Heads roll at VA (11,000 usa gulf war dead from Depleted Uranium)

[Monkie]

http://www.sfbayview.com/012605/headsroll012605.shtml

Mushrooming depleted uranium (DU) scandal blamed
by Bob Nichols
Project Censored Award Winner

"Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter charged Monday that the reason Veterans Affairs Secretary Anthony Principi stepped down earlier this month was the growing scandal surrounding the use of uranium munitions in the Iraq War.

Writing in Preventive Psychiatry E-Newsletter No. 169, Arthur N. Bernklau, executive director of Veterans for Constitutional Law in New York, stated, “The real reason for Mr. Principi’s departure was really never given, however a special report published by eminent scientist Leuren Moret naming depleted uranium as the definitive cause of the ‘Gulf War Syndrome’ has fed a growing scandal about the continued use of uranium munitions by the US Military.”"

~snip~

"He added, “Out of the 580,400 soldiers who served in GW1 (the first Gulf War), of them, 11,000 are now dead! By the year 2000, there were 325,000 on Permanent Medical Disability. This astounding number of ‘Disabled Vets’ means that a decade later, 56% of those soldiers who served have some form of permanent medical problems!”"

now i just have to figure out which islamic country is to blame so that a 3rd country can be bombed into the dark ages

[peacebird]

1. Can anyone verify his numbers?

If this is true.... :wtf:

the current crop of soldiers over in Afghanistan and Iraq is also totally screwed.

[Jonathan_Hoag]

2. So, out of those 11,000 ...

How many had significantly increased Uranium levels in their bodies and/or documented exposure to DU?

Other causes, first and foremost Saddam's chemical weapons (there is a well documented case of US soldiers accidentally blowing up a nerve agent dump), are much more likely candidates for Gulf War illness.

Also, since when is a psychiatric newsletter a good source for effects of heavy metals and radioactivity?

11000 out of 580,000 is less than 2%. That translates to a death rate of 1.35 deaths per 1000 people annually. Overall US death rate is 8.34.

And certainly saying that a total of 11,000 GW weterans died since 1991 does not mean that they all - or even most - died as a result of DU as the thread title indicates.

Bernklau also misrepresents the scientific concensus on the matter. He takes an opinion of Ms. Monet, a PhD student in Geosciences and long time anti-Du crusader, and presents it as scientific fact, eliminating "all guessing" as he puts it.

[ixion]

3. What Does "Mildly Radioactive" Mean, Anyway?

Highly radioactive, mildly radioactive, moderately radioactive. What does it mean? Whom to believe? The godless former Commies or the brave Iraq-smashing Americans? Decide for yourself. Radioactivity is a standard property of the metal uranium, used by Americans for bombs, shells and bullets, and one gram will always give off 12,000 "atomic disintegrations" per second.

This lasts forever, as far as we are concerned. Think of the "atomic diserntegrations" as little atomic bullets. The kind that are only harmful from inside the human body. What do you think? Does 12,000 per second rank high or low with you? What if it is in your lung?

Delicate lung cells of 19 year old American troopers and 60-year-old Iraqi “guerrillas” don't have the ability to "spin" what is turning them into infection, pus and cancer.

Just so you know, that is 43 million, 200 thousand little bullets per hour. This nuclear bombardment at the heart of a cell in the lung or the rest of the body never stops. Of course, the "throwaway soldiers" will get cancer and die; but, the chicken-hawk Neo-Cons in the Bush Administration say that is OK! They just don't want to pay for it.




http://tvnewslies.org/phpbb/viewtopic.php?p=2427

[Lindacooks]

5. Yeah, that's comparable to being 'a little bit' pregnant.

'Mildly' radioactive my ass.

[Zynx]

35. Actually, the radiation from it poses no real threat

The threat comes from the fact that its probably the worst of the heavy metals, and these are exceedingly toxic on a chemical basis.

Radiation really has almost nothing to do with it because U-238 is borderline inert due to its absurdly long half-life.

[Jonathan_Hoag]

19. It means that its specific radioactivity is low. Duh!

Highly radioactive, mildly radioactive, moderately radioactive. What does it mean? Whom to believe?

The facts. Certainly not fear-mongering.


