.

DU = nuclear warfare.

The US has been littering Iraq with it since 1990.

There's nothing depleted about "depleted uranium." I has a half life of several billion years. Yes, that's right, several billion years. Nice huh? Cancer rates in Iraq went up with 700% since the US started doing this. The use of DU weaponry in Iraq amounts to one of the worst crimes ever comitted throughout history.

Gulf syndrome is a direct result from uranium oxide exposure (the dust particles which get released when DU detonates). DU weaponry was used in the Balkans as well. Several other nations maintain stockpiles of DU weaponry, including the UK and Israel.

Don't get me started, this is some real sick evil-ass shit.

What mystery? There's nothing "mysterious" about it. Radioactive metals/shit are highly toxic and cause long term damage even after short exposures.

Here is a link on DU

mondediplo.com/2002/03/03uranium

Seems to me that DU is essentially waste from our lovely nuclear industry, quite toxic. They say it's "for free" to the defense industry as a nuclear byproduct. For a long time the nuclear industry has tried to find uses for it's waste, for instance, for food irradiation. It helps them to make a case that the waste is useful, thus undermining any arguement that the waste is difficult (if not impossible) to dispose of without severe environmental consequences at some point. A nuclear plant producing a DU waste byproduct, "reclaiming" the waste, only has to worry about disposal for waste that the defense contractors can't use.

I'd hazard a guess that DU could be useful in SOME situations, but in many cases it's use is probably encouraged where it's not necessary. The more DU shells that are used, the higher for the demand to manufacture more, the more waste that the nuclear industry doesn't need to worry about disposal of. What once would perhaps be a bomb used for hardened bunker busting, a very unusual and specific job in a war, would now be used in shells for tank killing against adversaries that don't have armor which would stand up against conventional shells, and then they'd use it on regular concrete buildings where a conventional bomb would work just as well.

If we only used the DU in the circumstances where it's truly beneficial, we wouldn't be using it often enough to justify not going with tungsten instead for bunker peircing, because it's expensive for sure but it's not like we'd need that many of them.

It's clear that when we do use DU, the proper protocol for our soldiers would be to wear respirators to prevent them from breathing in the dust, plust a decontamination protocol ASAP after they are done in that area... along with roping an area off as hazardous waste zone. Of course, if we did that then we'd have to admit to the world that we are using a dangerously toxic substance in warfare which might mean we are violating Geneva agreements against the use of poisions in warfare with gas and or dust. So, rather than admit it, they deny it, and send the troops in without the respirators they need ... telling them that it's a-okay.

Somebody made a heck of a lot of money on these DU shells, actually probably a few people. To dispose of nuclear waste properly is a costly process, one of the reasons why nuclear reactors aren't more common and why nuclear electricity is more expensive. If a company owning a nuclear plant is charging the price they would if they were disposing of their DU waste, but they give it away for free instead to defense contractors... they could make bonuses in the millions. The defense contractors get a great benefit, don't they? Free material, lots of selling points, the government using it liberal as a "standard" weapon of choice where less profitable weapons without DU would be far less profitable in all likelyhood.

I'm sure they know that eventually "the cat will get out of the bag" and have to stop manufacturing the DU, the international community will eventually see it as a violation of Geneva convention rules against poisons in warfare. The "party" these defense contractors are having with DU will be over. They won't care. Right till the end, they will make a great profit, then suddenly cry ignorance, feign shock... never be prosecuted even because politicians will argue that the defense industry is too critical to censure or penalize, they'll have to stop making it. The same arguement will be used against lawsuits from troops, and award amounts if any will be pathetic. That will be some other CEO's problem, some other shareholder's albatros to wear, the day they have to stop manufacturing DU weapons. Those who benefit from this now at a huge profit will be making a profit on their ill gotten profits long after they are out of the industry, having gotten away with their inhumanly selfish and unpatriotic disregard for the lives of our fighting men, and they will beleive they are just wonderful people. Democrats and Republicans will still kiss their asses for money, still cover for them, still redirect the public everywhere else for blame.

Of course, even though they'll get away with it, once the "sh-t hits the fan" with the dangers of DU and the attempts not to address it I doubt any American will want to sign willingly into our military. In the end, allowing such things as DU are foolish, will hurt our country and it's battle-readyness by undermining the confidence potential recruits might have of coming out of the military without being covered in tumors should they survive the bullets.

Soldier Health Scare Back in News
By Audrey Parente
Daytona Beach News Journal
Sunday 15 April 2007
www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042007B.shtml

Lori Brim cradled her son in her arms for three months before he died at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.

Dustin Brim, a 22-year-old Army specialist had collapsed three years ago in Iraq from a very aggressive cancer that attacked his kidney, caused a mass to grow over his esophagus and collapsed a lung.

The problems she saw during her time at Walter Reed, including her son screaming in pain while doctors argued over medications, had nothing to do with mold and shabby conditions documented in recent news reports. What this mother saw was an unexplainable illness consuming her son.

And what she has learned since her son's death is that his was not an isolated case.

Lori Brim has joined other parents, hundreds of other sick soldiers, legislators, research scientists and environmental activists who say the cause of their problems results from exposure to depleted uranium, a radioactive metal used in the manufacture of U.S. tank armor and weapon casings.

Health and environmental effects of depleted uranium are at the heart of scientific studies, a lawsuit in the New York courts and legislative bills in more than a dozen states (although not in Florida).

News stories claiming negative signs of depleted uranium's impact, including death and birth defects, are surfacing from Australia to England to the Far East. The controversy rages within government bodies and underlies the theme of TV shows like a recent episode of the medical series "House."

