US military using Depleted Uranium in Iraq!

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

This is really Phucked Up! So who's the real threat of WMD? SH must be rolling over laughing in his grave!

3parts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvCmthsTEGA&mode=related&search=

Actually it's me laughing at your misguided sensationalism.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[GQ_jumper 4]

Quote

Not available til 2008

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

Quote

Quote

WMD, DU is not.

A highly misleading reply.

It was a perfectly accurate reply. Do you dispute the accuracy of the facts in my post?

Your posts on DU have been highly selective and I consider them misleading. It's quite shocking to see a Physics Professor pander to the kind of anti-DU hysteria that's been posted here in the past.

If you consider 1/2 of one billionth of an ounce of C14 in your body to constitute being "riddled with it", then we can all draw our own conclusions about your objectivity and accuracy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

WMD, DU is not.

A highly misleading reply.

It was a perfectly accurate reply. Do you dispute the accuracy of the facts in my post?

Your posts on DU have been highly selective and I consider them misleading. It's quite shocking to see a Physics Professor pander to the kind of anti-DU hysteria that's been posted here in the past.

If you consider 1/2 of one billionth of an ounce of C14 in your body to constitute being "riddled with it", then we can all draw our own conclusions about your objectivity and accuracy.

rid·dled, rid·dling, rid·dles
1. To pierce with numerous holes; perforate: riddle a target with bullets.
2. To spread throughout: "Election campaigns have always been riddled with demagogy and worse" New Republic.
3. To put (gravel, for example) through a coarse sieve.

Unless the C14 isotope is concentrated in one area I think "riddled with it" is quite accurate by definition #2.

[niu 0]

Quote

It seems like people think we should just roll in with less effective rounds.

DU contamination from GW1 is a side effect from a basicly defensive war,which can make it somewhat understandable.This time around why roll at all?

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Good to hear of a story where this is saving lives. This is the real reason DU is used. It's a self-sharpening penetrator and is the most effective weapon for the job.

To call DU a WMD is simultaneously frivolous and obscene.

Per 18 U.S.C. 921 and 2332a, any projectile over .50 cal is a WMD. So DU, per the US government's own definition, fits the bill in large projectile form.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Quote

Good to hear of a story where this is saving lives. This is the real reason DU is used. It's a self-sharpening penetrator and is the most effective weapon for the job.

To call DU a WMD is simultaneously frivolous and obscene.

Per 18 U.S.C. 921 and 2332a, any projectile over .50 cal is a WMD. So DU, per the US government's own definition, fits the bill in large projectile form.

Then by that definition it's not, and I believe the term is "destructive device", not WMD.

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Good to hear of a story where this is saving lives. This is the real reason DU is used. It's a self-sharpening penetrator and is the most effective weapon for the job.

To call DU a WMD is simultaneously frivolous and obscene.

Per 18 U.S.C. 921 and 2332a, any projectile over .50 cal is a WMD. So DU, per the US government's own definition, fits the bill in large projectile form.

Then by that definition it's not, and I believe the term is "destructive device", not WMD.

Uh, yeah it is. The GAU-8 Avenger gatling gun fires a 30mm projectile, which is over a 1 inch diameter.

And look up the U.S.C. definition of WMD. It includes all 'destructive devices' including projectiles over 50 cal.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[willard 0]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWAaZnALTYc&mode=related&search=

I want one. (To deal with woodchucks, of course. )

Anybody know what the governments cost per round is?

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Good to hear of a story where this is saving lives. This is the real reason DU is used. It's a self-sharpening penetrator and is the most effective weapon for the job.

To call DU a WMD is simultaneously frivolous and obscene.

Per 18 U.S.C. 921 and 2332a, any projectile over .50 cal is a WMD. So DU, per the US government's own definition, fits the bill in large projectile form.

Then by that definition it's not, and I believe the term is "destructive device", not WMD.

Uh, yeah it is. The GAU-8 Avenger gatling gun fires a 30mm projectile, which is over a 1 inch diameter.

