Depleted uranium

[Dutchpower]

Sorry if this is posted before but this is some heavy stuff.

the american army sure like his share of illegal weapons first napalm then White Phosphorus and now i hear about this

http://www.dumpalink.com/media/11312...pleted_Uranium

[Erik]

This is old news but I think it's a disgrace.

We are talking about nuclear waste that Americans normally burry deep undergroud, in special bunker, just to make sure nobody get's into cantact with it.
The type of stuff no American want to have in their backyard.
But when a war breakes out those same Americans suddently stop treating it as a health risk and freely fire it into urban areas where it ends up in the air and drinking water.

And there is already a better alternative: Tungsten, as used by European armies.
Tungsten is more expensive but it's also much better at penetrating armour because it's harder and heavier.
So Americans only use DU because it's cheap, not even because it's the best material.

[the_mango55]

Im sure there are a lot more "illegal" weapons that are used in war, by every side, that people don't know about, it it is freaking war. No one is claiming that war is a happy place to be, things like this happen. I doubt that the US army would be able to obtain tungsten in the quantities that is required for an operation like desert storm.

Another thing that it does not mention in the video, how much DU is being used in THIS Iraqi war? That video was about the other one. Sure it was a bad idea using it, and we know that now. If it was used in such high quantities now as it was then, perhaps then there would be a case.

[meh_cd]

Sorry if this is posted before but this is some heavy stuff.

the american army sure like his share of illegal weapons first napalm then White Phosphorus and now i hear about this

http://www.dumpalink.com/media/11312...pleted_Uranium

Illegal my arse. Find me an article stating that its illegal and I might listen to you. We've been using it for a looong time and you decide to dredge this up now? Hah.

As for tungsten...

"DU can be used to engage the enemy at greater distances than tungsten penetrators or high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) rounds because of improved ballistic properties. When they strike a target, tungsten penetrators blunt while DU has a self-sharpening property. DU ammunition routinely provides a 25 percent increase in effective range over traditional kinetic energy rounds."



"DU's self-sharpening properties are evident in this
x-ray. Note how the tungsten penetrator's tip deforms
into a mushroom shape."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...nitions/du.htm

Also from the above article:

Health Issues
The major health concerns about DU relate to its chemical properties as a heavy metal rather than to its radioactivity, which is very low. As with all chemicals, the hazard depends mainly upon the amount taken into the body. Medical science recognizes that uranium at high doses can cause kidney damage. However, those levels are far above levels soldiers would have encountered in the Gulf or the Balkans.

Because depleted uranium emits primarily alpha radiation, it is not considered a serious external radiation hazard. The depleted uranium in armor and rounds is covered, further reducing the radiation dose. When breathed or eaten, small amounts of depleted uranium are carried in the blood to body tissues and organs; much the same as the more radioactive natural uranium. Despite this, no radiological health effects are expected because the radioactivity of uranium and depleted uranium are so low.

Most soldiers and civilians will not be exposed to dangerous levels of depleted uranium. However, in certain circumstances the exposures may be high and there would be a risk of heavy metal poisoning that could lead to long-term kidney damage for a few soldiers, as well as the increased risk of lung cancer. A small number of soldiers and civilians might suffer kidney damage from depleted uranium if substantial amounts are breathed in, or swallowed in contaminated soil and water. The kidneys of a few soldiers may be damaged if they inhale large quantities of DU after their vehicle is struck by a penetrator or while working for long periods in contaminated vehicles. Large numbers of corroding DU penetrators buried in the soil may also pose a long-term threat if uranium leaches into water supplies. Long-term sampling, particularly of water and milk, is required to detect any increase in uranium levels around areas where DU has been used on the battlefield.

Anecdotal reports of deaths and illnesses among US veterans of the Gulf War who worked for long periods in heavily contaminated vehicles prompted a number of investigations. The voluntary Veterans Affairs DU Medical Follow-up Program began in 1993-1994 with the medical evaluations of 33 friendly-fire DU-exposed veterans, many with embedded DU fragments. An additional 29 of the friendly-fire victims were added to the follow-up program in 1999. In 1998, the scope of the program was expanded to include Gulf War veterans who may have been exposed to DU through close contact with DU munitions, inhalation of smoke containing DU particulate during a fire at the Doha depot, or by entering or salvaging vehicles or bunkers that were hit with DU projectiles. The published results of these medical evaluations indicate that the presence of retained DU fragments is the only scenario predictive of a high urine uranium level, and those with embedded DU fragments continue to have elevated urine uranium levels ten years after the incident. It is unlikely that an individual without embedded DU fragments would have an elevated urine uranium level, and consequently any uranium-related health effects.

In late 2000 and early 2001, various news reports, mostly European, reported allegations of an increase in leukemia cases related to exposure to DU while serving in the Balkans. Subsequent independent investigations by the World Health Organization, European Commission, European Parliament, United Nations Environment Programme, United Kingdom Royal Society, and the Health Council of the Netherlands have all have discounted any association between depleted uranium and leukemia or other medical problems among Balkans veterans.

