The world is faced with what appears to be a fresh
obscenity. It has become obvious that the Syrian government has deployed a
chemical weapon against a civilian population. At this writing the exact nature
of the device is unclear, but a red line has been crossed, and neither the
United States nor other civilized nations can any longer sit back and ignore
the attack. The weapon is probably some form of Sarin, which is a
clear, colorless and tasteless liquid. It is made up of four common chemical
compounds: dimethyl methylphosphonate, phosphorus trichloride, sodium fluoride
and alcohol. Over a thousand children, babes in arms and innocent
civilians all have had their lives sucked out of them.
President Obama will strike Syria, but will wait on
Congress to debate the issue, even if he believes he has the authority as
Commander and Chief to launch an attack. That now seems to be postponed while
other negotiations are taking place. The American people are war weary, their
dis-ease complicated by the sense that we went to war against Iraq on false
premises. My personal hope is clear options other than a military attack can be
found.
Chemically based WMDs are not new in warfare.
In WW I,
mustard gas was the chemical weapon of choice. Even though it was subsequently outlawed
by the Geneva Convention, the US army admitted using mustard gas in Korea.
Since N. Korean troops had no gas masks, it was particularly effective.
One evening when my wife and I were discussing the day’s
news, she said, “What about
Napalm?” Napalm was and is produced by the Dow Chemical Company. And it, along
with other chemical compounds, is still being stockpiled by the American
military. So as heinous as the Syrian use of Sarin may be, perhaps the United
States might pause for a moment, recalling that a chemical weapon is any device
made from standard chemicals and deliverable by a bomb or an explosive missile.
Napalm, therefore, must be characterized as a chemical WMD.
Napalm is jellied gasoline. Its name is an acronym of naphthenic and
palmitic acids, which are used in its manufacture. Napalm became notorious in
Vietnam where it was used in three capacities. Possibly its most extensive use
was being dropped from aircraft in large canisters which tumbled sluggishly to
earth. Exploding on impact, they engulfed large areas in flame, sucking up all
the oxygen and emitting intense heat, thick black smoke, and a smell which no
one exposed to it will ever forget. Dropping napalm from high-speed jet aircraft
was far from accurate, resulting in thousands of civilian casualties. A second
use was in flamethrowers, which proved successful in clearing bunkers. If the
flames could not be directed to penetrate the bunker, they could bathe the
bunker in fire, consuming all the oxygen and suffocating those inside.
Flamethrowers also were used in destroying "enemy" villages.
Throughout the duration of the war, 1965–1973, eight million tons of
bombs were dropped over Vietnam; this was more than three times the amount deployed
in WWII. A considerable potion of these bombs contained Napalm.
Agent Orange is a toxic chemical herbicide. It was one of the main chemical
weapons employed during Operation Ranch Hand. This operation was intended to
deprive Vietnamese farmers and guerilla fighters of clean food and water in
hopes they would relocate to areas more heavily controlled by
the U.S. By the end of the operation over twenty million gallons of
herbicides and defoliants were sprayed over forests and fields in Vietnam, Laos
and Cambodia.
Agent Orange is fifty times more concentrated than normal agricultural
herbicides; this extreme intensity completely destroyed all plants in the area.
Agent Orange not only had devastating effects on agriculture but also on people
and animals. The Vietnam Red Cross recorded over 4.8 million deaths and 400,000
children were born with birth defects due to exposure to Agent Orange. The
military use of Agent Orange was later determined to be in violation of the
Geneva Convention.
While the Syrian government must be called to account for these latest
attacks, any military response by the United States must be done with a certain
humility when faced with our use of chemical weapons. While no one has a desire to refight the tragic war against
Vietnam, neither do we have any self-righteous cause to stand in judgment on
this obscene Syrian attack. What should be done? Perhaps there are no good answers.
Charles Bayer
No comments:
Post a Comment