And look up the U.S.C. definition of WMD. It includes all 'destructive devices' including projectiles over 50 cal.

My mistake, I was assuming the discussion was only referring to the .50BMG pictured above.

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

My mistake, I was assuming the discussion was only referring to the .50BMG pictured above.

No problem. The crazy thing is, we seem to now define ALL military weapons as WMD's. So we have been using WMD's in Iraq for years now.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

My mistake, I was assuming the discussion was only referring to the .50BMG pictured above.

No problem. The crazy thing is, we seem to now define ALL military weapons as WMD's. So we have been using WMD's in Iraq for years now.

Aha! So there ARE WMDs in Iraq! All those Iraqi AA guns, etc.

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

My mistake, I was assuming the discussion was only referring to the .50BMG pictured above.

No problem. The crazy thing is, we seem to now define ALL military weapons as WMD's. So we have been using WMD's in Iraq for years now.

Aha! So there ARE WMDs in Iraq! All those Iraqi AA guns, etc.

Yep. They changed the law so that any violations in the US can be prosecuted as a WMD violation. Any explosive device is now a WMD, irregardless of any nuclear, biological, or chemical content.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Yep. They changed the law so that any violations in the US can be prosecuted as a WMD violation. Any explosive device is now a WMD, irregardless of any nuclear, biological, or chemical content.

Cool! Can't find WMDs under current definition? Change definition to MAtch what you DID find!

Problem solved. Simple as that!

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

WMD, DU is not.

A highly misleading reply.

It was a perfectly accurate reply. Do you dispute the accuracy of the facts in my post?

Your posts on DU have been highly selective and I consider them misleading. It's quite shocking to see a Physics Professor pander to the kind of anti-DU hysteria that's been posted here in the past.

If you consider 1/2 of one billionth of an ounce of C14 in your body to constitute being "riddled with it", then we can all draw our own conclusions about your objectivity and accuracy.

Of course the point of my post was to highlight how idiotic some of these claims are and how certain facts can be presented to cause hysteria, but a sophisticated guy like you would have seen that. Do you seriously think I meant we should be concerned about carbon isotopes?

The fact is you're posting yet again in support of a DU = WMD bullshit thread. The last time you used such canards as an approximation in half life calculation (which was a reasonable 1st iteration of Newton's method at worst) while ignoring all issues with posted analysis such as the micro-gram quantities and extreme locality of tissue samples for massively overstating exposure.

I could point out that the half life of DU is 760 million years (vs.
Radiation scares the public, heavy metal, pfff, it's all over the pace including the drinking water.

The fact is you have a shameful and misleading record of posts on DU. But you are careful only to sit on the sidelines sniping and doing your best to sustain the hysteria.

Absolutely shabby for a scientist in my opinion but just as accurate as my post on radiocarbon.

[joedirt 0]

Wow this post is still going... it's a pointless argument really. I know lots of people who have handled sabot rounds, myself included. It was always understood to be depleted uranium. There really hasn't been proof either way, but the people who would be affected would be the people using them. I think most guys would like the option to use AP if they need it. I also think these conspiracy theory guys show up in discussion boards alot, but probably represent a very small minority of the public.

[kallend 2,182]

Quote

Wow this post is still going... it's a pointless argument really. I know lots of people who have handled sabot rounds, myself included. It was always understood to be depleted uranium. There really hasn't been proof either way, but the people who would be affected would be the people using them. I think most guys would like the option to use AP if they need it. I also think these conspiracy theory guys show up in discussion boards alot, but probably represent a very small minority of the public.

Handling the rounds is NOT the issue. Educate yourself.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,132]

The premise of this thread somewhat misses the point, I think. The issue is not that we're using DU in a war - the issue is that we decided to HAVE a war.

