Depleted Uranium, Increased Risk

[TheStripey1]

I find it extremely distasteful that we are spreading our nuclear waste willynilly in other countries in the name of liberation, freedom and democracy. It's a crime, pure and simple. IMO, the billions of people that will die as a result of ingesting this crap are the responsibility of those that support it's use in warfare, be they military or civilian.


Depleted Uranium, Increased Risk
Weapons the Department of Defense claims are harmless
have serious and lasting effects.

By Perry O’Brien, Cornell University
September 5, 2007
(http://campusprogress.org/opinions/1912/depleted-uranium-increased-risk)

...snip

For the Department of Defense, DU is cheap and readily available: The Cold War left the United States with about half a million tons of the stuff.

The thing the DoD often doesn’t like to talk about is that depleted uranium is both radioactive and toxic, putting its use in violation of some basic tenets of the Geneva Conventions. Defenders of DU (mainly the United States and Britain) have argued that it’s perfectly safe to hold a sabot round in your hand. That’s probably true, but when a sabot round hits its target, much of the shell aerosolizes into a ceramic dust that can enter the soil. This dust contaminates food and water supplies and can be inhaled or absorbed into the body through open wounds. A variety of critics, including veterans’ organizations, independent researchers, and the European Parliament, have charged that this dust has created serious health problems for exposed soldiers and civilians. If it’s as toxic as they say, then the use of DU violates at least three international laws.

...snip

DU is a radioactive substance. The Defense Department points out that alpha waves emitted by DU are stopped by human skin. But on the battlefield a DU weapon can easily enter the body as dust or metal shrapnel. Under international law, this puts DU weapons like the sabot round into the same category with nuclear and chemical weapons that cause “indiscriminate destruction.” A 1990 report for the U.S. Army warned of the radiological dangers to soldiers and civilian populations posed by depleted uranium, but more recent reports funded by the DoD have contradicted these concerns.

...snip

[bobbylien]

So charge everyone in the DoD with war crimes. Hang everyone who pushed the use of the stuff.

[TheStripey1]

So charge everyone in the DoD with war crimes. Hang everyone who pushed the use of the stuff.


good luck with that... we can't even get then to test our troopers for DU contamination after rotating out of theatre...

[PatrickHenry]

So charge everyone in the DoD with war crimes. Hang everyone who pushed the use of the stuff.
Uncle's military are criminals...that's what I have been sayin'

[TheStripey1]

So charge everyone in the DoD with war crimes. Hang everyone who pushed the use of the stuff.
Uncle's military are criminals...that's what I have been sayin'



not all of them... and not all of them in charge either...

I wonder who it is that determines what munitions are used in a conflict... anyone know? hmmmmm... Maybe I should ask that on one of the military boards I'm on... :help:

[Scorpion]

The debate about the battlefield use of DU munitions is quite interesting.

On the one hand, such munitions are quite effective, especially against armor and hardened targets. On the other hand, though DU is not radioactive it is poisonous and has a half life of 4.5 billion years.

What is confusing to me is that under international treaty (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=LEN20060119&articleId=1754), to which the US is a signatory, DU munitions are forbidden, yet we continue to use them. It's troubling that international convention is being ignored by the US and even more troubling that Iraq may be subjected to massive long term health problems because of DU.

In my opinion, DU use in munitions should be stopped and efforts made to recover expended DU ordinance for proper disposal.

[bobbylien]

It's troubling that international convention is being ignored by the US and even more troubling that Iraq may be subjected to massive long term health problems because of DU.
Troubling but not at all surprising. Nobody has the authority to enforce international law against us, we just use it to force our own foreign policy on others.
I can see some serious lawsuits being brought against our government in the future and I sincerely hope the victims get everything they ask for.

[Scorpion]

It's troubling that international convention is being ignored by the US and even more troubling that Iraq may be subjected to massive long term health problems because of DU.
Troubling but not at all surprising. Nobody has the authority to enforce international law against us, we just use it to force our own foreign policy on others.
I can see some serious lawsuits being brought against our government in the future and I sincerely hope the victims get everything they ask for.


I agree but it is a dilemma. Should we continue to use DU munitions because of their effectiveness or should we switch back to tungsten penetrators and lead/alloy munitions?

I'm concerned about the health effects for Iraqis and troops exposed in theatre.

If pressed for an opinion, I would say phase out DU munitions.

[Pogo]

In my opinion, DU use in munitions should be stopped and efforts made to recover expended DU ordinance for proper disposal.

Seems to me that that's impossible as the stuff aerosolizes on impact. If this wasn't the case, the threat it poses would be fairly minimal.

[Scorpion]

In my opinion, DU use in munitions should be stopped and efforts made to recover expended DU ordinance for proper disposal.

Seems to me that that's impossible as the stuff aerosolizes on impact. If this wasn't the case, the threat it poses would be fairly minimal.


The penetrators in artillery rounds are usually intact and recoverable.

Here's a link to some interesting and relevant information: http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/duupdate.htm

[PatrickHenry]

The debate about the battlefield use of DU munitions is quite interesting.

On the one hand, such munitions are quite effective, especially against armor and hardened targets. On the other hand, though DU is not radioactive it is poisonous and has a half life of 4.5 billion years.

You are mistaken, DU is radioactive. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium
Since depleted uranium contains less than one third as much uranium-235 and uranium-234 as natural uranium, it is weakly radioactive and an external radiation dose from depleted uranium is about 60% of that from the same mass of uranium with a natural isotopic ratio.See? Not as radioactive as natural uranium, but more radioactive than, for example, lead... It is 60% as radioactive as natural uranium.