Radioactivity is a standard property of the metal uranium, used by Americans for bombs, shells and bullets, and one gram will always give off 12,000 "atomic disintegrations" per second.

Which is a very low rate since a gram of U-238 contains 2,530,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms.


This lasts forever, as far as we are concerned.

And since radioactivity is reciprocaly linked to half life long half life means low levels of radioactivity.


Think of the "atomic diserntegrations" as little atomic bullets.


Think that way if you like, but that does not make it accurate.


The kind that are only harmful from inside the human body. What do you think? Does 12,000 per second rank high or low with you?


Low. Very low. U-238 is one of the least radioactive substances in existance.


What if it is in your lung?

I hate to alarm you, but it kinda is. Natural radioactivity is all around us,including our bodies . A normal human body brings it to 10s of thousands of Bq (i.e. "atomic disintegrations" per second) just due to naturally occuring radionuclids, mostly C14 and K40, but also trace amounts of Uranium. That said, it would be difficult to breathe in 1 g of Uranium unless you happen to be in the vehicle hit but in that case you're dead anyway.
Uranium is actually omnipresent in the environment. There is, on average, 1,8 mg of Uranium for every kg of the Earth's crust. There is a much higher concentration in certain rocks, such as granite and crustal Uranium releases Radon gas which is highly radioactive. Natural Radon accounts for most of radioactivity an average human is exposed to.


Delicate lung cells of 19 year old American troopers and 60-year-old Iraqi “guerrillas” don't have the ability to "spin" what is turning them into infection, pus and cancer.

What does spinning have to do with anything and what does low-level radiation have to do with infections. Missed school when they covered the germ theory?


Just so you know, that is 43 million, 200 thousand little bullets per hour.

I see you are still not used to the high nature o fnumbers one gets when considering the really small stuff (such as atoms).

[rog]

4. Not another one.

Listen, Jon ... before I put you on ignore I'll give you a chance to do some homework on this. Other than that, I've spent far too much energy going around and around with DU denyers who love to "debunk" without any facts whatsoever.

Did you read Moret's article, linked at the bottom of the Bob Nichols article above? I didn't think so, so here you go. It's long, so a point by point response with supporting research should take you a while.

http://www.sfbayview.com/081804/Depleteduranium081804.shtml

You said, "11000 out of 580,000 is less than 2%. That translates to a death rate of 1.35 deaths per 1000 people annually. Overall US death rate is 8.34."

But if you dig a little deeper into the articles above, you find that:

Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have medical problems.

The number of disabled vets reported up to 2000 has been increasing by 43,000 every year. Brad Flohr of the Department of Veterans Affairs told American Free Press that he believes there are more disabled vets now than even after World War II.

Moret's article is quite detailed. The conclusion of the section "How Did They Hide It" contains an interesting tidbit.

How was the truth about DU hidden from military personnel serving in successive DU wars? Before his tragic death, Sen. Paul Wellstone informed Joyce Riley, R.N., B.S.N., executive director of the American Gulf War Veterans Association, that 95 percent of Gulf War veterans had been recycled out of the military by 1995. Any of those continuing in military service were isolated from each other, preventing critical information being transferred to new troops. The "next DU war" had already been planned, and those planning it wanted "no skunk at the garden party."

And finally, you attempt to discredit Moret by saying she is "... a PhD 'student' in Geosciences and long time anti-Du crusader ...," as if being a long time anti-DU crusader is enough to discredit her.

As far as being a "student" is concerned, I'd suggest you read up on her CV.

Leuren Moret is a geoscientist who has worked around the world on radiation issues, educating citizens, the media, members of parliaments and Congress and other officials. She became a whistleblower in 1991 at the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab after experiencing major science fraud on the Yucca Mountain Project. An environmental commissioner in the City of Berkeley, she can be reached at [e-mail].

She provides her email address. Perhaps you'd like to ask her a few questions and then get back to us.

I'll expect a response AFTER you've done your homework.

Thank you.

.rog.

[Nordmadr]

8. I'm applauding this repsonse!!!!!!!! N/T

[Jonathan_Hoag]

22. If you feel you want to put me on ignore, go right ahead

Listen, Jon ... before I put you on ignore I'll give you a chance to do some homework on this. Other than that, I've spent far too much energy going around and around with DU denyers who love to "debunk" without any facts whatsoever.

