Napalm was used by US forces to effectively burn down sections of forests and weed out the guerrilla fighters hiding in the dense forests. A mixture of plastic polystyrene, hydrocarbon benzene, and gasoline, Napalm was a gelatinous substance that could stick to anything and burn up in 10 minutes if ignited.
Methods
Napalm was first militarily used by the US Air Force on Berlin in World War 2, launching AN-M76 incendiary bombs. It was again used in the Pacific War, burning out bunkers, tunnels, and other Japanese installations in the islands of Iwo Jima, Saipan, and Okinawa. B-29's also dropped Napalm bombs in fire raids on Japanese cities when thermite bombs were out of supply. During the Korean War, since ground forces were outnumbered, air support of the border between North Korea and South Korea used Napalm bombs to defend against ground attacks.
Perhaps the most widely known use of Napalm by the US military was during the Vietnam War. 388,000 tons of napalm bombs were dropped during the war.
Effects
The effects of Napalm are horrific, causing 5th degree burns on most of its victims (burns down to the bone). Since Napalm burns at 1500 degrees F, those who did not get hit directly by the substance could still die from heat stroke, smoke exposure, and carbon monoxide poisoning. Those who were hit directly suffered unbelievable pain, asphyxiation, and usually died.
The use of this chemical agent against civilians was banned by international law in 1980 and was signed by the US in 2009 under the Obama Administration.
Napalm was an unethical method of war that the US military deployed, but, like the atomic bomb, is it a necessary method in order to save lives?
Sources:
https://www.thoughtco.com/napalm-and-agent-orange-in-vietnam-war-195797
http://vietnamawbb.weebly.com/napalm-agent-orange.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napalm
http://www.drabruzzi.com/moral_righteousness_amnesia_and_chemical_weapons.htm
Interesting article that not only discusses facts about the use of napalm and its function, but also the ethical aspect of whether or not it should be used. From what you said in the article, it was clearly a highly destructive and merciless weapon that was used against civilians, however I like the comparison you drew at the end to the atomic bomb of WWII and the question: "is it a necessary method in order to save lives?" An incredibly important question indeed, as it is still a very controversial topic today whether or not ends should always justify the means. Overall a meaningful short article and well written.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting post. It discusses the methods and effects of the use of napalm, which are very serious and almost no victims of this kind of bombing survive. It seems like a merciless weapon, and only a step behind the atomic bomb, and so the questions of morality on this weapon are very similar to those for the atomic bomb. Overall, it was a very informative post for something that we had gone into depth before.
ReplyDelete