PDA

View Full Version : ‘worse’ than Hiroshima, Nagasaki



Qtec
07-25-2010, 05:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Study: Fallujah’s health fallout ‘worse’ than Hiroshima, Nagasaki

By Stephen C. Webster
Saturday, July 24th, 2010 -- 2:27 pm
submit to reddit Stumble This!
180Share
29diggsdigg

'Mutagenic and carcinogenic agents' blamed for soaring infant mortality, cancers

fallujahbirthdefects Study:

Fallujahs health fallout worse than Hiroshima, NagasakiIn Fallujah, a city just 50 miles from Baghdad, life has never been the same since April 2004, when U.S. Marines declared the entire area a free-fire zone and proceeded to do what Marines do best. Packing the most destructive weaponry in the world, American soldiers laid siege to the city, deploying depleted uranium munitions, white phosphorus and tons of conventional ballistics.

Operation Vigilant Resolve went on for a full month. Though U.S. forces allowed an estimated 70,000 women, children and elderly leave the city, to this day the campaign to recapture Fallujah is beset with allegations of war crimes.

In the wake of America's "shock and awe" bombing campaign to take Baghdad, radiation detectors as far away as the United Kingdom noticed a fourfold spike in radioactivity in the atmosphere. At the time, the Department of Defense bragged that the substance, a nuclear byproduct with a fraction of the radioactivity as standard uranium, is commonly ingested by Americans, in food, drinking water and the air, allegedly with no ill effects. Officials went on to say its use would cause "no impact on the health of people and the environment."

Today, according to a study by the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health [PDF link], rates of cancer, leukemia, infant mortality and sexual mutations in Fallujah are higher than those reported in the aftermath of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki nuclear detonations. </div></div> link (http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0724/study-health-effects-felt-fallujah-widespread-nuking-hiroshima-nagasaki/)


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">During the conflict A10 “tankbuster” planes — which use munitions containing depleted uranium — fired 300,000 rounds. The substance — dubbed a “silver bullet” because of its ability to pierce heavy tank armour — is controversial because of its potential effect on human health. Critics say it is chemically toxic and can cause cancer, and Iraqi doctors reported a marked rise in cancer cases after it was used in the first Gulf conflict.

The American and British governments say depleted uranium is relatively harmless, however. The Royal Society, the UK’s academy of science, has also said the risk from depleted uranium is “very low” for soldiers and people in a conflict zone.

Busby’s report shows that within nine days of the start of the Iraq war on March 19, 2003, higher levels of uranium were picked up on five sites in Berkshire. On two occasions, levels exceeded the threshold at which the Environment Agency must be informed, though within safety limits. The report says weather conditions over the war period showed a consistent flow of air from Iraq northwards. </div></div> link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article732523.ece)

Q

Chopstick
07-25-2010, 09:28 AM
Well now there's a news flash. Bombs and bullets are unhealthy. How is an anti-tank projectile supposed to be environmentally safe? After all these are the people that were giving out $25,000 for any family that murdered a Jew.

LWW
07-25-2010, 10:34 AM
Here is a glimpse at the Fallujah which the far left believes should have been allowed to continue:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">(CBS) U.S. commanders say their door to door patrols have uncovered nearly two dozen houses of horror in the back streets of Fallujah, reports CBS News Correspondent Lee Cowan.

"The face of Satan was here in Fallujah, and I'm absolutely convinced that that was true," said Lt. Col. Gareth Brandl, with the U.S. Marines.

The rooms were found by Marines following trails of dried blood, or the smell of death. Some rooms were hidden behind fake walls, or concealed in basements.

Residents told troops they only knew the torture chambers were there because they could hear the screams at night.

"We found numerous houses, also, where people were just chained to a wall for extended periods of time," said U.S. military intelligence officer Major Jim West.

Marines believe they found the place where British hostage Kenneth Bigley was caged before being beheaded, and others where American hostages could have been held. </div></div>

&gt;&gt;&gt;HAVE THEY NO RESPECT FOR HUMANITY&lt;&lt;&lt; (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/eveningnews/main657134.shtml)

LWW

Qtec
07-25-2010, 08:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well now there's a news flash. Bombs and bullets are unhealthy. </div></div>

Sure, they are meant to kill a target but are they also to be used to kill those not yet born or conceived?
Babies born with huge heads, two heads, no head........I can provide the link but its not a pretty sight.

Agent Orange? Ever heard of it?

You can't take the high ground when you are as cruel as the enemy.

Q

Chopstick
07-26-2010, 01:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well now there's a news flash. Bombs and bullets are unhealthy. </div></div>

Sure, they are meant to kill a target but are they also to be used to kill those not yet born or conceived?
Babies born with huge heads, two heads, no head........I can provide the link but its not a pretty sight.

Agent Orange? Ever heard of it?

You can't take the high ground when you are as cruel as the enemy.

Q </div></div>

Well, I sincerely doubt that those pictures are real and if so, they were certainly not caused by depleted uranium anti-tank rounds as the article above appears to claim. They are kinetic weapons. They do not explode. They are only slightly radioactive and they do not morph into a higher level of radioactive excitation when fired. All of the depleted uranium on earth combined would not amount to a fraction of the radiation that was applied to Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Why don't the soldiers that handle the munitions every day have babies with two heads? Why aren't there any two headed babies in Kosovo or Kuwait?

The US is phasing them out anyway. We have stuff that works much better now. The Europeans continue to use them though. War is always going to be a messy business with unforeseeable consequences no matter what weapon is used.

LWW
07-26-2010, 01:26 PM
Please cease and desist from using logic to combat emotion based arguments.

LWW

Qtec
07-26-2010, 09:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">There's a lot of controversy about the use of depleted uranium munitions, because people are afraid of the environmental effects on the countries that have been shot up with them. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>If they stayed intact there really wouldn't be much to worry about. But they don't stay intact, they vaporize on impact,</span> and this turns out to have a huge impact on their potential for harm. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The radiation from uranium is largely of a type that does not penetrate skin much past the outer layer of dead cells, and hence is not particularly harmful if it's outside of you. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>But if you inhale particles of such an alpha emitter, the radiation gets direct access to sensitive cells in the lungs and can do a great deal of damage. Outside the body, alpha emitters are the least hazardous form of radioactive materials, and hence DU rounds, intact, pose little danger to, for example, the people shooting them. But inside the body, they are the most dangerous.</span> </div></div>

Q

LWW
07-27-2010, 12:44 AM
From the World Health Organization:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><u><span style='font-size: 17pt'>POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS OF EXPOSURE TO DEPLETED URANIUM</span></u>

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.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>No reproductive or developmental effects have been reported in humans.</span></div></div>

&gt;&gt;&gt;MYTH SLAIN&lt;&lt;&lt; (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/)

Next?

LWW

Chopstick
07-27-2010, 11:13 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>If they stayed intact there really wouldn't be much to worry about. But they don't stay intact, they vaporize on impact,</span> and this turns out to have a huge impact on their potential for harm. </div></div></div></div>

Yes, they do vaporize. The same way the copper rounds do, at <span style='font-size: 17pt'>7000 degrees</span>. Yes if you inhale it, you will have a problem but you won't have to worry a birth defect.