The only thing I have to say is that yes, I have done my homework.


Did you read Moret's article, linked at the bottom of the Bob Nichols article above? I didn't think so, so here you go. It's long, so a point by point response with supporting research should take you a while.

I have not seen the link, but I will give it a go.


You said, "11000 out of 580,000 is less than 2%. That translates to a death rate of 1.35 deaths per 1000 people annually. Overall US death rate is 8.34."

But if you dig a little deeper into the articles above, you find that:


So we agree that there is no excess mortality among Gulf War veterans?


Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability.

Yeah, I would like some independent confirmation of those numbers. Like, for example, VA statistics, including nature and cause of disability. Also we need to go into possible reasons. Even if these numbers are true, there are myriad possible causes other than DU. And even if these numbers are true, we have already established that there is no excess mortality.


Moret's article is quite detailed. The conclusion of the section "How Did They Hide It" contains an interesting tidbit.

Reads like a conspiracy theory. But then again, this smiley is quite popular on DU :tinfoilhat:


And finally, you attempt to discredit Moret by saying she is "... a PhD 'student' in Geosciences and long time anti-Du crusader ...," as if being a long time anti-DU crusader is enough to discredit her.


That alone is not enough to discredit her. But it is enough to discredit the premise of the original article which states that because of her anti-Du report, Uranium has been determined as the cause of Gulf War illness. Now, because she is a known anti-DU activist her report did no such thing. Linking the report with the resignation of the VA guy is thus pure conjecture and a pretty bad one at that.


As far as being a "student" is concerned, I'd suggest you read up on her CV.

Yes, it says there she hasn't finished her dissertation. That makes her a PhD student.

About her article: she makes a mistajke in the frist paragraph. Iraq war is not a nuclear war as DU is not a nuclear weapon. It is a kinetic weapon.

Also, if DU used in GW1 is so dangerous, soldiers presently in Iraq should be literally glowing by extrapolation. US used about 300 tonnes of DU first time around and about 3000 tonnes in this war. Also the exposure times are much longer.

[rog]

23. Jonathan, you're going to have to do a LOT better than this.

Come on. Do you really expect anyone to take you seriously? Be honest, now.

This is kid stuff. You're WAY out of your league, my friend.

Let's see what you've got ... concrete documentation of your position.

Otherwise I'm just going to watch you sink like a stone.

punk

.rog.

[Jonathan_Hoag]

24. Kid stuff? Way out of my league?

What are you talking about. You have not contributed nothing except linking to questionable articles filled with fear-mongering propaganda.

if you want real science on the subject go an dtake a look at the RAND study on Gulf War illness. And unlike DU fearmongers that blame every case of headache among veterans to depleted uranium this study goes into several different possible causes and employes scientific methodology.

[rog]

25. The RAND report debunked.

You said, "Kid stuff? Way out of my league?"

Yes, son, WAY out of your league.

By the way ... let me guess at your resume:

Jonathan Hoag: High school sophomore who should be studying instead of aggravating adults on the internet.

The RAND Institute is a notorious right wing think tank ... one of the first right wing think tanks, actually ... that even predates the PNAC. Do a little homework on your source.

I direct your attention (and that of anyone else who is interested) to this very good article by Dan Fahey, regarding the RAND study.

A Fear Of Falling
Third in a series of reports on depleted uranium weapons
http://www.spidersmill.com/gwvrl/a_fear_of_falling.htm
Dan Fahey
August 4, 1999

ON EDIT: added this quote from the article, re: the RAND report

The Joint Chiefs of Staff describe DU as "extremely safe" in letters to Congressmen. Even though no one knows how much depleted uranium "thousands" of Gulf War veterans were exposed to, the Department of Defense paid the RAND Corporation to produce a report stating that not even one Gulf War veteran was exposed to enough depleted uranium to cause any health problems.

Table Of Contents

A Fear of Falling...............................................................................1

U.S. Study of Gulf War Veterans: Fact and Fiction........................... 3

The Fundamental Problem With the RAND DU Report.................. 7

Some Additional Reports Not Reviewed by RAND..........................14

DU Hazard Warnings Ignored...........................................................16

British Government Issues DU Advisory............................................18

DU in the Kosovo War.....................................................................19

U.S. Army Switches to Tungsten...................................................... 21

Canada: No to DU............................................................................23

Rhymes with "Cheddar".................................................................... 24

Documents Cited in A Fear of Falling.................................................25

Web Sites Containing Depleted Uranium Information..........................26

Read it!