And its "half-life" is not in reference to its nature as a poison. Uranium is a heavy metal poison and will remain so for a million times 4.5 billion years.

Effectiveness of a munition is not the only factor governing its use. For example, poison gas is quite effective. But its use in warfare is not sanctioned.

What is confusing to me is that under international treaty (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=LEN20060119&articleId=1754), to which the US is a signatory, DU munitions are forbidden, yet we continue to use them. It's troubling that international convention is being ignored by the US and even more troubling that Iraq may be subjected to massive long term health problems because of DU.

In my opinion, DU use in munitions should be stopped and efforts made to recover expended DU ordinance for proper disposal.

When DU munitions are "expended," Scorpion, they are present in the environment as a microfine uranium dust, uranium oxide, and uranium salts.

I suppose that there may be some that don't burst into fragments (for instance if they don't hit the armored target) and that the projectiles or fragments could be recovered intact. Those that impact armor are pyrophoric and become a hazardous aerosol and could be inhaled.

I agree that its use in munitions should be discontinued and attempts made to recover it from former battlefields.

[Pogo]

In my opinion, DU use in munitions should be stopped and efforts made to recover expended DU ordinance for proper disposal.

Seems to me that that's impossible as the stuff aerosolizes on impact. If this wasn't the case, the threat it poses would be fairly minimal.


The penetrators in artillery rounds are usually intact and recoverable.

Here's a link to some interesting and relevant information: http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/duupdate.htm

I was under the impression that there was 100% aerosolization. Thanks for the correction.

Cheers

[TheStripey1]

The debate about the battlefield use of DU munitions is quite interesting.

On the one hand, such munitions are quite effective, especially against armor and hardened targets. On the other hand, though DU is not radioactive it is poisonous and has a half life of 4.5 billion years.

What is confusing to me is that under international treaty (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=LEN20060119&articleId=1754), to which the US is a signatory, DU munitions are forbidden, yet we continue to use them. It's troubling that international convention is being ignored by the US and even more troubling that Iraq may be subjected to massive long term health problems because of DU.

In my opinion, DU use in munitions should be stopped and efforts made to recover expended DU ordinance for proper disposal.


Actually, DU is radioactive... but that isn't what kills you on the battlefield. After the DU round hits it's target and explodes, the penetrator is reduced to tiny ceramic particles that are easily ingested, be it by breathing it in as dust, drinking it in contaminated water or eating it as food, the effects can be quite devastating to the human body.

And I agree with you, scorpion, it is weird that we are signatories to an international treaty and yet violate it continously.

AIAWY pt 2, the DU residue should have been recovered and disposed of properly from the gitgo. It is afterall, what WHO recommended...[hr]

It's troubling that international convention is being ignored by the US and even more troubling that Iraq may be subjected to massive long term health problems because of DU.
Troubling but not at all surprising. Nobody has the authority to enforce international law against us, we just use it to force our own foreign policy on others.
I can see some serious lawsuits being brought against our government in the future and I sincerely hope the victims get everything they ask for.


I agree but it is a dilemma. Should we continue to use DU munitions because of their effectiveness or should we switch back to tungsten penetrators and lead/alloy munitions?

I'm concerned about the health effects for Iraqis and troops exposed in theatre.

If pressed for an opinion, I would say phase out DU munitions.


I vote for tungsten...
yes, absolutely...
and I agree here as well...

[PatrickHenry]

That document you referenced: http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/duupdate.htm

Is pretty damning to the management of the militaries that use DU penetrators.

The DU project and review of previous research reinforced the original conclusions and recommendations that we developed while still in Saudi Arabia and which are just plain simple common sense. These recommendations were / are:

1. All depleted uranium contamination must be physically removed and properly disposed of to prevent future exposures.

2. Radiation detection devices that detect and measure alpha particles, beta particles, x-rays, and gamma rays emissions at appropriate levels from 20 dpm up to 100,000 dpm and from .1 mrem/ hour to 75 mrem/ hour must be acquired and distributed to all individuals or organizations responsible for medical care and environmental remediation activities involving depleted uranium / uranium 238 and other low level radioactive isotopes that may be present.

3. Medical screening of all individuals who did or may have inhaled, ingested, or had wound contamination to detect mobile and sequestered internalized uranium contamination must be completed.

4. All individuals who enter, climb on, or work within 25 meters of any DU contaminated equipment or terrain must wear respiratory and skin protection.

5. Uranium 238 contaminated and damaged equipment or materials should not be recycled to manufacture new materials or equipment.

WHAT HAS OCCURRED?

Visual evidence, personal experience, and published reports verify that:

1. Medical care has not been provided to all DU casualties.

2. Environmental remediation has not been completed.

3. DU contaminated and damaged equipment and materials have been recycled to manufacture new products.

4. DU training and education has only been partially implemented.

5. DU contamination management procedures have not been distributed.

The United States Army Materiel Command possesses the Nuclear Regulatory Commission license for depleted uranium. A health physicist assigned to the Office of the Surgeon General, U.S. Army Materiel Command told me during a conversation on November 8, 1999 that their office will not release the DU medical treatment protocols nor the DU contamination management and remediation procedures to all those who are affected by depleted uranium contamination. He has restated this decision in writing on behalf of commanding general. This decision ignores United States and international legal requirements.