DU: Gotta love increased rates of deformity/immune system disorders!

2007-01-10 03:34:12

#1

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6581

I admittedly have but a superficial level of knowledge about depleted uranium and its effects but from what I can gather I think the use of this material for military projectiles should be banned or restricted under international law. It's on a par with chemical and biological weapons: the 'beauty' being that the effects won't be evident until several years later. What say you?

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-01-10 03:37:18)

2007-01-10 03:35:10

#2

TeamZephyr: Maintaining My Rage Since 1975; +124|6555|Hillside, Melbourne, Australia

Ban it now.

2007-01-10 03:38:45

#3

LockerFish: Member; +47|6732

Don't scavenge from busted tanks then. Now you're golden.

2007-01-10 03:41:22

#4

EVieira: Member; +105|6504|Lutenblaag, Molvania

I also don't know exactly the effects of depleted uranium, but if its harmful then wouldn't the military personel who handle these things be exposed alot more to them than their enemy? I mean, tanks and chopper crews are around this stuff everyday, and I don't think they wear rad suits...

"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

2007-01-10 04:04:34

#5

.:XDR:.PureFodder: Member; +105|6855

While they're at it they can ban white phosphorus too. Chemical weapons by any other name.....

2007-01-10 04:15:23

#6

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6581

EVieira wrote:
I also don't know exactly the effects of depleted uranium, but if its harmful then wouldn't the military personel who handle these things be exposed alot more to them than their enemy? I mean, tanks and chopper crews are around this stuff everyday, and I don't think they wear rad suits...

Part of Gulf War I syndrome has been an increased level of instances of troops succombing to immune system disorders, typical of exposure to radiation.

2007-01-10 04:42:36

#7

The Last Black Winegum: Mmmm! Winegums; +52|6631|Lancashire, UK

EVieira wrote:
I also don't know exactly the effects of depleted uranium, but if its harmful then wouldn't the military personel who handle these things be exposed alot more to them than their enemy? I mean, tanks and chopper crews are around this stuff everyday, and I don't think they wear rad suits...

Isn't it the Dust from after these weapons have been fired that is dangerous? If so, they probably wouldn't be dangerous to carry as munitions but it would be dangerous to be in the area where they have been used. It's the aftereffects.

2007-01-10 06:09:25

#8

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6607|SE London

I think the use of DU should be restricted. But banning it might be going a bit far. I'm against banning normalish weapons on the battlefield. DU isn't that bad, just don't go messing about with it and you'll be fine.

At the rate people want to ban different types of modern weapons they'll be banning bullets next.

2007-01-10 06:12:38

#9

112505: Member; +5|6346

If it kills the enemy faster than use it.

2007-01-10 06:16:34

#10

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6575|UK

112505 wrote:
If it kills the enemy faster than use it.

Sort of inclined to agree, if its effective in dealing with an agressing force then to hell with them.

Martyn

2007-01-10 06:18:50

#11

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|6581

Bell wrote:
112505 wrote:
If it kills the enemy faster than use it.
Sort of inclined to agree, if its effective in dealing with an agressing force then to hell with them.

Martyn

Tell that to the Bosnians and Serbs, whose children have been born with deformities. The effects of the weaponry outlive the enemy...

2007-01-10 06:22:57

#12

krazed: Admiral of the Bathtub; +619|6805|Great Brown North

somehow i doubt if another nation was peppering your country with as much what gets sprayed around, i doubt you would be inclined to agree. tactical nukes would kill the enemy faster, why not use those? same effects just alot faster and more severe.

Last edited by krazed (2007-01-10 06:23:39)

2007-01-10 06:28:47

#13

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6575|UK

CameronPoe wrote:
Bell wrote:
112505 wrote:
If it kills the enemy faster than use it.
Sort of inclined to agree, if its effective in dealing with an agressing force then to hell with them.

Martyn
Tell that to the Bosnians and Serbs, whose children have been born with deformities. The effects of the weaponry outlive the enemy...

Basically........Tough, I didnt do it, or have any control so I have nothing to be ashamed about. I was meaning more to the extent of, e.g a challenger 2 tank, firing a DU round into an enemy vehicle. Rather than huge scale.

Martyn

2007-01-10 06:40:56

#14

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6555|Global Command

krazed wrote:
somehow i doubt if another nation was peppering your country with as much what gets sprayed around, i doubt you would be inclined to agree. tactical nukes would kill the enemy faster, why not use those? same effects just alot faster and more severe.

Stand by for tactical nukes.

2007-01-10 06:59:31

#15

Pug: UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate; +652|6568|Texas - Bigger than France

CameronPoe wrote:
Part of Gulf War I syndrome has been an increased level of instances of troops succombing to immune system disorders, typical of exposure to radiation.

DU is one of many possible causes of the GW Syndrome. However - the Gulf War syndrome is weird. Its not strictly immune system disorders, its a whole slew of different unrelated symptoms, some which have been cured, some which are lingering.