Fahey also provides his contact information, should you like to ask any questions.

Dan Fahey
[e-mail]
c/o National Gulf War Resource Center
1224 M St., NW
Washington, DC 20005
U.S.A.

You'd better be careful, Jon. Coming in raising sand with only right wing corporate and military propaganda to back you up could cause folks to question the smell in here. You're walking a fine line.

Personally, I'll just chalk it up to ignorance.

On the other hand, who are you, really? You guys seem to crawl out of the baseboards every single time the subject of DU comes up, and your "arguments" are always remarkably similar.

.rog.

[Jonathan_Hoag]

27. Debunked my ass!

And besides, I will not engage in discussion with someone who is engaging in ad hominems. You are welcome to apologize and then we can resume.

Have a nice day!

[rog]

28. Thank you for the educated and erudite response.

"Debunked my ass!" - Jonathan Hoag

Wow! That does it for me! I'm convinced ... I'm now on your side! Fahey is full of beans - I realize that now. How could I have been so gullible?

Thank you for being so persuasive.

Listen, Jon ... my patience is at an end with you. This is no longer even faintly amusing. Better get your homework done before tomorrow morning, kid.

.rog.

[Jonathan_Hoag]

29. You did not go into one factual comment

Not about low specific radioactivity of DU. Not about 11000 dead being consistent with the normal mortality rate for such a group. Nothing. Just ad hominem attacks and name calling.

You will have to do better than that because I will not waste my breath repsonding to you factually until you do so.

[mistertrickster]

7. Good post! It's hard science that is going to win this debate, and

rightly so. Whenever I read "eminent scientist," my warning light goes off, because true "scientists" refer to themselves as "researchers" or by their field ("ethno-biologist").

Uranium munitions sound scary and I'd like to see them banned (actually, they may already BE banned) and discontinued. But that doesn't mean we should buy into any statistical study without reflection or examination.

[rog]

9. Honest to God, where do you guys come from?

My only question to you is, where is the "hard science" in Jonathan's post above?

Read my post #4 above. Perhaps you'd like to join Jonathan in his research project (which I'm sure he's undertaking feverishly at this very moment). The two of you should be able to present an opposing view supported by "hard science."

Until then I'll assume that you have done absolutely no reading on this topic, therefore you remain woefully ignorant.

Get back to me with some facts, and at least read the articles you're responding to. There has been plenty of research on the subject of DU weapons. Time to educate yourself.

I'll look forward to reading your presentation after you hook up with Jonathan.

.rog.

[rog]

10. Attention: Jonathan & mistertrickster, re: Leuren Moret ...

... and also, re: "hard science"

Perhaps you'd like to read a little more about Ms. Moret's qualifications to talk about DU.

Really ... and sorry to have to say this ... you guys are pathetic.

By the way ... how's your research project going?

-----

Leuren Moret is an independent scientist who works on radiation and public health issues with communities around the world. She earned her B.S. in Geology at U.C. Davis in 1968, and her M.A. in Near Eastern Studies from U.C. Berkeley in 1978. She has completed all but her dissertation for a PhD. in the Geosciences at U.C. Davis.

After working 5 years at the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and two years at the Livermore nuclear weapons lab, she left Livermore and now dedicates her life to revealing and understanding the actual health effects of radiation exposure. She has worked extensively on the impact of radiation on public health from nuclear power plants and atmospheric testing and how radiation moves through the environment.

Ms. Moret works with the Radiation and Public Health Project http://www.radiation.org - a group of independent scientists who have written ten books on low level radiation and public health.

Ms. Moret has written a scientific report on depleted uranium for the United Nations subcommission investigating the illegality of depleted uranium munitions. She has been trained on radiation issues by a former Manhattan Project Scientist and retired insider at the Livermore Lab who is an expert on radioactive fallout and rainout. Together with Dr. Hari Sharma, they have studied high levels of depleted uranium measured in the tissue samples of 70 residents of Basra, Iraq, who died after the Gulf War from internal exposure to depleted uranium.