[Erik]

As for tungsten...

"DU can be used to engage the enemy at greater distances than tungsten penetrators or high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) rounds because of improved ballistic properties. When they strike a target, tungsten penetrators blunt while DU has a self-sharpening property. DU ammunition routinely provides a 25 percent increase in effective range over traditional kinetic energy rounds."

Ok, I stand corrected.
I was mistaking because I had read a comparison between the M1A2 and the Leo2A6, and the Leo came on top in firepower.
But apparently this was due to the gun, not the shells. (I was confused because they were discussing the shells at the same time as the guns).

Health Issues
The major health concerns about DU relate to its chemical properties as a heavy metal rather than to its radioactivity, which is very low. As with all chemicals, the hazard depends mainly upon the amount taken into the body. Medical science recognizes that uranium at high doses can cause kidney damage. However, those levels are far above levels soldiers would have encountered in the Gulf or the Balkans.

Most American research has been done to danger to tank crews who handle the shells.
But soldiers sitting safely in their tanks and looking at their rounds impact kilometers away don't get the highest dosis.
It's the civilians and the soldiers who check up on their kills who are at risk.

Because depleted uranium emits primarily alpha radiation, it is not considered a serious external radiation hazard.

External, no, but when you get it into your lungs or blood it's a completely different story.
In these cases alpha radiation is the most dangerous of all.

The depleted uranium in armor and rounds is covered, further reducing the radiation dose.

When the shell is still in tact yes, but not after you fired it.
DU burns and Uranium-oxyde dust can spread like crazy.

When breathed or eaten, small amounts of depleted uranium are carried in the blood to body tissues and organs; much the same as the more radioactive natural uranium. Despite this, no radiological health effects are expected because the radioactivity of uranium and depleted uranium are so low.

This is bull because we are talking about a much bigger dose of uranium than anybody would ever get in a normal, day to day, situation.
We are talking for example about uranium-Oxyde dust that falls onto crops and are then eaten.

Most soldiers and civilians will not be exposed to dangerous levels of depleted uranium.

Notice how he carefully chooses his words here.
Most civilians (as in 50%+ of the worlds population) won't get into contact with DU.
But a large number of civilians do get into contact with DU (say, maybe 5% of all Iraqi's).

Most people wil never get killed in a terrorist attack.
Does this mean we shouldn't prevent terrorism for the other .01% of all people who do?

However, in certain circumstances the exposures may be high and there would be a risk of heavy metal poisoning that could lead to long-term kidney damage for a few soldiers, as well as the increased risk of lung cancer. A small number of soldiers and civilians might suffer kidney damage from depleted uranium if substantial amounts are breathed in, or swallowed in contaminated soil and water. The kidneys of a few soldiers may be damaged if they inhale large quantities of DU after their vehicle is struck by a penetrator or while working for long periods in contaminated vehicles. Large numbers of corroding DU penetrators buried in the soil may also pose a long-term threat if uranium leaches into water supplies. Long-term sampling, particularly of water and milk, is required to detect any increase in uranium levels around areas where DU has been used on the battlefield.

Here he finally admits DU is unhealthy.
We don;t know how many people wil be infected but at least he agrees SOME people wil get infected.
How many deaths are acceptable, btw?
100?
1000?

Anecdotal reports of deaths and illnesses among US veterans of the Gulf War who worked for long periods in heavily contaminated vehicles prompted a number of investigations. The voluntary Veterans Affairs DU Medical Follow-up Program began in 1993-1994 with the medical evaluations of 33 friendly-fire DU-exposed veterans, many with embedded DU fragments. An additional 29 of the friendly-fire victims were added to the follow-up program in 1999. In 1998, the scope of the program was expanded to include Gulf War veterans who may have been exposed to DU through close contact with DU munitions, inhalation of smoke containing DU particulate during a fire at the Doha depot, or by entering or salvaging vehicles or bunkers that were hit with DU projectiles. The published results of these medical evaluations indicate that the presence of retained DU fragments is the only scenario predictive of a high urine uranium level, and those with embedded DU fragments continue to have elevated urine uranium levels ten years after the incident. It is unlikely that an individual without embedded DU fragments would have an elevated urine uranium level, and consequently any uranium-related health effects.

I am not interesed in uranium in urine, I am interested in uranium in the human body.

Those people were only tested for uranium contamination years after the war, the unranium could have caused it's damage and left their body by that time, or maybe it's still locked inside their lungs and wil never be exposed of trough urine.

In late 2000 and early 2001, various news reports, mostly European, reported allegations of an increase in leukemia cases related to exposure to DU while serving in the Balkans. Subsequent independent investigations by the World Health Organization, European Commission, European Parliament, United Nations Environment Programme, United Kingdom Royal Society, and the Health Council of the Netherlands have all have discounted any association between depleted uranium and leukemia or other medical problems among Balkans veterans.