The GW symptom list is ridiculously long, but suffers only have one or two of the symptoms - headaches, immune system, bowel issues, sleep patterns, imsomnia, skin coloration, dizziness, hair loss, etc etc etc. So what I think is that someone ought to try to splinter the GW syndrome to specific illnesses to determine cause, and stop throwing the entire "unknown illness" catagory into the GW syndrome category.

2007-01-10 09:19:55

#16

oug: Calmer than you are.; +380|6545|Πάϊ

Steel wrote:
if we ban the use of DU...... then where do we toss our garbage???
you must admit you don't want it in your back yard..........
So shooting it at your enemy's makes the best sense, don't you agree???

lol you're probably joking but there's people who actually believe that!^^

ps: for greater laughs place the above next to posts complaining about how cowardly and unfair the insurgents are for using guerrilla tactics and not standing and fighting like men blah blah blah

ps2: no matter how harmful to both parties, DUs will never be abolished. They're way too expensive and thus one of the prime sources of income for arms dealers.

_ƒ³

2007-01-10 09:49:41

#17

Pug: UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate; +652|6568|Texas - Bigger than France

My thoughts on this is it's just like another weapon:
Lasting affects: It's like mines that get left behind. Bombs that don't explode. The battleships at Pearl Harbor are still leaking oil. Chemical components within missiles stick around for a time afterward. But it goes away with time. DU dust gets spread out within (days, weeks, months??? but not years) to safer levels - immediate lung exposure to the dust can't be good for you, but I would imagine it would be similar to exposing yourself to the remnants of a battle immediately afterwards.

Killing the enemy: Weapons kill quickly. I don't see why it's not fair to kill people immediately with DU rounds.

But on a side note, the US is using tungsten now instead.

2007-01-10 10:15:30

#18

BVC: Member; +325|6721

Ban the stuff. Its like dumping nuclear/toxic waste and calling it a weapon, really. And the dust is bad.

2007-01-10 10:33:21

#19

RicardoBlanco: The English; +177|6594|Oxford

Ban it.

https://tuberose.com/Graphics/Depleted%20Uranium%20Baby.1.jpg

2007-01-10 14:30:50

#20

BN: smells like wee wee; +159|6793

If going into Iraq was to help the people why then are the coalition using DU?

DU will last 100 year min. Its gets in the soil, water, food chain and then you're fucked.

2007-01-10 14:35:47

#21

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6797|PNW

CameronPoe wrote:
EVieira wrote:
I also don't know exactly the effects of depleted uranium, but if its harmful then wouldn't the military personel who handle these things be exposed alot more to them than their enemy? I mean, tanks and chopper crews are around this stuff everyday, and I don't think they wear rad suits...
Part of Gulf War I syndrome has been an increased level of instances of troops succombing to immune system disorders, typical of exposure to radiation.

Since when did the US military really give two flying shits about their men? They sat them in front of nuclear weapons tests, on our fucking homeland for that matter (you'll notice they didn't bomb the shit out of the east coast...). But I voted yes. When unretrieved chunks of this stuff are poisoning the people and unborn children you're trying to liberate, and the troops who are doing so, then it's time to reevaluate the situation.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2007-01-10 14:38:18)

2007-01-10 14:55:55

#22

usmarine2007: Banned; +374|6393|Columbus, Ohio

No.

2007-01-10 14:57:16

#23

KEN-JENNINGS: I am all that is MOD!; +2,973|6658|949

It's not just GW syndrome. I agree with Pug in his assertion that DU is much like unexploded ordnance - It is deadly for years to come. However, unlike unexploded ordnance, the effects of DU are much more drawn out. I firmly believe that deadly and/or radioactive toxins should not be used in any type of weapons system. As expressed previously, not only do these weapons hurt innocent bystanders, they affect the generations for years to come. There is no excuse for the US and other Armed Forces to be using this sort of weaponry.

2007-01-10 16:53:19

#24

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6431|North Carolina

RicardoBlanco wrote:
Ban it.

http://tuberose.com/Graphics/Depleted%2 … Baby.1.jpg

That is one twisted picture, but I can't help but think of... "Timmy! Timma-Timmy!"

2007-01-15 07:39:07

#25

krazed: Admiral of the Bathtub; +619|6805|Great Brown North

Turquoise wrote:
RicardoBlanco wrote:
Ban it.

http://tuberose.com/Graphics/Depleted%2 … Baby.1.jpg
That is one twisted picture, but I can't help but think of... "Timmy! Timma-Timmy!"

as bad as it is.... so did i :S

Yes	53%	53% - 45
No	33%	33% - 28
Go fuck yourself	13%	13% - 11
Total: 84

BF2S Forums DU: Gotta love increased rates of deformity/immune system disorders!

Poll

EVieira wrote:

EVieira wrote:

112505 wrote:

Bell wrote:

112505 wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Bell wrote:

112505 wrote:

krazed wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Steel wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

EVieira wrote:

RicardoBlanco wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

RicardoBlanco wrote:

Board footer