Re: NAPALM

[James Robert Dennis III <jrdennis@earthlink.net>]

>I was wondering if anybody knew of a good description from a Chinese or
>Korean point of view of "napalming." I've read some paticularly
>disturbing accounts from GIs and news reporters, but nothing from the
>intended targets. Any suggestions?
>
>thanks
>
>HJM
>

I don't have the book with me now, but I believe the booK "Enter the 
Dragon" has some passages where the Chinese speak about being napalmed.

Napalm is best used against an enemy in the open, a lightly dug in enemy 
or against a material target.  

Years ago when I was at the Chemical School there was some discussion on 
flame weapons.  The Marine Corps was decertifying it's aircraft to carry 
napalm.  (Napalm was developed by the Army's Chemical Corps in World War 
II).  When we looked into it, we found the Air Force and Navy had 
decertified their aircraft for napalm in the late 70s and the Marine 
Corps around 1986.  In the study to determine if napalm was needed we 
found that in most cases, an armored unit could button up and drive 
through the napalm.  We also found that the pattern of the "blast" was 
not consistant and there were cases in World War II, Korea and Viet Nam 
where flames passed overhead and didn't hurt the intended victims.  It 
was also discovered that canvas with about an inch of dirt on it, half 
inch plywood and other expedients could negate the effect of the flames 
on a dug in position.  Unless the flame got into the position in massive 
amounts, it could be contained or ignored.  

Napalm was traditionally mixed on site and then weaponized (white 
phosphorous grenades attached) there.  A lot of the fuel used was 
contaminated and the Air Force has become better at reclaiming the fuel.  
Finally the Air Force had since developed a better incindary cluster bomb 
system.  

During Desert Shield the Army was preparing to enter Kuwait.  There was a 
lot of questions as to how to elimiate the extensive Iraqi trench systems 
in that country.  They built replicas of those trenches at the National 
Training Center (Ft. Irwin, CA) based on Iraqi defectors and other 
engineering experts.  They were then bombed by a B-52 with 500 lb bombs.  
 The string of bombs cut across the trench system and none of the 
trenches or bunkers collapsed.  
A bit disconcerting.  They also fired a lot of artillery and so on to see 
how to clear a trench, doing it with men was extremely expensive.  This 
is one of the reasons that 1st ID used mine plows to fill the trenches in 
when they attacked and "SABOT" rounds to destroy bunkers.

High Explosive bombs in a mountainous area is more to cause the higher 
parts of the mountain to fill up the ground at the bottom of the hill.  
When we were looking at killing HARTS (Hardened Artillery Sites) a long 
time ago, it was going to be more cost efficient to cause a landslide and 
bury the doors than to actually get a bomb into the door.