Sunday, June 19, 2005

It's not Napalm, it is 'Firebombing'

In what may be the most entertaining effort to use semantics since the consideration of is.


During the war, Pentagon spokesmen disputed reports that napalm was being used, saying the Pentagon's stockpile had been destroyed two years ago.

Apparently the spokesmen were drawing a distinction between the terms "firebomb" and "napalm." If reporters had asked about firebombs, officials said yesterday they would have confirmed their use.

What the Marines dropped, the spokesmen said yesterday, were "Mark 77 firebombs." They acknowledged those are incendiary devices with a function "remarkably similar" to napalm weapons.

Rather than using gasoline and benzene as the fuel, the firebombs use kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene.




So, the technical truth is we didn't Napalm anyone in Iraq, we 'firebombed' them. I wonder if they are any less burned, maimed, or dead since we didn't use napalm, but an advancement of napalm.

No comments: