Dramatic increases in infant mortality, cancer and leukaemia in the Iraqi city of Fallujah, which was bombarded by US Marines in 2004, exceed those reported by survivors of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, according to a new study.
Wow. That sounds pretty bad. And it is a "study" so who could question that?
But I smell bullshit. One, the comparison to a nuclear attack seems a bit much, even for a person pre-disposed to think ill of America, doesn't it?
Dr Chris Busby, a visiting professor at the University of Ulster and one of the authors of the survey of 4,800 individuals in Fallujah, said it is difficult to pin down the exact cause of the cancers and birth defects. He added that "to produce an effect like this, some very major mutagenic exposure must have occurred in 2004 when the attacks happened".
Ah, first off, we have a survey of 4,800 extrapolated to the whole city. Shades of Lancet mortality surveys, I'd say. Oh my oh my, I wonder how that survey sample was selected?
And the fact that it is difficult to pin down the cause of birth defects doesn't stop them from trying to blame it on us. I mean, it must have occurred because of the 2004 attacks.
So what could it be? First, let's establish indiscriminate firepower usage to set the stage:
US Marines first besieged and bombarded Fallujah, 30 miles west of Baghdad, in April 2004 after four employees of the American security company Blackwater were killed and their bodies burned. After an eight-month stand-off, the Marines stormed the city in November using artillery and aerial bombing against rebel positions. US forces later admitted that they had employed white phosphorus as well as other munitions.
We "admitted" we used white phosphorus. As if we only owned up to it after intense questioning. That round has long been the subject of international Leftists trying to nail us for chemical warfare. It is a chemical, no doubt. But it is not a chemical weapon. It is lawful to use in combat, although it is not supposed to be fired directly at enemy forces because of the burning wounds it causes.
And then of course, we "admitted" we used "other munitions," too! Double ah ha! Imagine using munitions in a war! Where are Belgian judges when you need them?
Then check this out:
In the assault US commanders largely treated Fallujah as a free-fire zone to try to reduce casualties among their own troops. British officers were appalled by the lack of concern for civilian casualties. "During preparatory operations in the November 2004 Fallujah clearance operation, on one night over 40 155mm artillery rounds were fired into a small sector of the city," recalled Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, a British commander serving with the American forces in Baghdad.
He added that the US commander who ordered this devastating use of firepower did not consider it significant enough to mention it in his daily report to the US general in command. Dr Busby says that while he cannot identify the type of armaments used by the Marines, the extent of genetic damage suffered by inhabitants suggests the use of uranium in some form. He said: "My guess is that they used a new weapon against buildings to break through walls and kill those inside."
So we used it as a free-fire zone? Well, we did blast our way through the place. But we didn't blast as much as we could have given the house-to-house fighting we initiated. And we did work to evacuate as many innocent civilans as possible before the November assault.
The article cites 40 rounds in one night as one worthy of horror. But 40 rounds over a night doesn't seem like a lot to me. Even if high explosive rounds, that isn't a lot. Maybe the firing wasn't mentioned because they were illumination rounds? That's possible. But we don't know and the article doesn't say. And there is no knowledge of what we shot at, if indeed it was high explosive rounds. But surely they know we were aiming directly at little kids and kittens.
And then the killer leap: we must have used a new form of uranium-based round to penetrate the building walls.
Wow. Now we are in to seriously stupid territory. Depleted uranium rounds--very dense rounds that are designed to penetrate the thick armor of main battle tanks--are another weapon the international Left loves to drone on about. It is not the horrible weapon--except to an enemy shooting at us--it is made out to be. And more to the point, why on earth would we need to use such ammunition on buildings? What kind of super building material was used in Fallujah housing, anyway? I'll take a wild guess and say that the exotic weapon known as "high explosives" would break through walls and kill those inside.
This sounds like just another hit piece that the Lefty journalists in the Western world love to write about America and which Lefty readers in Western Europe, along with many in the Third World, love to read with their morning tea.
I call BS on this one.
