advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 24, 2006 06:57AM
"More than 1,000 tons of Depleted Uranium have been used in Afghanistan and more than 3,000 tons in Iraq, the results of which will affect victims generations to come."

This generation of soldiers aren't exposed to Agent Orange. The government is doing something much worse to them, as well as Iraqi, Serbian and Afghani civilians.
[www.countercurrents.org]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: davester
Date: March 24, 2006 10:05AM
As is usual for the depleted uranium paranoia articles, that article quotes the total nutcase Leuren Moret as a so-called "expert" on DU. I've had personal experience with Ms. Moret and know a number of people who've worked with her over the years (including during her distinguished career as a junior level field tech). Well she's no expert. She's a self-promoting paranoid nutcase with NO QUALIFICATIONS in nuclear chemistry or public health who believes agents of the "government" deliberately exposed her to radiogenic material in her workplace and secretly invaded her home. What a loony! Paranoid propaganda articles like this that cite "experts" who know nothing is no way to find out what the real hazards of DU are.



"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 24, 2006 11:26AM
Moret's quotes in the article are only a very small part of its content. Even if you discount her don't discount the other sources out of hand. Do you have anything bad to say about Dr. Doug Rokke or other DU cautioners? Increased levels of cancer and birth defects were seen throughout the region after Gulf War 1, even in Kuwait, so it's definitely not something we want civilians or our troops exposed to. Troops from that first DU war are experiencing high rates of disability, whether from DU, untested vaccines or just diseases they picked up in country. If you don't care about civilians then at least be concerned about our own troops enough to want to minimize the hazards to which they are exposed to enemy fire.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: davester
Date: March 24, 2006 12:23PM
I know nothing about the other citees in the article. However, since the article quotes Moret as an "expert", obviously little care was taken in researching sources so the entire article in highly suspect and therefore USELESS! There is no point in going further if the research is so bad. Clearly, DU present a possible toxics problem, but without a proper public health study, simple statements about "increased levels of cancer and birth defects" mean NOTHING!! I work every day in the toxics cleanup field and I've seen more garbage written about DU and other radiological contaminants than anything else. You of all people need to learn to heed my sig.



"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2006 12:23PM by davester.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Guitarman
Date: March 24, 2006 12:49PM
Everything that loki posts is somewhere between a half truth and out and out lie.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 24, 2006 02:18PM
Under the rules of war we have a responsibility to refrain from using weapons whose effects are not specifically limited to military targets. Because of their wide dispersion from the battlefield d.u. weapons, along with cluster bombs, are banned under international law. We are the only nation using them. The burden of proof of lack of hazard to civilian populations lies with us, not those we use these weapons upon. Advocates of the use of D.U. must prove their residues safe. No other nation asserts their right to use these weapons, especially in an unprovoked and illegal war.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2006 02:20PM by Refurbvirgin.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Robert M
Date: March 24, 2006 02:26PM
Refurb,

Please offer us a factual source for the "rules of war". No supposition. No speculation. Just facts.

Robert



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2006 02:26PM by Robert M.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 24, 2006 03:00PM
"The rules of war prohibit the use of inherently indiscriminate weapons. These are weapons which are incapable of being used in a manner that complies with the obligation to distinguish between civilians and combatants."
[web.amnesty.org]

"The scenes at al-Hilla’s hospital on 1 April showed that something terrible had happened. The bodies of the men, women and children - both dead and alive - brought to the hospital were punctured with shards of shrapnel from cluster bombs. Videotape of the victims was judged by Reuters and Associated Press editors as being too awful to show on television. Independent newspaper journalists reported that the pictures showed babies cut in half and children with their limbs blown off. Two lorry-loads of bodies, including women in flowered dresses, were seen outside the hospital.

Injured survivors told reporters how the explosives fell "like grapes" from the sky, and how bomblets bounced through the windows and doors of their homes before exploding. A doctor at al-Hilla’s hospital said that almost all the patients were victims of cluster bombs."
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: davester
Date: March 24, 2006 03:05PM
Refurbvirgin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> User ignored - click to show/hide this message
> "The rules of war prohibit the use of inherently
> indiscriminate weapons. These are weapons which
> are incapable of being used in a manner that
> complies with the obligation to distinguish
> between civilians and combatants."