While the military continues to deny the connection of depleted uranium to sicknesses plaguing returning servicemen and women, a newly mandated study stemming from legislation signed by President Bush in October is just getting under way.

Opposition

The new study, which began in March, follows several that have been completed by the military into depleted uranium, a byproduct left when enriched uranium is separated out for use in nuclear power and atomic weapons. The Department of Energy gives it to arms makers, where its extreme density is valuable in the manufacture of armor and casings.

Despite a 1996 U.N. resolution opposing its use because of discovery of health problems after the first Gulf War, the military studies have concluded there was no evidence that exposure to the metal caused illnesses.

To the military, the effectiveness of weapons and armor made with depleted uranium outweighs any residual effects. Their bottom line: Depleted uranium saves soldiers' lives in combat.

Robert Holloway, president of Nevada Technical Associates Inc., a firm that specializes in radiation safety training, disputes any concern over depleted uranium.

"I have no financial interest in promoting depleted uranium," Holloway wrote in an e-mail to The News-Journal. "There really is no substitute for depending on the judgment of professionals in this field."

Holloway and others who believe depleted uranium is safe to use say the best authority in the scientific community would be individuals connected to the Health Physics Society.

Doug Craig of Ponce Inlet, a retired radiation biophysics scientist, is such a person. He doesn't believe low doses of radiation from depleted uranium are a problem.

"Uranium occurs in a lot of places," Craig said, "and man has been exposed to low concentrations of uranium for a long time."

Laws and Lawsuits

But Brim and others think there will not be enough known until soldiers are tested for exposure. They compare the debate over depleted uranium to the controversy surrounding Agent Orange, the toxic herbicide used to defoliate the jungles of Vietnam. Speculation over its effects continued for more than two decades before the Defense Department agreed to compensate veterans who suffered from ailments linked to its use.

Brim often comforts other mothers whose sons and daughters are suffering from unexplainable, aggressive cancers, like a Michigan mother Brim met on the Internet.

The Michigan mom says she believes malignant tumors that resulted in removal of her Marine son's ear, ear canal and half his face may be linked to depleted uranium. But the woman asks that her name not be used because her son still is a Marine - battling cancer, not bullets. And he has not been tested for DU exposure, she says.

In addition to consoling other mothers, Brim has tried unsuccessfully to raise awareness of the issue either through legislation or a lawsuit.

She recently traveled to Tallahassee with cancer lobbyists and left plate-size booster buttons with her son's image, trying to raise the consciousness of Florida legislators. But she says she has not been able to interest anyone in creating a bill similar to one passed last year in Connecticut - the first state law in the nation aimed at helping National Guard personnel returning from Iraq to get tested for exposure to depleted uranium.

Other veterans are seeking help from legislators in states around the country, like Melissa Sterry, 44, of Connecticut, who served during the Persian Gulf War and suffers from multiple symptoms, including chronic headaches, infections and multiple heart attacks.

Sterry is an activist who keeps track of more than a dozen states that have introduced bills. That includes her home state, where a veterans' health registry is being created as a database for the federal government. Among the current list of states working on individual legislation, Arizona has state Rep. Albert Tom, a Democrat. For three years he introduced the issue of testing National Guardsmen, each time a bit differently. He patterned a bill after the Connecticut law this year.

"Again it was heard (in committee), but it just didn't go anywhere," Tom said.

Veterans might have better luck in court. Brim is closely following a trial in New York, where - despite a precedent that prevents military personnel from suing the government for injuries resulting from their service - eight National Guard veterans have won the right to be heard about their depleted uranium exposure.

One veteran in that suit, Gerard Matthew, says not only is he sick, but contends his little girl's birth deformities are related to his exposure to depleted uranium. The deformity, Matthew said, is similar to many being reported within the Iraqi population since the first Gulf War.

Depleted Uranium News Update

Oct. 2006: President George W. Bush signed the Department of Defense Authorization legislation. The House amendment was authored and introduced by Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wa.) ordering a comprehensive study - with a report due in one year - on possible adverse health effects on U.S. soldiers from the U.S. military's use of DU - Depleted Uranium. The Senate companion bill was backed by Joe Lieberman of Conn., a democrat at the time. (McDermott's Web site: www.house.gov/mcdermott)

Feb. 6, 2007: The New York newspaper, The Post Chronicle, reported that U.S. government scientists at the Ames Laboratory in Iowa say they are close to developing nanostructured material of tungsten and metallic glass to eliminate the use of depleted uranium in ammunition. In a recent phone call by The News-Journal to senior scientist Dan Sordelet, reported to be leading the research team, he said he is "no longer working on that" and declined to give any further information.

March 23, 2007: The Tico Times of San Jose, Costa Rica, reported that the U.S. and Costa Rican activists are lobbying to enlist Costa Rica's Nobel Peace Prize winner and disarmament defender to lead their uphill battle against the military use of a popular radioactive weapon.

April 3, 2007: ABC News Online, Australia, reports that the Australian Veterans Affairs Minister Bruce Billson says he is concerned the group "Depleted Uranium Silent Killer," which is opposed to the use of depleted uranium weapons, is using Gulf War veterans to run an anti-uranium scare campaign. The group says overseas tests confirm two Sunshine Coast veterans from the first Gulf War - one in the Army and the other in the Navy - were exposed to the heavy metal during their service 15 years ago.

April 10, 2007: Star Tribune (Minn., Mn.) reports a state Senate committee OK'd a bill providing for testing veteran national guardsmen returning from Iraq to see if dust from spent-uranium munitions has harmed them. Link: www.startribune.com/587/story/1112856.html.

--------

For more information: Special Report: Depleted Uranium