Israel using depleted Uranium on civilians. Rightwing assholes yawn in apathy

yes, i lob doo doo on radioactive particles.

where's Strife?

It's used in Bunker Busting Bombs --which are missles.

Bombs are not missiles, Kendra. The GBU is laser-guided, but that's just to steer the tailfins. Furthermore, the GBU-28 and the BLU-113 neither one use DU. The GBU-37 is a more recent development by the US (reportedly used in Afghanistan but that's according to anti-war sites of questionable credibility) and I sincerely doubt that the Israelis even have any.

Airborne DU dust has the toxicity of asbestos, to give you an idea of what we're talking about. We're not talking about irradiating an entire countryside -- an assertion even WHO has denied.

Airborne DU dust has the toxicity of asbestos, to give you an idea of what we're talking about.

It's used in Bunker Busting Bombs --which are missles.

If you fire it at something it's a missle. Bullets are also missles. So are rocks and bits of paper at the end of a plastic straw.

If you want to use the very strict dictionary definition, even rocks can be "missiles". But in military parlance, if it isn't self-propelled and guided, it's not a missile. If it's self-propelled and unguided (like the Katyushas), it's a rocket.

And in neither case are GBUs missiles. They are bombs. Guided bombs.

The military also calls dead babies "collateral damage", so I tend to use actual definitions instead of propogandist claptrap.

The military also calls dead babies "collateral damage", so I tend to use actual definitions instead of propogandist claptrap.

The military also calls dead babies "collateral damage", so I tend to use actual definitions instead of propogandist claptrap.

Depleted uranium

Exposure to uranium and depleted uranium

* A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report giving field measurements taken around selected impact sites in Kosovo (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) indicates that contamination by DU in the environment was localized to a few tens of metres around impact sites. Contamination by DU dusts of local vegetation and water supplies was found to be extremely low. Thus, the probability of significant exposure to local populations was considered to be very low.
* Levels of DU may exceed background levels of uranium close to DU contaminating events. Over the days and years following such an event, the contamination normally becomes dispersed into the wider natural environment by wind and rain. People living or working in affected areas may inhale contaminated dusts or consume contaminated food and drinking water.

Intake of depleted uranium

* Average annual intakes of uranium by adults are estimated to be about 0.5mg (500 μg) from ingestion of food and water and 0.6 μg from breathing air.
* Ingestion of small amounts of DU contaminated soil by small children may occur while playing.
* Contact exposure of DU through the skin is normally very low and unimportant.
* Intake from wound contamination or embedded fragments in skin tissues may allow DU to enter the systemic circulation.

Absorption of depleted uranium

* About 98% of uranium entering the body via ingestion is not absorbed, but is eliminated via the faeces. Typical gut absorption rates for uranium in food and water are about 2% for soluble and about 0.2% for insoluble uranium compounds.
* The fraction of uranium absorbed into the blood is generally greater following inhalation than following ingestion of the same chemical form. The fraction will also depend on the particle size distribution. For some soluble forms, more than 20% of the inhaled material could be absorbed into blood.
* Of the uranium that is absorbed into the blood, approximately 70% will be filtered by the kidney and excreted in the urine within 24 hours; this amount increases to 90% within a few days.

Potential health effects of exposure to depleted uranium

* In the kidneys, the proximal tubules (the main filtering component of the kidney) are considered to be the main site of potential damage from chemical toxicity of uranium. There is limited information from human studies indicating that the severity of effects on kidney function and the time taken for renal function to return to normal both increase with the level of uranium exposure.
* In a number of studies on uranium miners, an increased risk of lung cancer was demonstrated, but this has been attributed to exposure from radon decay products. Lung tissue damage is possible leading to a risk of lung cancer that increases with increasing radiation dose. However, because DU is only weakly radioactive, very large amounts of dust (on the order of grams) would have to be inhaled for the additional risk of lung cancer to be detectable in an exposed group. Risks for other radiation-induced cancers, including leukaemia, are considered to be very much lower than for lung cancer.
* Erythema (superficial inflammation of the skin) or other effects on the skin are unlikely to occur even if DU is held against the skin for long periods (weeks).
* No consistent or confirmed adverse chemical effects of uranium have been reported for the skeleton or liver.
* No reproductive or developmental effects have been reported in humans.
* Although uranium released from embedded fragments may accumulate in the central nervous system (CNS) tissue, and some animal and human studies are suggestive of effects on CNS function, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from the few studies reported.

The military also calls dead babies "collateral damage", so I tend to use actual definitions instead of propogandist claptrap.

Maybe I'm wrong, but it sounds as alarming as industrial pollutants. Not good stuff, but not as awful as it's been made to sound on this thread, either.

Also, if "No reproductive or developmental effects have been reported in humans," how does that jibe with the Hooch's photos?

You sound like someone I heard on the abortion thread.

Except I'm actually talking about real babies like this one:




not embryos like this one:

Industrial pollutants don't have a half-life of 4.5 billion years though.

Can I borrow your forum posting ability?

Maybe I'm wrong, but it sounds as alarming as industrial pollutants. Not good stuff, but not as awful as it's been made to sound on this thread, either.

Also, if "No reproductive or developmental effects have been reported in humans," how does that jibe with the Hooch's photos?

It could be worse, they could be using lead. Most journalists are pretty bad at reporting on anything containing science, but that article was exceptionally bad.

It could be worse, they could be using lead. Most journalists are pretty bad at reporting on anything containing science, but that article was exceptionally bad.

Radiation bad, Og not like radiation.

I can't stand the Bush league, but please say that there is some alternative besides this.

That website also hosts articles about how Zomg! homosexuals are subverting morality and how the Illuminati continue to rule. My husband looked at the site last night and came across a mention there about how "global bankers" are behind all that's wrong.

Global bankers... hm... whoever could he mean by that???