Ms. Moret has detailed her research on the important issue of depleted uranium particle size formed under high temperature conditions on the battlefield. The production of these particles in very high concentrations and numbers results in the permanent suspension of depleted uranium particulate matter in the atmosphere that has been ignored, but is a major contributor to adverse health effects caused by DU exposure.

Ms. Moret wrote the Forword to Discounted Casualties: The Human Cost of Depleted Uranium by Hiroshima journalist Akira Tashiro. The book can be read online at: http://www.chugoku-np.co.jp/abom/uran/index_e.html In February 2002, she introduced Martin Meissonier’s film The Invisible War: Depleted Uranium and the Politics of Radiation at the Arab Film Festival in Berkeley. Most recently, she helped to introduce Takashi Morizumi and his photo exhibit A Different Nuclear War: Children of the Gulf War to the United States in October 2002, where the first US exhibit was in the city of Berkeley.

Ms. Moret has worked extensively with Indigenous People contaminated by radiation from the nuclear weapons program, communities in the US and other countries exposed to radiation from related activities, and communities impacted by radiation from nuclear power plants. She is the Official Bay Area Representative for members of the Japanese Parliament opposed to the US war against Iraq, and is working closely with Congresswoman Barbara Lee. Her Berkeley Resolution which was passed September 10, 2002, by the first city in the world calls for a permanent ban on the weaponization of space. She proposed the resolution after learning that lower orbital space is contaminated with uranium and its decay products from man-made sources.

Leuren Moret

President, Scientists for Indigenous People

Past President, Association for Women Geoscientists

City of Berkeley Environmental Commissioner

Official Bay Area Representative for Japanese Parliament Members opposed to the US War against Iraq

[Jonathan_Hoag]

21. Comment on her bio

Leuren Moret is an independent scientist who works on radiation and public health issues with communities around the world.


Her only science degree so far is a BS. That does not qualify her to be called "scientist". She does not have a MS (only a MA in "Near East Studies" which is a non-science discipline) and has not finished her PhD yet.

Even when she finishes her PhD she will be an expert on Geosciences, not on radiation Physics or radiation Biology.

[Zynx]

36. She seems to have no relevent expertise in this field whatsoever

Setting aside that she does not have anything more advanced than a BS...

You can quote Einstein, but if you're quoting him on evolutionary biology, you might as well be quoting Fred the Hobo.

Scientists are only relevent experts in their own fields, and I don't see anything here to indicate she has *any* relevent expertise, as geology has nothing to do with this beyond the fact you originally find uranium in the ground.

[HamdenRice]

16. Please be careful with your numbers ...

When you say the death rate is 8.34, I believe that is the overall death rate, which includes very high death rates for the elderly. The appropriate comparison is to the death rate for people in the same age bracket as gulf war veterans. These rates tend to be much, much lower, between .9 and 1.7 per thousand depending on their ages over the last 14 years since the war.

[Jonathan_Hoag]

20. I could only find the overall death rate on the quick.

And yes, I do know that the overall rate includes the elderly. But I compared 1.3 for Gulf War soldiers with 8.3 overall one which was enough to show that the first figure was much lower.

Given your figures of 0.9-1.7 (what age bracket is that exactly?) 1.3 falls right in there so that proves my point that there is no increased mortality among Gulf War veterans.

Thank you for your info.

[DS1]

33. If Clinton did it, I suspect you'd be singing a MUCH different tune

[Nothing Without Hope]

6. If this can be confirmed, it is explosive news. Recommended.

I have never understood why they could possibly consider using depleted uranium in munitions in the first place. What are they thinking!? What did they expect? Absolutely beyond belief.

And the soil and water of the countries these munitions have poisoned, not to mention the people there were clearly not considered important enough to enter the equation.

MONSTROUS!!!

[RedCloud]

14. US government cannot leave radiation alone!

It is sick and diseased.

Soldiers receiving radiation from bomb blasts.

DU in both desert wars.

Obviously to know how the powerful can survive a nuking. We are only their guinea pigs.

All Americans should know every last detail. Demand accountability and, if necessary, lynchings of the leaders who signed off on it!

