Chemical Warfare in Iraq?

There's been a flurry of reports on the Web about accusations the US has used chemical weapons in Iraq. Specifically:

RAI, the all news state-run satellite channel in Italy, aired a documentary Tuesday that accused the United States of using chemical weapons against the civilian population during a November 2004 bombardment of Fallujah. AKI, the Italian news agency, reports that the documentary, entitled "Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre" and aired on the first aniversary of the assault on insurgents in Fallujah, includes interviews with former US soldiers and with residents of Fallujah who say that during the assault on the city the US military used the chemical white phosphorus.

...continued in full post...

The Daily Kos jumped all over the story, and there have been any number of comments elsewhere.

---

Scott Burgess, at The Daily Ablution, has some postings on the subject:

Here: Essentially, the injuries reported are not consistent with burns from white phosphorus.

One interesting comment:

Some have claimed the use of WP contravenes the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention which bans the use of any 'toxic chemical' weapons which causes 'death, harm or temporary incapacitation to humans or animals through their chemical action on life processes'.

That means, tear gas is banned, but machine guns are OK.

Also,

(I can't help but feel that, if the smoke was in fact as dangerous as Mr. Monbiot wants it to be, the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons would take note).

And:

There are no reported deaths resulting from exposure to phosphorus smokes."

No "burning flesh to the bone", then. No "caramelisation" or "dissolving". No suffocation and "burning from the inside". "No reported deaths".

Here:

One good sign that you've done well in a discussion is the descent by your counterpart into the realm of the ad hominem. If, at the same time, he ignores the substantive, factual points you've raised (e.g., the opinion of his chosen expert that his conclusions are ill-founded), you're left with little choice but to conclude that he's incapable of answering those points. The Independent's Andrew Buncombe seems to be in precisely that position of impotence.

Here

Referring to another quote from yesterday's Independent story, I asked:

Daily Ablution: "Are burns caused by white phosphorus consistent with 'bodies burned but clothes intact'?" John Pike: "No

And finally, it seems witnesses on whose accounts this story is based have axes to grind.

---

Mudville Gazette has a lenthy post on Fallujah, including:

As for the rest, the BBC debunks many of the instant myths surrounding this story, noting that White Phosphorous is an incendiary weapon (also used to create smoke screens), not a chemical weapon, and that although the US is not a signatory to any international treaty restricting the use of white phosphorus devices the military has stated they were used to illuminate combat areas at night.

---

CounterColumn has a comment here and links to another comment here.