"Aren't bombs chemical weapons?"
I fell bad enough for having the hijacked this thread this much already.
But since you asked, yes, of course the explosive is chemical but itakes more than that to be a chemical weapon under the treaty.. The Chemical weapons treaty is in 722 parts and I won't pretend to understand it all but this seems to be the working defiinition.
" 1.
A toxic chemical and its precursors, except where intended for purposes not prohibited under the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), provided that the type and quantity are consistent with such purposes;
2.
A munition or device, specifically designed to cause death or other harm through the toxic properties of those toxic chemicals specified in paragraph (1) of this definition, which would be released as a result of the employment of such munition or device; or
3.
Any equipment specifically designed for use directly in connection with the employment of munitions or devices specified in paragraph (2) of this definition. "
So while white phosphorous is toxic, its not the toxic propertuies that are relvent here and the army has a good point about their legality. My point was that if we can do it without putting our troops lives at risk, we oughtto avoiud the appearence of using chemicals directy on humans as weapons to seperate us from Sadaam's tactics.
http://www.cwc.gov/Regulations/cfr-15/part-710_html
Do you care which chemical reaction causes your death when your dead?