[TexasLawyer]

11. OMG

If this is true, it needs to be made known far and wide. In addition to our own troops, imagine what this is doing, and will be doing, to the people in the countries we've bombed with DU weapons!

[cyberpj]

18. I've been trying - MSM won't listen or respond and letters to editor

are refuted and laughed at.

We need good journalists and a free press again for this stuff to get to the public.

[TexasLawyer]

12. Some corroborating information from an older article

http://www.healthboards.com/gulf-war-syndrome/658.html

The Sunday Times (Times of London)

September 3 2000 WORLD

Tests show Gulf war victims have uranium poisoning

Jonathon Carr-Brown and Martin Meissonnier

NEW evidence that Gulf war syndrome exists and was caused by radiation poisoning will be revealed today by a former American army colonel who was at the centre of his government's attempts to diagnose the illness. Dr Asaf Durakovic will tell a conference of eminent nuclear scientists in Paris that "tens of thousands" of British and American soldiers are dying from radiation from depleted uranium (DU) shells fired during the Gulf war. The findings will undermine the British and American governments' claims that Gulf war syndrome does not exist and intensify pressure from veterans on both sides of the Atlantic for
compensation.

<snip>

Durakovic, who left America because he was told his life was in danger if he continued his research, has concluded that troops inhaled the tiny uranium particles after American and British
forces fired more than 700,000 DU shells during the conflict.

The finding begins to explain for the first time why medical orderlies and mechanics are the principal victims of Gulf war syndrome. British Army engineers who removed tanks hit by DU shells from the battlefield and medical personnel who cut off the clothes of Iraqi casualties in field hospitals have been disproportionately affected. Once inside the body, DU causes a slow death from cancers, irreversible kidney damage or wastage from immune deficiency disorders.

In the UK, where more than 400 veterans are estimated to have died from "Gulf war syndrome", at least 50 of those victims came from Reme (Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers) units. Others, such as Ray Bristow, 42, of Hull, who was a theatre technician for 32 Field Hospital, are now wheelchair-bound. Tests carried out by Durakovic on Bristow showed that, nine years after leaving the Gulf, he had more than 100 times the safe limit of DU in his body. Durakovic said: "I doubt whether the MoD or Pentagon will have the audacity to challenge these results. I can't say this is the solitary cause of Gulf war syndrome, but we now have clear evidence that it is a leading factor in the majority of victims.

"I hope the US and UK governments finally realise that, by continuing to use this ammunition, they are effectively poisoning their own soldiers." An MoD spokesman said it would study any new evidence: "Our aim is to get the best care for British veterans and our views are based on the best evidence around."

[SnowGoose]

13. Anyone who is interested in the "real" science behind DU

can go to the national library of medicine's information clearing house - in this case "pub med", and look it up, here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

search for the term "depleted uranium". That search yields over one hundred and seventy abstracts. Don't be lead - review the literature, and decide for yourself.

I did a couple of years ago, while working on a paper on air pollution and miscarriage/preterm birth. It's pretty clear (to me at least) that this is a highly toxic substance.

[rog]

15. Thank you! n/t

.rog.

[Zynx]

34. Highly toxic, most certainly. Highly radioactive, hell no.

People need to stop focusing on the radioactive nature of it. It's virtually inert when compared to other radioactive materials because of how slow its decay rate is.

It's still extremely toxic stuff, though.

[SnowGoose]

37. Right on.

Take ricin, for example, which some standard reference materials (e.g. Merck Index) list as having a human LD50 of 0.001 mg of ricin/kg of body mass (IIRC).

Put another way, a 70 kg adult given 0.00007 of a gram would have a 50/50 chance of dying from the exposure - and the ones who didn't die would be *gravely* ill.

Of course, it's not radioactive in the least, but that wouldn't me much comfort to someone exposed to pure ricin.

Lots of non-radioactive stuff will kill you dead.

Those who are trying to alert the public to the dangers inherent in these munitions do us all a service, and while we will help ourselves by being precise about the scientific backing, we ought not forget the *take home* point - this stuff is not benign, and our tax dollars are being used to spread a fine film of depleted uranium all over the lands we 'liberate'.