So this is one claim down, many yet to go.
There were far more DU shells used in Iraq and it's effects have never been investigated.

Anyways, if you all beleive DU is safe I think you should keep some at home.
Maybe you can use it as a doorstop, it's very cheap I've heared.

[danzig]

Sorry if this is posted before but this is some heavy stuff.

the american army sure like his share of illegal weapons first napalm then White Phosphorus and now i hear about this

http://www.dumpalink.com/media/11312...pleted_Uranium

Dunno about anyone else but Id be concerned that your source for information was coming from a site with 'anal bleaching' & striptease videos As has been said your a bit late on this as its nothing new.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Nat...rity/EM721.cfm
http://usinfo.state.gov/mena/Archive...11-575985.html

Personally I prefer this comment from a Vetern's group:
"One overlooked but significant consequence of the Bush administration’s plans to invade Iraq is the renewed debate about weapons containing depleted uranium (DU). During the last decade, international interest in the effects of the use of DU munitions has ebbed and flowed with the tides of war. In the debate’s present revival, the most zealous defenders and critics of DU munitions advance old and new claims that mix facts with fiction and propaganda, creating myths and misperceptions that obscure sensible assessments of DU’s serious health and environmental effects...

"DU munitions are neither the benign wonder weapons promoted by Pentagon propagandists nor the instruments of genocide decried by hyperbolic anti-DU activists.
While the political effects of using DU munitions are perhaps more apparent than their health and environmental effects, science and common sense dictate it is unwise to use a weapon that distributes large quantities of a toxic waste in areas where people live, work, grow food, or draw water. There’s no end in sight to the DU debate, but debunking the
false claims from both extremes is an important first step in creating the conditions necessary for constructive dialogue and sensible scientific studies."

Oh and sorry but tungsten is *not* superior to DU as far as a weapon goes, DU has better range capability and it pierces better, tungsten has more of a blunt impact (http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...itions/du.htm). Also there is the fact that US would have to purchase the material from China to meet demand given our own capacity...not a wise decision imo. Also might want to look at http://www.opinionjournal.com/column.../?id=105001780.

[Kanaric]

DU has been around for a while, but its completely idiotic for the government to use this kind of weapon. Only opens us op for propoganda and other kinds of foreign attacks. IDK why Washington doesn't get this, but they are idiots who dont care about the future of this country so they can't help it.

the american army sure like his share of illegal weapons first napalm then White Phosphorus and now i hear about this

Only illegal in countrys where they signed it to be, son.

[leeho730]

DU has been around for a while, but its completely idiotic for the government to use this kind of weapon.

1. It is FREE

2. meh_cd said how effective DU is.

[Tom Paine]

Only illegal in countrys where they signed it to be, son.

Actually the reverse: its only illegal for countries who agreed not to use it.

[Kanaric]

It's the civilians and the soldiers who check up on their kills who are at risk.

In Iraq their are poor people who salvage tanks that have DU shells in it. Some of them actually have gotten sick from this, as this kind of thing was around in Desert Storm as well.

[Dutchpower]

The worst part i think is when its is used the effect cant be reversd. you cant fully clean the lands that are contaminated(sp?)

[Tom Paine]

The same is true of various chemical weapons, and biological weapons kill more people through spreading like a, well, a disease.

[Erik]

The same is true of various chemical weapons, and biological weapons kill more people through spreading like a, well, a disease.

I am against the use of bio weapons too.
Luckily the US has stayed away from them up to now.

[Tom Paine]

True, but I was pointing out that compared to other chemical weapons DU isn't so bad; whereas napalm and variants, are.

[Tiwaz]

I am more interested about "possible" health hazard caused by "leaking" of corroding DU to groundwater and soil. For example A-10 aircraft with it's GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm cannon can spray 1350 rounds of DU shots all over countryside. These are then resting in where they land and large amount of them will remain uncleared. Similarily one can ask how well the tank DU rounds are cleaned and how much remain in the countryside to bring joy to future generations.

If you are not ready to have DU shell buried next to your house or next to your drinking water well don't support using it.

[Dutchpower]

I am more interested about "possible" health hazard caused by "leaking" of corroding DU to groundwater and soil. For example A-10 aircraft with it's GAU-8/A Avenger 30mm cannon can spray 1350 rounds of DU shots all over countryside. These are then resting in where they land and large amount of them will remain uncleared. Similarily one can ask how well the tank DU rounds are cleaned and how much remain in the countryside to bring joy to future generations.

If you are not ready to have DU shell buried next to your house or next to your drinking water well don't support using it.

Thats right there are bullets with uranium to i forgot about them how big of a hazard to they form actually?

[Erik]

If you are not ready to have DU shell buried next to your house or next to your drinking water well don't support using it.

Exactly.

[Tom Paine]

I don't support it, i just don't thnk its the most pressing of issues.