You dolt! You obviously don't know a thing about depleted uranium ammo or what it's used for, but you blithely post propaganda regarding it. Posting some garbage about cluster bombs and indiscriminate weapons is about as irrelevant to DU as anything could be.



"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Robert M
Date: March 24, 2006 03:09PM
Refurb,

Stop wasting our time. I asked for a link that provides _factual evidence_ of the rules of war. You give me an news article that contains a slew of content that is irrelevant. I ask again that you provide us with factual evidence.

Assuming the statement in quotes is factual, then any weapon with the possible exception of those used for melee combat might be construed as illegal.

Robert



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2006 03:10PM by Robert M.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: cbelt3
Date: March 24, 2006 03:26PM
What's more interesting is the 'rules of war' reference.

And just HOW are the 'insurgents' or whatever you want to call them following the 'rules of war' ?

Yes, war is bad.
Yes, it is bad when people kill other people.
Don'tcha think that if the 'insurgents' stopped their attacks (mainly on their 'fellow' Iraqi citizens), everyone started talking and joining in, that this would stop ?

Let's face it, kids. The US came in, kicked butt, overthrew your boy Saddam. Sure, we were naive as hell to think that everyone would have a party in the street, thank us very much, get organized, and start building Starbucks and McDonald's.

But the US is strictly reactive here.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 25, 2006 12:38AM
davester Wrote:
> You dolt! You obviously don't know a thing about
> depleted uranium ammo or what it's used for, but
> you blithely post propaganda regarding it.
> Posting some garbage about cluster bombs and
> indiscriminate weapons is about as irrelevant to
> DU as anything could be.

The Amnesty article was about the full spectrum of illegal weapons we are using on Iraq (and Afghanistan). I quoted a section of it that I thought might stir your conscience, but obviously you don't have one.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 25, 2006 12:44AM
cbelt3 Wrote:
> And just HOW are the 'insurgents' or whatever you
> want to call them following the 'rules of war' ?

If you're referencing their attacks on U.S. soldiers they are defending their homeland from a foreign aggressor waging unprovoked war.

> Yes, war is bad.
> Yes, it is bad when people kill other people.
> Don'tcha think that if the 'insurgents' stopped
> their attacks (mainly on their 'fellow' Iraqi
> citizens), everyone started talking and joining
> in, that this would stop ?
>
> Let's face it, kids. The US came in, kicked butt,
> overthrew your boy Saddam.

He's not "my boy." We should have utilized UN charter provisions for removing an abusive tyrant, and then we'd have had a worldwide coalition with us, and enough money and manpower to do the job right. Unfortunately many of our allies and trading partners are as bad or worse than Saddam, so it probably would have taken some finagling to get people on side. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11 so your statement that we are strictly "reactive" is false. This is an unprovoked, preemptive war of aggression.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Robert M
Date: March 25, 2006 06:57AM
Refurb,

You quoted a section of an article, one that lacks citiations and, to an extent, objectivity. That is not factual evidence. Please stop wasting our time.

Robert



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/25/2006 09:16AM by Robert M.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: davester
Date: March 25, 2006 09:56AM
Refurbvirgin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I quoted a section of it that I
> thought might stir your conscience, but obviously
> you don't have one.

The joke is on you refurb. You are so consumed in your completely non-objective views that you don't even understand that my political stance is far to the left of center. I generally agree with the broader issues that you rant about, but I agree with them for the right reasons, not the nonsensical ones that you constantly dredge up. People like you are the worst enemy of liberal causes because your ridiculous stands give the right-wingers fuel for pointing out that liberals are loonies.






"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 25, 2006 10:47AM
davester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> People like you are the worst enemy of liberal
> causes because your ridiculous stands give the
> right-wingers fuel for pointing out that liberals
> are loonies.

