Is Bush microwaving Iraqis?

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I imagine that everyone of you wireless phone users gets many times the radiation every time you yak on the phone. Why aren't you all running around commenting upon the war crimes Nokia is commiting? A bit of bias maybe?

While the irradiation from a mobile phone is much higher, it's of a different kind. Specifically, it's not ionizing, so you're comparing apples and oranges.

(Note that this doesn't say that the radiation from DU is more dangerous anymore than noting that apples aren't oranges measn they're poisonous.)

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Battel Corp completed a study which was requested by the US Congress in order to seporate scientific facts from media induced fiction. What did the study say? First that the level of radiation in DU in so low that it is just barely higher then the natural background radiation we all experience just walking around; you recieve orders of magnitude more exposure getting an X-Ray.

Such a claim is contested by other groups, IIRC UCS being one of them. So it's not like that's a cut and dry fact.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by techumseh
Wasn't Gulf War Syndrome caused by DU?

There´s some debate regarding this. There is, however, no conclusive evidence AFAIK.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by BlackCat


Check your history books one more time - it was Aug 9 nagasaki was hit.

Oh, yeah. Sorry...

[realpolitic]

Here's an article that claims reports that 2000 tons of DU were exaggerrated, only 200 tons were used. Whether it's 4,000,000 pounds or 400,000 pounds that's a lot of cancer.

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=148

As with most con rants, it pushes its claim so hard to distract the reader from the danger of 200 or 2000 tons of DU. Since the crux of the article is to distract from the claim that even 200 tons of DU would be dangerous, I tend to believe the 2000 ton number is right.

DU Disinfo Dupes Project Censored
Posted on 10 September 2005 by ICBUWby Jack Cohen-Joppa
Recently, Project Censored has brought attention to an important story. However, they did so by endorsing the unsubstantiated and alarmist views of an activist fringe.

Background
Project Censored picked “High Uranium Levels Found in Troops and Civilians” as the #4 most-censored story this year, citing the following:


• “Uranium Medical Research Centers Preliminary Findings from Afghanistan and Operation Enduring Freedom" and "Afghan Field Trip #2 Report: Precision Destruction - Indiscriminate Effects" by Tedd Weyman
• Scientists Uncover Radioactive Trail in Afghanistan, by Stephanie Hiller
• New York Daily News, April 5, 2004, "Poisoned?" by Juan Gonzalez
• Dissident Voice, March 2004, "There Are No Words… Radiation in Iraq equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs" by Bob Nichols
• "International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan At Tokyo, The People Vs. George Bush", Summary by Professor Ms. Niloufer Bhagwat

It’s like confusing a dime for a dollar. That’s the difference between the amount of depleted uranium in weapons the U.S. is known to have used in Iraq since the invasion of March, 2003 - bad enough at almost 200 tons - and 2,000 tons - a grossly exaggerated estimate accepted as fact by Project Censored.

Here's a picture of varius DU munitions, I would guess the smallest are bullet size, and probably are bullets. It would seem to me that the heavy duty shells are designed to piece tanks, and are in widespread use. While these shells aren't teribbly wide, they are many times longer than a bullet.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by realpolitic
Here's an article that claims reports that 2000 tons of DU were exaggerrated, only 200 tons were used. Whether it's 4,000,000 pounds or 400,000 pounds that's a lot of cancer.

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=148

As with most con rants, it pushes its claim so hard to distract the reader from the danger of 200 or 2000 tons of DU. Since the crux of the article is to distract from the claim that even 200 tons of DU would be dangerous, I tend to believe the 2000 ton number is right.

Guess that noone has has bothered to check out what DU really are - the word Uran is quite enough. Hearing this word people automatically are thinking about dangerous levels of radiation, but is that true ? No, DU are the remnants after REMOVING the interesting U-235 isotope and it isn't particularily radioactive. Actually you will find lots of uran in granite and dark sand (an indication of precences of heavy metals) which all are a source to what is called natural background radiation. Uran in itself isn't that dangerous unless you get a lot of dust in your lungs, then there are risks. The real danger from DU and the natural occurence are the the byproducts when they decays - especially radon has a high risk but only in buildings.

Some people seems to have fantasies about DU weapons, but they are totally wrong when they think that they in any way differs from ordinary munition. The ONLY reason to use DU in munition is that it is heavier and by this improves penetration of armour - there are no "radiation" effect. DU ammo is just standard ammo made of another material - i guess that the 105 mm howitzer made in 1942 i dragged around back in 79 without any problems could fire DU ammo if it existed.

The claim that "Whether it's 4,000,000 pounds or 400,000 pounds that's a lot of cancer" doesn't hold validity for a second.

Maybe it's just all lies, but check :

http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/faq_17apr.htm

[Odin]

The amount of radiation in DU is rediculously tiny; the risk of heavy metal poisoning is what is dangerous, not the radiation, the eco-nuts notwithstanding.

[man_guy_96]

your mums infectious LOLROFL WTFBBQ~!!!11

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
That article is funny. It doesn't actually provide evidence.

The CRIMINAL!

[Elok]

What the hell is this doing back up? Bumped exactly one year to the day after the last post...let it die.

[Zoid]

Apparently man_guy_96 had something really important to say

[C0ckney]

holy old thread revival, batman!

[MrFun]

I'm shocked that the Bush yes-men on Apolyton refuse to at least consider the possibility that there are serious violations of warfare!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Elok]

Oh, there could be and no doubt are. It's just that this particular war crime is comically implausible. Bush has plenty of people just sitting in Gitmo or elsewhere for him to test this on, without the obvious risk of discovery or hitting US troops. Assuming this is even feasible in theory, which doesn't sound too likely. Microwaves work in an oven because of the contained space, but even then they don't "irradiate," they just heat up the object via friction between water molecules. It sounds like a pretty lame weapon anyway.

[loinburger]

We are developing a microwave laser, but it's not so much for mind control (or whatever crap they were using microwaves for in the OP) as much as it's for inflicting pain.