I think in this day and age of modern exposives, the average Joe Schmoe (or in this case Mu-hak-mabar), would not be able to tell the difference between some of the larger air to surface missiles, regular bombs, and fire bombs.

Example; the MK84 is a general all purpose bomb. It weighs 500KGs and does mucho damage to anything near it via is shear explosive force followed by it's plume of fire. No napalm though.

Speaking of the after effects, it seems doubtful the untrained eye knows how to spot the difference.

:lol: Look what happened when untrained eyes viewed the evidence of the airplane crash into the Pentagon. Proof for sure the layman knows his ballistics!

*typo fixed for the anal retentive

The US journalist James Crawley was on the ground with US troops as an embedded journalist .
He too wanted to know , which kind of bombs exactly were dropped at this time .

James Crawley , US Military Journalist :

" I asked , what kind of bombs they've used , and they said laserbombs , satellite-guided bombs and Napalm." Napalm in the Iraq-War . The US Ministry of Defence rejected this announcements immediately : "We did not used Napalm in Iraq and we won't use it neither ."

Cockpit-pictures from an US combat-jet in Iraq . What exactly was dropped from the US-jets over Iraq ? Firebombs ? Napalm ?

We drive to San Diego , to the base of the US Marine Corps who were at service in Iraq . To us , the speaker confirmed the use of Napalm-firebombs .

Joseph Boehm , Colonel US Marine Corps :

" In the 30 wardays we used only 30 canisters . The marines used it on their way to Baghdad . Where it was exactly , I don't know . It is a lethal weapon and also a psychological weapon ."

These are the firebombs we're talking about : they are labeled MK 77 , an advanced and perfected version of the Napalm-bomb used in Vietnam . The US Military and armament-industry still uses the same name for it : MK 77(Napalm)

James Snyder , Physicians for Social Responsibility :

" There is absolutely no difference in the impact and use of MK 77 and Napalm . They're both made for the same purpose . The only difference lies in their fuel . But both are designed to kill as much humans as possible , attack bunkers and spread fire." We wanted to know from the Pentagon , if these MK 77 bombs were used in the Iraq-war .

A Pentagon-speaker told MONITOR :

" I can confirm , that MK 77 bombs were dropped at the Kuwaiti-Iraqi-border." And on the question , if the MK 77 bombs are indeed Napalm-firebombs , the speaker said : " MK 77 is called
Napalm due to the fact , that their impact on targets resembles remarkable to the use of Napalm."

Speaking of the after effects, it seems doubtful the untrained eye knows how to spot the difference.

:lol: Look what happened when untrained eyes viewed the evidence of the airplane crash into the Pentagon. Proof for sure the layman knows his ballistics!

*typo fixed for the anal retentive

I could tell the difference between a napalm bomb and a regular bomb. Napalm rains from the sky.

Actually you posted a link to a poorly written attempt at a news story that doesn't list a single person by name in reference to it's claims. In fact if you read you're own article, you would have read: "...No independent source could verify the facts, ..."

Why such a chip on your shoulder?


It's opening line and the ONLY accusation about napalm reads: "We buried them, but we could not identify them because they were charred from the napalm bombs used by the Americans».<b> People from Saqlawiya village, near Falluja, told al Jazeera television</b>,"


So... the 'report' you claim as fact, seems to be a reporter relaying what the <i>civilians</i> of the area had to say.

I agree it would be easy for regular people to mistake different bombs, I mean the only way they could know what napalm looks like is from movies and we all know how accurate thous are.

It's a fact that we used Napalm in Iraq, whether you refuse to admit it is a different issue.

I didn't post that article for the reason of proving we used napalm in Iraq. If you had read the news about it, you would have recognized that.

I posted that article to make the point that this journalist who was shot at, was working on this type of story about Fallujah. So what exactly is the point you are trying to make here? I mean, aside from displaying your ignorance about munitions, and the fact that you don't believe Iraqi people can tell the difference between a blown up person, and a person running around with flaming liquid covering their body?

I think in this day and age of modern explosives, the average Joe Schmoe (or in this case Mu-hak-mabar), would not be able to tell the difference between some of the larger air to surface missiles, regular bombs, and fire bombs.

lol, and the USA never wanted to pay ransom at all.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=napalm+admits+iraq&btnG=Search

All from 3rd party sites. No CNN, Yahoo!, MSNBC, ABC, Fox. How the hell can you believe independent journalism?

All from 3rd party sites. No CNN, Yahoo!, MSNBC, ABC, Fox. How the hell can you believe independent journalism?

Example; the MK84 is a general all purpose bomb. It weighs 500KGs and does mucho damage to anything near it via is shear explosive force followed by it's plume of fire. No napalm though.