On 2/28 you claimed to have placed me on "ignore." Evidently you lied. Anyone who claims to be so bugged by another's words that they must hide them from view, then is so obsessive that they are drawn back, unable to resist the need to slam someone, has more serious mental health issues than I do.
[forums.macresource.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 25, 2006 11:35AM
davester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are so consumed in
> your completely non-objective views that you don't
> even understand that my political stance is far to
> the left of center.

To the left of Genghis Khan, perhaps.

You wrote:
"Yeah, so what? The U.S. Army also plans to rain down death and destruction. That's their job."
[forums.macresource.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Racer X
Date: March 25, 2006 07:59PM
we work with depleted uranium at work, and other than basic dust particulate masks for the machinists, no special precautions are required by the city, county, state or the corporate EH&S dept. Why is that?

The head of the chem lab's office is across the hall from the model shop (prototype machine shop) If this chemist with a PhD isn't worried, neither am I.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 26, 2006 12:31AM
Racer X -
DU is pyrophoric when it strikes a target, literally burning through conventional armor, which makes it such efficient ammunition. You're probably safe, but because the effects can take years or decades to show themselves err on the side of caution. The real danger is to those in the vicinity of DU ammo impacts, or downwind of them.

"When a DU shell strikes its target, up to 70% of the depleted uranium vaporizes into fine dust, which then settles out in the surrounding soil and water. Over half of the aerosolized particles are smaller than 5 microns and anything smaller than 10 microns can be inhaled. Once lodged in the lungs, these particles can emit a steady dose of alpha radiation.
An additional hazard is DU's chemical toxicity."
[www.citizen-soldier.org]

Remember that the experts all said Agent Orange was safe, too.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: davester
Date: March 26, 2006 12:34AM
Refurbvirgin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On 2/28 you claimed to have placed me on "ignore."
> Evidently you lied. Anyone who claims to be so
> bugged by another's words that they must hide them
> from view, then is so obsessive that they are
> drawn back, unable to resist the need to slam
> someone, has more serious mental health issues
> than I do.

You obviously have never taken a logic course. I did place you on "ignore" so I didn't lie. That I decided to unhide your foolish post here was only due to my interest in 1) toxics and 2) my familiarity with crazy person Lauren Moret of depleted uranium notoriety. I chose to unhide this thread to check out the things I'm interested in. Unfortunately, you have revealed nothing of any import except for your own lack of critical thinking so you'll be consigned back to my dustbin of ignored places again.






"In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion." (1987) -- Carl Sagan
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 26, 2006 12:58AM
davester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You obviously have never taken a logic course.

Actually I took two quarters of Logic, & got A's in both.

> Unfortunately, you have revealed nothing of
> any import except for your own lack of critical
> thinking so you'll be consigned back to my dustbin
> of ignored places again.

It's not unfortunate to me, as your inability to discuss any issue without resorting to name-calling and insults makes you an unpleasant correspondent. Just because one source in an article displeases you is no reason to toss the whole thing. Did you look at the Citizen Soldier page above?

"In the first years after the Gulf War, thousands of vets began to experience some chronic health problems and many of them sought evaluation and treatment at either VA medical centers or military hospitals. They reported some or all of the following symptoms: neurological problems, chronic skin rashes, respiratory problems, chronic flu-like symptoms including severe body aches, immune system disorders, severe fatigue, joint pain, gynecological infection, bleeding gums and lesions, and unexplained rapid weight loss."

If DU isn't responsible, what, utilizing your toxic expertise, is?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 26, 2006 01:03AM
Germany is using tungsten alloy warheads in its armor piercing projectiles, and it doesn't vaporize on impact or have the radiological hazard, so there's no excuse for us not to do the same. Advocates of DU munitions should assume the burden of proving their safety, not critics its hazards.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Racer X
Date: March 26, 2006 02:05AM
Now that I think of it, i have some on my desk at work.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 26, 2006 08:02AM
Racer X Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now that I think of it, i have some on my desk at
> work.