[cyberpj]

17. And not just DU, what about the Napalm? Here are more older articles:

FALLUJAH NAPALMED
Nov 28 2004
US uses banned weapon ..but was Tony Blair told?
By Paul Gilfeather Political Editor

US troops are secretly using outlawed napalm gas to wipe out remaining insurgents in and around Fallujah.

News that President George W. Bush has sanctioned the use of napalm, a deadly cocktail of polystyrene and jet fuel banned by the United Nations in 1980, will stun governments around the world.

And last night Tony Blair was dragged into the row as furious Labour MPs demanded he face the Commons over it. Reports claim that innocent civilians have died in napalm attacks, which turn victims into human fireballs as the gel bonds flames to flesh.

Outraged critics have also demanded that Mr Blair threatens to withdraw British troops from Iraq unless the US abandons one of the world's most reviled weapons. Halifax Labour MP Alice Mahon said: "I am calling on Mr Blair to make an emergency statement to the Commons to explain why this is happening. It begs the question: 'Did we know about this hideous weapon's use in Iraq?'"

Since the American assault on Fallujah there have been reports of "melted" corpses, which appeared to have napalm injuries.

Last August the US was forced to admit using the gas in Iraq.

A 1980 UN convention banned the use of napalm against civilians - after pictures of a naked girl victim fleeing in Vietnam shocked the world.

America, which didn't ratify the treaty, is the only country in the world still using the weapon.

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=14920109&method=full&siteid=106694&headline=fallujah-napalmed-name_page.html

==============================================
More on chemical weapons we're using:

Depleted Uranium - US Continues Using Chemical WMD On Others

Not only Napalm but Depleted Uranium has been used since the Gulf War and will not only damage Iraqis but our own soldiers as well. This is another major item we should be asking our media about! We go to war over WMD and them we USE them!

Depleted Uranium will prove to be a major Weapon of Mass Destruction used by our country:

Brief history in these 4 articles:

1 - Published on Friday, November 30, 2001 by Reuters
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1130-01.htm

US Wins Defeat of Depleted Uranium Study

2 - Last Updated: Tuesday, 18 March, 2003, 16:28 GMT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/2860759.stm

In the House of Commons in London on Monday, Labour MP Joan Ruddock said a test of the UK Government's pledge to keep civilian casualties to a minimum in an attack on Iraq would include not using depleted uranium weapons.

Apparently anticipating complaints, the US defence department briefed journalists about DU - making it plain it would continue to be used.

3 - Monday, April 5th, 2004
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/05/1356248

Broadcast Exclusive: U.S. Soldiers Contaminated With Depleted Uranium Speak Out

A special investigation by Democracy Now! co-host Juan Gonzalez of the New York Daily News has found four of nine soldiers of the 442nd Military Police Company of the New York Army National Guard returning from Iraq tested positive for depleted uranium contamination. They are the first confirmed cases of inhaled depleted uranium exposure from the current Iraq conflict.
After repeatedly being denied testing for depleted uranium from Army doctors, the soldiers contacted The News who paid to have them tested as part of their investigation.

4 - Sunday 14th November 2004
http://bellaciao.org/en/article.php3?id_article=4324
U.S. use of depleted uranium under fire
Alvin Clark, of Tacoma, developed aplastic anemia he believes is related to his exposure to depleted uranium dust after he was hit by friendly fire in Saudi Arabia.

Shells and armor used by U.S. tanks, gunships and helicopters are often made of depleted uranium because depleted uranium, or D.U., is a heavy metal, able to pierce armored vehicles or resist being pierced. But it’s also radioactive, a waste product of nuclear enrichment plants like Hanford.

A pentagon training film shows how the D.U. ordnance bursts into a fiery powder on contact.

[Babel_17]

26. Lol, Jonathan Hoag has indeed taken on an unpleasant profession

here at the DU.

I have to wonder if the user name involves a little taunting and/or a sly reference. Clever if so.

One thing, doesn't depleted uranium when used in a shell or armor piercing rounds release a very unhealthy radioactive vapor as it goes incendiary? Afaik DU rounds and shells release significantly more heat than a comparable conventional round. That's partly why they are used, yes?

Apologies for not reading the link, just passing through.

