct fire, how delightfully ironic. ) When a WP round goes off, the wind tends to move the smoke in its own direction, without regard to where you wanted it to go when you shot it.

DR

 

[DC]

Willy Pete

that sounds so peacefull and harmless.
clever usage...

 

[FireGarden]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5497338.ece

More than 50 people with burns were taken into Nasser Hospital in the southern town of Khan Yunis, in what the hospital director, Youssef Abu Al-Reesh, said was a massive case of exposure to white phosphorus.

“We don’t have the medical experience to judge these cases, but we searched the internet according to the cases we have, and it indeed confirmed that it’s white phosphorus munitions. I have been working in this hospital for ten years and I have never seen anything like this.”

[...] Munir Albarsh, the Head of Emergency Medicine at Gaza’s Ministry of Health, said that doctors were collecting tissue samples at hospitals across Gaza to send for phosphorus testing at international laboratories. He added that the ministry would demand an independent international investigation into Israel’s use of white phosphorus.

They also say the shells were assembled in Pine Bluff, USA Sept 1991 -- based on lot numbers printed on the shells.

 

[Toke]

I read a book on the danish forces in jugoslavia, it had a description of tank armament.

The WP-shells were for torching stuff, marking a target for a plane, laying smoke, or "chasing stubborn infanterrists out of their holes so they could be shot regulationvice by machinegun"

Whatever the laws on the subject is, the ammunition is handled by practical people who know what it can be used for.

 

[fuelair]

Willy Pete

that sounds so peacefull and harmless.
clever usage...

Standard military shortening, not propaganda. Also makes it unlikely the wrong munition will be brought in/loaded into a system.

 

[gumboot]

As far as being illegal, the CCW specifically says incendiary weapons are illegal when used in the presence of civilians. It does, however, specifically exempt illumination and smoke systems whose incendiary effects are incidental, such as WP.

Except I don't believe Israel is a party to Protocol III anyway. For anyone that is interested, Israel openly admitted to using WP in Lebanon in 2006, so I can't see why they'd try hide it now.

 

[FireGarden]

For anyone that is interested, Israel openly admitted to using WP in Lebanon in 2006, so I can't see why they'd try hide it now.

Israel admitted using WP in open ground:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777549.html

Israel has acknowledged for the first time that it attacked Hezbollah targets during the second Lebanon war with phosphorus shells. White phosphorus causes very painful and often lethal chemical burns to those hit by it, and until recently Israel maintained that it only uses such bombs to mark targets or territory.

[...] "The IDF holds phosphorus munitions in different forms," Edery said. "The IDF made use of phosphorous shells during the war against Hezbollah in attacks against military targets in open ground."

That's different to using WP in a city. But pictures reveal where the smoke is: a city.

So I do see a reason why Israel would deny that it is WP.

 

[geni]

Except I don't believe Israel is a party to Protocol III anyway. For anyone that is interested, Israel openly admitted to using WP in Lebanon in 2006, so I can't see why they'd try hide it now.

Because there are no issues under international law in useing it to target installations away from civilians (as long as you use it for it's incendurary effect) of which hezbollah had some.

 

[Ziggurat]

Standard military shortening, not propaganda.

Next thing you know, Dictator Cheney is going to say that "Victor Charlie" was intended to humanize communist insurgents. Oh, wait, that wouldn't make us look bad.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Israel admitted using WP in open ground:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777549.html




That's different to using WP in a city. But pictures reveal where the smoke is: a city.

So I do see a reason why Israel would deny that it is WP.

I thought White Phoshoporus burns where thermal burns not chemical burns.

 

[Toke]

Gaza is rather densely populated, so I wonder if hamas have other practical options that fighting among civilians, and then make the most of the propaganda value from the corpses.
At what point will a israeli commander decide to ignore civilian casualties in order to protect his own troops? It´s after all not his civilians.

Does either of them have a choise of how to fight?

 

[Toke]

I thought White Phoshoporus burns where thermal burns not chemical burns.

It´s a burning chemical.
Guess chemical burns sounds sexier than just burns.

A chemical burn would be acid, base, or some organic disolvant.

 

[Ziggurat]

Palestinians are being taken to hospital with burns the staff haven't seen before.

I remember a number of years back, come palestinians claimed Israel had used nerve gas on them. Turned out it was just tear gas. I have no reason to trust that current speculation about burns has any more significance.

From the story:
"He added, however, that Human Rights Watch had no evidence that Israel was using incendiaries as weapons."

Sounds like the only story here is that they found an IDF spokesman who doesn't know what they're talking about, and are trying to turn that into a scandal.

 

[geni]

I thought White Phoshoporus burns where thermal burns not chemical burns.

Can be either depending on if it is on fire or not.

 

[BenBurch]

Well, isn't this a slippery-slope argument?

You have the legal WP shells for smoke screening and target designation.

As a commander, you know that you know the combatants you are targeting are somewhere in a particular built-up area, but the reality of urban warfare is such that you either go house-to-house, accepting huge casualties to your force, or you shell or bomb the place flat, or you burn it out.

So you use WP a few times as it was intended to be used, but one of those times you notice that it did the whole job for you by burning out the buildings you were targeting.

The temptation then exists to use it when you don't really need it hoping to get "lucky" with it again.

And though we cannot say that this has happened, that is the reason we ought not use such weapons at all.

 

[Ziggurat]

And though we cannot say that this has happened, that is the reason we ought not use such weapons at all.

Translation: I'm making up rationalizations for my position in the absence of any evidence.

 

[ddt]

Translation: I'm making up rationalizations for my position in the absence of any evidence.

There is precedent for the scenario Ben Burch sketches. The IDF also has used shells and missiles with flechettes against civilians on previous occasions:

For example, on 20 October 2003, an Israeli assassination squad killed Hamas activists Khalid al-Masri and Iyad al-Hilo as they drove through the Nusseirat refugee camp near Gaza City. They were killed by a missile that struck their car, and dozens of bystanders were horrifically wounded - at least 10 of them fatally - by a second missile that struck while EMS personnel were treating the victims of the first.

It turned out that the second missile was loaded with flechettes. The IDF only admitted as such only after MK Yossi Sarid, who had heard it confidentially in the Knesset's Defense Committee, threatened to go public with the information.