The Karenni National Defense Force (KNDF) has announced that the Myanmar military (Tatmadaw) used chemical agents in drone strikes during battles between the military and revolutionary forces along the Karenni-Shan border. The KNDF stated that on December 7 and 8, troops from Battalion 422, based near Moebye, launched drone strikes with bombs containing S-PHOS (560) chemical agents in Moebye and its surroundings. “A chemical agent was used in attacks. As a result, revolutionary fighters experienced symptoms such as dizziness and vomiting,” said Ta Eh Soe, a KNDF spokesperson.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/34931992

The KNDF stated that on December 7 and 8, troops from Battalion 422, based near Moebye, launched drone strikes with bombs containing S-PHOS (560) chemical agents in Moebye and its surroundings.

“A chemical agent was used in attacks. As a result, revolutionary fighters experienced symptoms such as dizziness and vomiting,” said Ta Eh Soe, a KNDF spokesperson.

  • TimeNaan@lemmy.worldEnglish
    21·
    2 days ago

    So this is essentially just fertilizer that they are using to produce mildly toxic fumes. It’s chemical warfare but not very deadly chemical warfare.

    EDIT: I guess I must be wrong about that, see replies.

    • deranger@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      2·
      3 days ago

      You’re wrong about it being fertilizer. The primary ingredient in S-PHOS 560 is aluminum phosphide, a fumigant.

      Aluminum phosphide is a highly toxic, inorganic compound that’s used as a pesticide and fumigant. When exposed to air, it generates phosphine gas. (Not to be confused with phosgene, though.)

      mildly toxic fumes

      Phosphine is a highly toxic respiratory poison, and is immediately dangerous to life or health at 50 ppm.

      Dunno where you’re pulling your info from but it’s wrong.

  • yesman@lemmy.worldEnglish
    56·
    4 days ago

    The concept of “war crimes” implies that honorable warfare exists.

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.netEnglish
      5·
      4 days ago

      I don’t disagree with the spirit of what you’re saying, but “war crimes” is a useful construct because there are clearly some forms of warfare that are worse than others (bombing civilian targets compared to bombing purely military targets, for example). By designating something so profane it should not ever happen, we create a powerful construct that aims to deter these acts. Though the extent to which that’s effective or not is beyond the scope of this comment