SurveyUsing depleted uranium munitions is a war crime
      – BorgClown, 2009-10-23 at 02:49:35   (9 comments)

On 2009-10-23 at 02:54:36, BorgClown wrote...
I saw something about depleted uranium when watching the urinal video, and got curious and read more. Basically, it's a slightly radioactive toxic heavy metal. It's bad if you make contact with it for a long time, and since its purpose is to vaporize and burn armor on impact, there's a plenty of it to breath. WP quotes an estimate of 1,000 tons of DU used in Iraq on 2003, in a 3-week period, mostly near cities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium
On 2009-10-23 at 02:56:12, BorgClown wrote...
Soldiers inhale burnt DU too, but who cared when profit was to be made?
On 2009-10-23 at 08:41:00, Lee J Haywood wrote...
It often seems that the military try out new technologies first and then see what the consequences are. It ought to be that they used some sense to see how toxic depleted uranium is and verified it with testing, then avoided using it. Instead, they laugh at the size of their budget and assume they can simply pay off anyone who sues them (not that they'll pay up if asked nicely).
On 2009-10-23 at 15:04:09, DigitalBoss wrote...
Depleted means that it is not radioactive.
On 2009-10-23 at 23:31:17, BorgClown wrote...
Depleted means weakly radioactive, although DU is lees radioactive than natural occurring uranium oxide, It doesn't take away the fact that DU is a heavy metal like mercury or lead, and it burns and vaporizes on impact. You wouldn't vaporize hundreds of tons of mercury near cities and call it harmless, would you?
On 2009-10-24 at 00:03:46, DigitalBoss wrote...
Every study ever made of the effects of DU has either determined none or inconclusive results. Where is the beef?
On 2009-10-24 at 00:04:37, DigitalBoss wrote...
DU is by no means as toxic as mercury. Come on guys, make some real sense.
On 2009-10-24 at 16:18:33, Lee J Haywood wrote...
No sensible person would allow themselves to be exposed to uranium regardless of the status of any studies, just as you'd have to be stupid to think that cigarette smoking wasn't harmful to your health prior to research showing this to be the case. Although any level of radiation exposure has the potential to be harmful, having uranium in your body means constant exposure - multiplying the number of opportunities for genetic damage. It only takes one mutation in one cell to lead to cancer, and no-one would purposefully wish to increase the chances of getting it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Health_considerations I'd agree that war is a slightly different situation, and depleted uranium would be difficult to substitute with anything else. At the very least, its use should be limited and both soldiers and civilians protected from its dust.
On 2009-10-26 at 03:47:07, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: Would you breath it?