Are you kidding? Remains of toxic bullets litter Iraq (By Scott Peterson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor )

"...Ms. Hamid's stand is just four paces away from a burnt-out Iraqi tank, destroyed by - and contaminated with - controversial American depleted-uranium (DU) bullets. Local children play "throughout the day" on the tank, Hamid says, and on another one across the road."

"No one has warned [Ms. Hamid] to keep the toxic and radioactive dust off her produce. The children haven't been told not to play with the radioactive debris. They gather around as a Geiger counter carried by a visiting reporter starts singing when it nears a DU bullet fragment no bigger than a pencil eraser. It registers nearly 1,000 times normal background radiation levels on the digital readout."

This stuff (DU) remains around long after it is used. Please educate yourself about it. I don't know for certain which weapons use DU, but a lot of it has been fired in Iraq during both wars.

"Also, since when were the living conditions great before we got there?" The answer is yes, before you got there, before sanctions crippled their economy. Ever since then, not so great.

@raven: No offense taken.
@raven and twiddles:
I never meant that to be insensitive, but more of a "how-does-living-in-a-bad-house-give-you-cancer" sort of way. Unless I missed something (I'm not big on aircraft ordinance) but I thought a bunker buster was steel and explosives. How does that give you cancer?
Also, since when were the living conditions great before we got there?

The only depleted uranium in use that I know of is in the large-caliber Gatling guns that don't really see much use. And rougy, I never said our presence isn't what caused those deaths. But once again, thanks for the personal attacks. Those always make a mature conversation so much fun.

"And since when did people get cancer from living in a shitty house?"

That's seems to be a rather insensative statement. Facts show that we can expect the rates of cancer to increase due to the use of depleted uranium just as it has before. Their "shitty" living conditions are a direct result of our sanctions and then going in there and blowing up their world.

It is wonderful that some of the military take time to play with the Iraqi children. But how will that child feel tomorrow when some indiscriminate fire or faulty intelligence maimes or takes the life of his mother, his sister, his brother? The child is happy now, but the longer the troops remain the greater the chance that the boy will begin to hate them.

Enjoy the video for what it is, not as a chance to mock people who don't believe what you believe.

forget about a statistic, then, if it doesn't suit your understanding.

if you want to simply talk about what 'we' did, how about the egregious collateral impact on the iraqi economy and environment? the historic and cultural losses from opportunistic ethnic cleansings and museum lootings?

depleted uranium?

no jobs? educational opportunities? water?

More then a "nil" percent will die of cancer from unacceptable living conditions.

And playing with kids is a good thing, instead of teasing them with water. No doubt. FOr reaLS.

Human flesh cooks much like pork. It doesn't need to be aged as long as beef, once the blood is drained out, 6-8 days of aging in a cool room is sufficient. Because humans are omnivorous, the flesh is a bit drier and tends to be tougher- it is best to select vegetarian or vegan humans for consumption.

Obviously the more tender cuts such as the loin will be prefered, but be sure to cook to an internal temperature of at least 150 degrees fahrenheit or medium. The larger muscles such as the glutes tend to be stringy, and can benefit from brining. These cuts are best for slow, moist heat cooking such as in a stew or a braise.

Because the federal government of most countries does not inspect human meat, be sure that your supplier is reliable and sanitary, and selects only the healthiest humans for harvest. As with all mammals, humans should be in a relaxed state when slaughtered, as adrenaline in the muscles converts the sugars into atpdepletes the muscles lactic acid after death which has a bitter taste causing a tougher meat which spoils more readily.

"Either intelligence was incorrect and bad decisions were made as a result of it, or the president knowing concocted a plan to frame a foreign country for personal gain and has been managing to manipulate his way out of being caught by Democrats that have absolutley nothing but pure hated for him. I think given past evidence of our president's public speaking ability and general intelligence level, I'm going with option A."

I suggest option C:
The president's TEAM (let's not forget cheyney, rumsfeld, etc) told the world that Iraq was an imminent threat (nukes in 45 minutes) and somehow connected with 9/11 (because preemptive war is illegal), in order to further their own financial interests and increase their political power, because they are just plain greedy, as unprincipled as the Democrats who are afraid to oppose him, being as they are just the other side of a dirty coin.