It is low-level radioactive waste. There is no such thing as absolute safety in life but do attempt to minimize your exposure. As they taught us in SAR training, unnecessary risk is unacceptable risk.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Racer X
Date: March 26, 2006 05:54PM
I'll try and not lick it every time I go into my office. Same for the lead paint in my house.

and my anti-static negative brushes use a pelonium chip, and my watch has tritium.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/26/2006 06:03PM by Racer X.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 26, 2006 09:59PM
I have this vision of Homer Simpson flipping the glowing pellet into his back pocket as he leaves work.

As long as you're not breathing the vaporized dust particles below 10 microns you're probably safe, but why expose yourself needlessly? There have often been "safe" levels of exposure established, that were later reduced. If it doesn't have to be on your desk, why keep it there?

Good luck!
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: RgrF
Date: March 27, 2006 03:44AM
Refurbvirgin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have this vision of Homer Simpson flipping the
> glowing pellet into his back pocket as he leaves
> work.
>
> As long as you're not breathing the vaporized dust
> particles below 10 microns you're probably safe,
> but why expose yourself needlessly? There have
> often been "safe" levels of exposure established,
> that were later reduced. If it doesn't have to be
> on your desk, why keep it there?
>
> Good luck!

Everyone has their own way of expressing defiance when they feel the need. Some never feel that need. Leave him to his and you to yours.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: HeyDude
Date: March 27, 2006 04:16AM
Over half the Gulf War vets (which have been) diagnosed with GW Syndrome are dead. That is a VA fact.

They may have been exposed to chemicals which mixed together in their bodies to harm them. They may have exposed themselves to DU walking around their own battlefield. They may have succumbed to the P-tabs which they were required to take. Or they may have gotten blood-born diseases from Desert Sandflies, alien to Western immunities.

No one knows what the magic bullet is. I think it is the combination of toxins that has done it. Just as combination therapy has the best result in cancer treatments, wouldn't it also hold that combination poisons produce more severe effects upon the human body?

You work in toxic cleanup? Gulf War vets worked in waste that wasn't cleaned up. I lived in sewage-saturated sand for 8 months. Mix in with that burning oil fumes, oil-rain, un-tested vaccines, vermin exposure (local disease carriers), and being pulse-radiated by ATC radar every 20 seconds [34,560 high energy pulses - cumulative effect?]

GW trooops are being exposed to alot more than you, and they are doing it in the open, under extremes of temperature and humidity.

There is no such thing as a proper public health study for GW troops(You can't duplicate the conditions). It isn't the research that is bad, it is the failure of government to take responsiblity for making us lab rats.


davester Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I know nothing about the other citees in the
> article. However, since the article quotes Moret
> as an "expert", obviously little care was taken in
> researching sources so the entire article in
> highly suspect and therefore USELESS! There is no
> point in going further if the research is so bad.
> Clearly, DU present a possible toxics problem, but
> without a proper public health study, simple
> statements about "increased levels of cancer and
> birth defects" mean NOTHING!! I work every day in
> the toxics cleanup field and I've seen more
> garbage written about DU and other radiological
> contaminants than anything else. You of all
> people need to learn to heed my sig.
>
> -----------------------------------------
> "It is all too easy to derive endless strings of
> interesting-looking but untrue or irrelevant
> formulae instead of checking the validity of the
> initial premises" John Ziman (Reliable Knowledge)
>
>
>
> Edited 1 times. Last edit at 03/24/06 12:23PM by
> davester.






Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2006 04:22AM by HeyDude.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Depleted Uranium For Dummies
Posted by: Refurbvirgin
Date: March 27, 2006 10:55AM
RgrF Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone has their own way of expressing defiance
> when they feel the need. Some never feel that
> need. Leave him to his and you to yours.

If you saw a little kid playing with blasting caps would your response be the same? When does "expressing defiance" become a greater value to you than expressing concern about another human being causing possible harm to themselves? Most likely he's not harming himself, but as we've found sometimes experts are wrong. Better to err on the side of caution. If it's not necessary to keep the DU on his desk why are you defending his action?





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2006 10:57AM by Refurbvirgin.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 346
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 2330 on October 25, 2018