[tsuki]

30. Yes, it does. And a mask will not stop it. n/t

[Jonathan_Hoag]

31. Well it's a tough job

but somebody has to do it. :)

Uranium is pyrophoric and ignites when a DU round hits the target. That releases aerosol, fine solid particles (not really a vapor). Obviously it is radioactive and chemically toxic and chemical toxicty is actually more significant than radioactivity because DU has such a low specific radioactivity. Note that tungsten, which is also a very dense material, is often used as a DU alternative. However it has been linked to cander as well:
http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/press/011505.html
So, DU, being a heavy metal and slightly radioactive as well, is far from being harmless, but it is also far from being the metal from hell as it is described on sensationalistic web sites and by many posters here.

By the way, DU is used in armor piercing rounds because it is very dense, with 19 g/cm^2 almost twice as dense as lead. Because of that DU can slice through less dense metals as through warm butter when heated by contact friction. That it ignites is an added bonus as it promptly destroys anything and anybody within the vehicle.
The reverse works too by the way - armor made of dense material will stop lesser dnse projectiles very effectively and equally dense ones pretty good still which is why US tanks utilize DU armor as well.

I hope that this was helpful to you.

[Babel_17]

32. I see

Ah, thanks for those finer points, I wasn't aware of them.

Mmmmm, this is a tough one. The military isn't the EPA but I do think we need to look at the long term effects of the combination of the heavy metal toxicity with the low level radiation.

There might not be any easy trade offs. I can't see soldiers wanting to give up a better form of armor. Given US military domination in the region we might want to do something about the rounds and shells.

Maybe hold them in reserve for a really pressing need.

But at a minimum we need to do more laboratory testing and see if effective treatments suggest themselves.

We need to hold the moral high ground and we need to be seen as doing so.


This topic could veer into becoming a much more complex one.

My knowledge of military history is sketchy at best but I do remember that there have often been made arguments in favor of using hitherto undreamed of weapons on the grounds that they would tip the balance and thus paradoxically act as instruments for reducing the carnage of war.

It usually hasn't worked out that way though.

Now, it could be argued that as the pre-eminent military force in the world it will generally be to the good where and when the US can beef up its military effectiveness.

But should that pre-eminence get seriously challenged it will be, by definition, in a manner that incorporates a corresponding level of destruction.

Corresponding in level but probably not in means.

I don't know the answer ..... as our military evolves with its prowess we need to also evolve with our diplomatic skills.

Brute force diplomacy teamed up with a military no army will willingly fight is bound to evolve an opposition that comes back at us in new and frightening manners.

[Nancy Waterman]

38. We are ignoring an important and potentially explosive part of the article

Has Bushco been hiding the fact that the DU used in the first Gulf War likely caused the Gulf War Syndrome and that a huge, statistically very significant number of vets from that war have gotten ill and/or died because of DU? Is that why Principi quit? This is really explosive!! It means they are knowingly poisoning our current soldiers without telling anyone. It also means we are poisoning Iraq's land and people, though narcissitic America may not care as much about that. But the issue about our own soldiers, about the cuts in vet benefits, and about hiding the now known cause of Gulf War Syndrome, make a nice package that the Left should really push. Our mantra should be that this adminsitration is criminally immoral: poisoning our soldiers; taking money from the poor to give to the rich; and lying to the people about everything. I think this issue needs ot be pused mercilessly. We should write to Olberman and to anyone who might do a story (Seymour Hersh?).

[Babel_17]

39. I generally agree

but I think more emphasis should be on pursuing the facts/data and getting them published and disseminated.

The corporate media will not allow a story this potentially explosive to be covered if it looks even remotely based on, or coming through the filter of, partisan sources.

Sad, but imo that is the reality.

What little coverage it would get would be obscured by the political details and endless caveats.

We need reports and documentation presented in a neat non-partisan package.

In short, we need to do the work the media no longer has the stomach or funding for.

Later we can put a human face on this and draw political conclusions.

After we have a good body of evidence out there that will trip up the spinmeisters of the right is the time we bring out the veterans and their families.

Just my disillusioned 2 cents.

I know longer pin my hopes on "notifying the press".

They need it wrapped up and with a big bow tie.

[Nancy Waterman]

40. I agree we need facts and figures

Perhaps a couple of the more prominent blogs would take it on. Enough energy from them and the press would be forced to follow, at least to some degree. I do think it is an explosive issue if it gets out.