The "extreme" reaction of people like rougy is barely equivalent to the extremity of rolling into a sovereign nation, protecting the oil ministry, building huge permanent bases, torturing innocents to gain false information to go and kill other innocents, employing thousands of mercenaries outside the law, awarding huge sums of money to US companies for reconstruction projects that never happen, arming terrorists with unmarked weapons that get "lost" and dropping depleted uranium on school playgrounds with no electricity or running water.

The fact that you have seen some positive things in Iraq doesn't begin to outweigh the outrageousness of this war. The fact that "fixing" saddam might have been an honourable thing to do doesn't make up for the fact that it was done dishonourably and there was no realistic plan for replacing him, and now the world has lost patience with America and your dollar is fucked.

I don't hate soldiers, I marched in the street to try and stop you being sent there.

LOL!! Please put this in the Truthiness Collective..

Excerpt from above:

The modern liberal will invariably side with evil over good, wrong over right, and the behaviors that lead to failure over those that lead to success. Give the modern liberal the choice between Saddam Hussein and the United States, he will not only side with Saddam Hussein, he will slander America and Americans in order to do so. Given the choice between the vicious, mass-murdering, corrupt terrorist dictator Yasser Arafat, and the tiny and wonderful democracy of Israel, he will plagiarize maps, forge documents, engage in blood libels, as did our former President, Jimmy Carter, to side with a terrorist organization, and to attack the tiny state.

First of all Saddam is about American as any foreign ruler gets. Trained, supported, funded, armed, put into power by.... ???

Secondly, Israel is "tiny and wonderful". You know everything has two sides of a story. I'm sure a few Palestinians have a different view on Israel and their human rights abuses, but hey, they must be sub-human so they don't count. They are not one our side, so children in Iraq or Gaza really don't matter. Helpless Iraqi children living in depleted uranium soil and millions of rounds containing lead and other heavy metals, but who really cares, cause you are "helping" them and their country, right? You know what is best. To not continue helping them would be "bad".

Truth, beauty, honesty... that's his principals. So the Heritage Folks are pro-war, pro-unitary executive. They are pro-torture. They believe in Bush's policies.

QM:

Please tell me which of these fall into which category (good or evil) and then ask yourself if this is a 'liberal' ideal or conservative ideal (At least the modern conservative that approves of Bush's reaches of power).

- [torture (MCA)] or [Geneva Convention]
- [domestic spying] or [FISA and following existing laws]
- [secret military tribunals] or [habeas corpus]
- [unjustified war for oil] or [balanced budget, money for education, health care, economy, or tax cuts]


Ask yourself WHO IS THE ONE THAT IS INDOCTRINATED? Someone that is a critical thinker and believes (based on facts and evidence) that the US invaded Iraq primarily in the name of oil or at least indefinite control of the region to ensure future access to oil. Or someone that believes anything about "bringing democracy to Iraqis". Who is the one eliminating rational thought?

Is Democracy worth bringing to people if they have to live as refuges, kicked out of their ancestral homes, living with 1 hour of electricity, no water, and constant killings and bombings in their formerly peaceful village. What did we bring to Iraqis? Can you honestly really believe it is all their fault? Are the Iraqis so sub-human in your mind that you cannot imagine all humans are pretty close to similar and their lives or probably of equal value.

Sayer: There is no standard to them, because a standard would require them to say that something is better than something else, which goes against this entire philosophy.

I'm sorry that you need to believe that you are better than others. That your ideas are superior and need to be imposed on other by gov't. That your religion is the correct one. That your nation is always correct and proper and the good guys. And everything is us vs. them. And you "know" which is better and right. You are correct that I'm not as naive and such a small thinker as you are. This guy really is your ideological hero.

To really understand the issue one needs to know how DU is used, mostly as a kinetic force penetrator in ammunition. DU is very dense; at 19050 kg/m³, it is almost 70% denser than lead, thus a given weight of it has a smaller diameter than an equivalent lead projectile, with less aerodynamic drag and deeper penetration due to a higher pressure at point of impact. DU projectile ordnance is often incendiary because of its pyrophoric property.