War is the worst thing there is. Anything is OK under the facile justification of defense during wartime. It's OK to kill 350,000 people with two nukes to end the war sooner, based on some estimates of how many people might die later. It's OK to blow the arms off a 10 year old boy; some collateral damage is, after all, to be expected. It's OK to torture people; wouldn't you rather torture someone than LOSE THE WAR? It's OK to spend hundreds of billions; after all, we have to win, and we must support our brave troops. It's understandable that some soldiers snap and do bad things; after all, they're at war! It is the ultimate excuse for atrocities, the perfect cover for all things that advance one's political and military goals.

Now we're using DU. I'm not surprised. Heck, we're doing most of the things Saddam used to do, but we're the good guys, so it's OK when we do it - because it's war.

So complaining about the use of DU during war, to me, is like worrying that a guy on death row is going to feel pain when you execute him. The issue isn't whether he's going to feel pain or not - the issue is that you're executing him.

[willard 0]

Quote

Heck, we're doing most of the things Saddam used to do

Interesting. If you would share with us any evidence, even rumors, that the U.S. is torturing children in front of their parents, eliminating entire towns with poison gas, or committing genocide. I'd like very much to see it.

[shropshire 0]

He didn't say ALL things that SH was doing but SOME.

Like people disappearing, without what you might call due process.... for starters

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[willard 0]

Quote

He didn't say ALL things that SH was doing but SOME.

Like people disappearing, without what you might call due process.... for starters

I believe the word he used was "most", not "some".

Big difference in people being held by our government and those Saddam took in. If you were taken into one of Saddam's prisons because you spoke out against him you would be executed and never seen again. If you were lucky they would leave your family alone, but usually they tortured and/or killed them as well. Show me where this has happened here in the U.S.

[billvon 3,132]

>If you would share with us any evidence, even rumors, that the U.S. is
>torturing children in front of their parents

From a talk by Seymour Hersh, the guy who broke the My Lai and Abu Ghraib abuse stories.

"Some of the worse that happened that you don't know about, ok. Videos, there are women there. Some of you may have read they were passing letters, communications out to their men. This is at Abu Ghraib which is 30 miles from Baghdad.

The women were passing messages saying "Please come and kill me, because of what's happened". Basically what happened is that those women who were arrested with young boys/children in cases that have been recorded. The boys were sodomized with the cameras rolling. The worst about all of them is the soundtrack of the boys shrieking that your government has. They are in total terror it's going to come out.

It's impossible to say to yourself how do we get there? who are we? Who are these people that sent us there?"

The sodomy with broomsticks was corroborated by the Taguba report:

"In addition, several detainees also described the following acts of abuse, which under the circumstances, I find credible based on the clarity of their statements and supporting evidence provided by other witnesses:
. . .
g. Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick."

>eliminating entire towns with poison gas . . .

We haven't done that. But remember how Saddam redirected rivers to 'starve out' the Marsh Arabs? We're bulldozing date and citrus orchards in reprisal against farmers we think are helping insurgents.

What else have we done? We've used torture regularly; indeed, we have even seeked to redefine the term! We have killed tens of thousands (at minimum) of innocent people. We've raped and killed innocent Iraqis. We imprison children. We have secret prisons all over the world now where we hold people forever. We beat people to death in our facilities. We help Iranian terrorists kill Iranians. (Remember how outraged everyone was at Saddam's support of suicide bombers in Syria?)

Sometime I think I am alone in thinking that we should be better than that. We shouldn't just be a little bit better than Saddam - there should be no comparison. There should not be thousands of Iraqis who hate us for raping, torturing and killing their family members. We should do better, and we must do better.

[shropshire 0]

<> It's not happening in the US! It's being done at Gitmo for a reason and they wouldn't advertise it, if it was happening either... but folk are being held for no good reason.. True or False?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[willard 0]

folk are being held for no good reason.. True or False?

False.

Prove me wrong.

[willard 0]

I put about as much faith in Seymour Hersh as I do anyone else who would say anything to get their face on tv or in a paper, which happens to be none.

I don't deny that there have been instances of bad shit done by some of our people over there, but those are rare cases and the exception, not the rule. Even if everything Hersh said was true that is still a tiny fraction of what SH was doing, not even close to "most".