To: Pokey78; SAMWolf
Whatever they want to call it, we used it and good for us.
Does the reporter think we should feel sorry for the enemy?
Like the Marine said, "We told them to surrender".
To: snippy_about_it
How is napalm worse than a bomb full of ordinary explosive? I wasn't aware there was a controversy over its use.
To: snippy_about_it
Makes sense to me to use this on positions located on bridge approaches. You wouldn't want to use HE and accidently damage a bridge you want to take intact.
There is no treaty prohibiting this weapon that the U.S. is a party to. War is hell and there are few pleasant ways of dying in combat.
These hypocrites want to pin an unjust "war crimes" label on the U.S. while ignoring Iraq's refusal to adhere to the Geneva Convention.
To: snippy_about_it; Pokey78
I'm Shocked!! I'm outraged! This is a disgrace!!
Why are we using naplam when FAE's are so much better?
Fry 'em!
13 posted on
08/09/2003 1:36:21 PM PDT by
SAMWolf
(Behind every argument is someone's ignorance.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson