"The article also quotes Army sources when they say they wanted to save more WP for “lethal missions.” It intends to mislead readers into thinking the WP itself is being used as the lethal device when in fact it’s simply providing targets for other lethal means such as HE rounds and other indirect fire methods, direct fire engagements, and close air support."

Precisely. Little word of advice to enemies of the US (or any modern army, all of which use WP), if you are suddenly in or near a cloud of white smoke, the smoke is the least of your worries. Its the 155mm howitzer zeroing in on your position, or more precisely the hundred pounds of high explosives in the shell arching towards you that might be of concern. But none of the handwrigers have gotten around to trying to outlaw those yet.

Perhaps nerf can develop a artillery system for our next deployment.

I would like to suggest that we start a San Francisco nerf arty batallion. In addition to lethal nerf football attacks, they could use strong language and protest all forms of violence.

Hmm. While the general thrust of the linked NCO's essay is correct, he makes some errors of fact. Smoke grenades do not use WP, they are filled with hexachloroethane. Also, artillery and mortar illumination rounds as well as hand-launched flares use magnesium, not WP.

Hey Donald, is magnesium much different from WP, at least in its effect on contact? Chemically it seems to be the same principle, volatile elements that burn when exposed to just about anything.

This should be used as a case study in modern information warfare. Firstly, it shows how any story, no matter how bogus, can be globally disseminated through the news media.

Secondly, it shows how easy it is to manipulate the media by giving them what they want. Left-wing media outlets want stories that make America look bad, and they all want sensational stories full of blood and horror. Where the first motivation dominates, ideological conviction that the story tells a deeper truth can easily overcome any doubts about its factual accuracy. But the second motivation is present virtually everywhere in the MSM, because the media market is so competitive that no outlet can afford to ignore any story that might gain it a few more readers or viewers. The dictum that "if it bleeds, it ledes" isn't just an expression of cynicism. It's an instinct created by the evolutionary pressure of a relentless struggle for commercial survival.

Thirdly, it demonstrates the life cycle of a propaganda meme. It starts as an unsubstantiated allegation from a partisan source. In this form it is relatively harmless, as only confirmed America-haters and the lunatic fringe will believe it. If it stays in this form, it circulates briefly through the global information space and dies. If any part of the MSM picks it up, their institutional authority gives it huge and instant credibility. Repetition and simplification, as the story is reduced to a few headline-friendly buzzwords, then turn it into a "fact". Finally, it is recycled back into propaganda by terrorists and hostile nations.

Fourthly, it shows how swiftly this cycle is completed. For example, here in the UK the story first appeared in left-wing newspaper The Independent on 8th November. A week later on Tuesday 15th it had become the lead item on the BBC's main evening news bulletin. On the 16th a story on the Yahoo! UK portal was headlined "US Admits Using Chemicals As Weapon", which a casual reader could easily misread – or mis-remember – as "US Admits Using Chemical Weapons". This neatly demonstrates how the simplification of stories helps allegations morph into facts.

Fifthly, it demonstrates how a false accusation can be framed to obstruct refutation by reasoned argument. The military can't explain the legitimate uses of White Phosphorous without revealing that it is widely used, thus letting the media play "gotcha". Great care must also be taken in explaining why this substance is not classified as a chemical weapon to avoid it sounding like a Clintonesque legal quibble about what the meaning of the word "chemical" is. Plus, the media will always prefer to talk about horrific burns rather than boring smokescreens because sensationalism sells.

Finally, it demonstrates how information victories can be used to mitigate military defeats. The second battle of Fallujah was a major defeat for the terrorists and an awesome demonstration of American military superiority. The proponents of the WP story are therefore attempting to neutralise the propaganda value of this swift and clinical victory by associating it with something shameful. They are following the lesson of the Tet Offensive, that strategic gains can be made from a tactical defeat if the public can be prevented from seeing it for what it is.