Gas.

This is coolbert:

Once more, we find an incident of where history needs to be re-written?

Thanks again to the Jungle Trader blog for the tip:

"Despite claims, UK did not gas Iraqis in the 1920s, new research finds"

Allegations, accepted as fact, common knowledge, HISTORY, that the British in the early 1920's, USED poison gas against Iraqi civilians are without credence. So says new research and scholarly study.

"It has passed as fact among historians, journalists and politicians, and has been recounted everywhere from tourist guidebooks to the floor of the U.S. Congress: British forces used chemical weapons on Iraqis just after World War I."

"But that claim has never been fully squared with the historical record . . . no such incident ever occurred."

The British mandated occupation of Iraq and other areas of the Middle East [British Mesopotamia], in the aftermath of World War One [WW1] created animosity and rebellion on the part of the locals. Tribesmen, Arabs [Kurds too?], seeking autonomy or independence, engaged in rebellion on a limited basis. British military forces employed chemical weaponry in response to the rebellions, so according to the standard history and lore of the region.

It IS TRUE THAT THE WILL AND DESIRE TO USE CHEMICAL WEAPONS WAS PRESENT! BUT AT NO TIME WAS SUCH WEAPONRY EVER USED! This has now been established?

Also, the proposal to use gas did not mean using LETHAL CHEMICAL WEAPONRY!! It was proposed to use tear gas, a riot agent, and not lethal chemical munitions as used by the various combatants of WW1.

Read it all!!

"History is like a constantly changing tree" - D. Irving.

coolbert.