Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-11-2013, 07:28 PM
Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(15-11-2013 07:01 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(15-11-2013 05:13 PM)I and I Wrote:  There are Geneva conventions on torture, Israel is the only nation that openly admits that it uses torture. Israel and the US also use chemical weapons (white phosphorous).

Drinking Beverage

White phosphorous is not classified as a chemical weapon.

Isn't it an incendiary device?

He's not the Messiah. He's a very naughty boy! -Brian's mum
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 07:40 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(15-11-2013 07:28 PM)Cardinal Smurf Wrote:  
(15-11-2013 07:01 PM)Chas Wrote:  White phosphorous is not classified as a chemical weapon.

Isn't it an incendiary device?

Popham, Peter; Anne Penketh (23 November 2005). "US intelligence classified white phosphorus as 'chemical weapon'". The Independent (London). Retrieved 21 January 2009.

Pentagon: "Iraqi forces loyal to President Saddam may have possibly used white phosphorus chemical weapons against Kurdish rebels and the populace in Erbil and Dohuk. The WP chemical was delivered by artillery rounds and helicopter gunships."

According to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, white phosphorus is permitted for use as an illumination device and as a weapon with regard to heat energy, but not permitted as an offensive weapon with regard to its toxic chemical properties.

"If on the other hand the toxic properties of white phosphorus are specifically intended to be used as a weapon, that of course is prohibited, because the way the convention is structured or the way it is in fact applied, any chemicals used against humans or animals that cause harm or death through the toxic properties of the chemical are considered chemical weapons."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 08:22 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(15-11-2013 07:01 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(15-11-2013 05:13 PM)I and I Wrote:  There are Geneva conventions on torture, Israel is the only nation that openly admits that it uses torture. Israel and the US also use chemical weapons (white phosphorous).

Drinking Beverage

White phosphorous is not classified as a chemical weapon.

According to U.S. intelligence white phosphorous is labeled a chemical weapon.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/...16523.html

Chas makes a claim, completely false, I show evidence of the U.S. itself classifying white phosphorous as a chemical weapon.

Watch kids, as chas back tracks, plays semantics and does that beautiful back pedal dance he does.

Dance boy dance.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes I and I's post
15-11-2013, 09:45 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(15-11-2013 08:22 PM)I and I Wrote:  Chas makes a claim, completely false, I show evidence of the U.S. itself classifying white phosphorous as a chemical weapon.

Watch kids, as chas back tracks, plays semantics and does that beautiful back pedal dance he does.

Dance boy dance.

My hunch is that he'll simply ignore all the facts and just continue to believe he's right after all, and probably give you a negative reputation for having the audacity to challenge him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 06:50 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(15-11-2013 09:45 PM)frankksj Wrote:  
(15-11-2013 08:22 PM)I and I Wrote:  Chas makes a claim, completely false, I show evidence of the U.S. itself classifying white phosphorous as a chemical weapon.

Watch kids, as chas back tracks, plays semantics and does that beautiful back pedal dance he does.

Dance boy dance.

My hunch is that he'll simply ignore all the facts and just continue to believe he's right after all, and probably give you a negative reputation for having the audacity to challenge him.

apparently you were right.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 06:58 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(15-11-2013 05:13 PM)I and I Wrote:  So should the Geneva conventions be enforced?

Enforced by the militaries on the field intent on destroying one another, or the BRBS's forces?

Benevolent Russian Baby Shields
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 07:14 PM
Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(16-11-2013 06:58 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  
(15-11-2013 05:13 PM)I and I Wrote:  So should the Geneva conventions be enforced?

Enforced by the militaries on the field intent on destroying one another, or the BRBS's forces?

Benevolent Russian Baby Shields

They should be enforced by the TOTTDC.


(The off topic thread derailing comment)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 07:16 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(16-11-2013 06:50 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(15-11-2013 09:45 PM)frankksj Wrote:  My hunch is that he'll simply ignore all the facts and just continue to believe he's right after all, and probably give you a negative reputation for having the audacity to challenge him.

apparently you were right.

It is not defined as a chemical weapon in the Geneva Convention - which is the subject of the thread.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 07:21 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(16-11-2013 07:14 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(16-11-2013 06:58 PM)TheGulegon Wrote:  Enforced by the militaries on the field intent on destroying one another, or the BRBS's forces?

Benevolent Russian Baby Shields

They should be enforced by the TOTTDC.


(The off topic thread derailing comment)

So your saying YOU wouldn't enforce the Geneva Conventions? Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
16-11-2013, 08:16 PM
RE: Forth Geneva Conventions Section 3
(16-11-2013 07:16 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(16-11-2013 06:50 PM)I and I Wrote:  apparently you were right.

It is not defined as a chemical weapon in the Geneva Convention - which is the subject of the thread.

According to the U.S. white phosphorous is a chemical weapon. Please provide an argument against the U.S. findings.

And no, the topic of the thread is Geneva Conventions section 3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Gene...erritories

I provided that specific link in the first post.

Next Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: