Sarin gas, napalm, white phosphorus and hypocrisy

The US president wants to go to war over the use of Sarin gas in Syria due to it being a banned, inhumane, chemical weapon. Unless they start lethal injecting people, all weapons of war are inhumane, some more so than others.

Case in point, napalm and white phosphorus, which the US and others have used extensively. Napalm and white phosphorus are chemical weapons that are banned against targeting civilians for the same reason sarin is, namely, an incredibly horrific, inhumane way to die.

So my question to you is, "Given a choice, how would you rather die?" Its a morbid but important question. My point is that, in my opinion, Sarin is a more humane weapon than the other two, and therefore, not a reason to go to war. You may say, "But Sarin is an invisible gas and he's targetting his own civilian population." True but when Assad is bombing his people at night, thats ok? No one see's those bombs coming, and they are just as indiscriminate. The effects of bombing is all over the net for anyone with the stomach and desire to witness. The poor sarin victims dont look any worse off.

Sarin gas effects on people:
www.bt.cdc.gov...

Naplam:
en.wikipedia.org...

"Napalm is the most terrible pain you can imagine," said Kim Phúc, a napalm bombing survivor known from a famous Vietnam War photograph

White Phosphorus:
en.wikipedia.org...

White Phosphorus doesn't stop burning until the substance burns itself up or is deprived of oxygen.

Uses:

www.policymic.com...

reply to post by NOrrTH


White phosphorus is a smokescreen agent, not a chemical weapon. If you happen to be in its way, well thats tough luck for you.

How would I like to die?
Of Old age Please!

reply to post by SirMike


Lots of people seem to be "getting in the way". Be proud.

www.policymic.com...

reply to post by NOrrTH


I am ... few things strike the fear of God in an adversary like incendiary weapons.

Originally posted by SirMike
reply to post by NOrrTH

 

I am ... few things strike the fear of God in an adversary like incendiary weapons.

Actually I'm much more afraid of incendiary statements by political leaders the likes of which we've been hearing lately. Yes, it is hypocritical beyond belief for the US government to take exception with other countries using pretty much any weapon of mass destruction... then again, they treat their own citizens with the same "Do as we say not as we do" bullcrap on a daily basis. Really curious as to how most people who still hold faith in them convince themselves to be trusting of such a historically unworthy of any trust establishment.

The same asshats who pushed the idea that radiation was good for people, cigarettes were healthy, countless since-proven-madmen dictators were great allies when we instituted their rule to oust whomever had then run afoul of the US, Agent orange and DDT are safe to use in our fields, etc, etc, etc are now magically believable and trustworthy in all things? BAH! The world certainly has a tremendous share of gullible people.

Personally I wouldn't mind being shot in the back by the outraged partner of the stunningly gorgeos 20-something woman I'm bonking flat out.

But that's just me