So upon impact the DU tip vaporises and spreads into the air, since DU rounds usually hit a combustible target and there is a subsequent explosion the spread of the material is wide. This was all covered after Gulf War when DU first started getting used widely and created the now commonly known Gulf War Sickness or Balkans War Sickness.

Various goverment studies keep pushing the question back and forth between goverment committees as the issue of exposure, since no scientific based way can be worked about how DU gets into the human system, so some reports say there is too little to cause harm and others say it depends on exposure and the issue basically starts to revolve on how people get it into their system, how much is lethal, etc etc.

At the end of the day the fact is that even though we have various treaties prevent the use of chemically and biological arms, DU is not covered within any of them, and the issue is such that nothing can really be done until a treaty can be worked out on DU usage. That is not likely to happen anytime soon. The US, France, UK and other nations actively use DU as the cheapest form of kinetic penetrator known to man, and shot down various treaties designed to go against the usage of DU.

Regarding this debate, the above mentioned working paper published in 2002 by the United Nations Sub-Commission on Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, at paragraph 171 under the title "Moratorium" reads:

“Considering the disturbing reports on the ill effects of DU weapons in the Gulf and the Balkans, it is saddening to note that so far appeals for a moratorium coming from different quarters have not yet prevailed. Killing first and asking questions later has, however, never been a sensible solution.

Ironically

Aircraft may also contain depleted uranium trim weights (a Boeing 747-100 may contain 400 to 1,500 kg). This application of DU is controversial. If an aircraft crashes there is concern that the uranium would enter the environment: the metal can oxidize to a fine powder in a fire. Its use has been phased out in many newer aircraft; Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas discontinued using DU counterweights in the 1980s.

Clearly when used in ammunition it doesn't catch fire... The NATO countries of France, the United Kingdom and the United States have consistently rejected calls for a ban, maintaining that its use continues to be legal, and that the health risks are entirely unsubstantiated. The UK government further alleges that cancers and birth defects in Iraq could be blamed on the Iraqi Government's use of chemical weapons on its own citizens.

There was an interesting discussion over at:
http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=67401

I'm still a bit skeptical. I mean come on, a regular old lead round has a similar toxic effect if it enters your body. Maybe we should contract Nerf to make our weapons.

Depleted uranium is not a significant health hazard unless it is taken into the body. External exposure to radiation from depleted uranium is generally not a major concern because the alpha particles emitted by its isotopes travel only a few centimeters in air or can be stopped by a sheet of paper. Also, the uranium-235 that remains in depleted uranium emits only a small amount of low-energy gamma radiation. However, if allowed to enter the body, depleted uranium, like natural uranium, has the potential for both chemical and radiological toxicity with the two important target organs being the kidneys and the lungs.
http://web.ead.anl.gov/uranium/guide/depletedu/health/index.cfm

Now look at lead:

Lead is a very strong poison. When a person swallows a lead object or inhales lead dust, some of the poison can stay in the body and cause serious health problems. A single high, toxic dose of lead can cause severe emergency symptoms. However, it is more common for lead poisoning to build up slowly over time. This occurs from repeated exposure to small amounts of lead. In this case, there may not be any obvious symptoms, but the lead can still cause serious health problems over time, such as difficulty sleeping or lowered IQ in children.
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002473.htm

Maybe we should just think a little harder about not going to war in the first place.

From an Australian Parlimentary proceeding regarding the Lancelin Defence Training Area. It's kinda funny Rokke gets hit pretty hard.
http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/hansard/hans35.nsf/451a59fb51257dd248256c85002bc738/d5a84c09a211cadd48256d8600336c20?OpenDocument

Leuren Moret "says she specializes in "the study of the damaging effects of low level radiation" - 3:35 min
- Look again at her education and ask if that makes any sense what so ever?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leuren_Moret
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Rokke

Depleted uranium (DU) was used in tank kinetic energy penetrator and autocannon rounds on a large scale for the first time in the Gulf War. DU munitions often burn when they impact a hard target, producing toxic combustion products. The toxicity, effects, distribution, and exposure involved have all been the subject of a lengthy and complex debate.

Because uranium is a heavy metal and chemical toxicant with nephrotoxic (kidney-damaging), teratogenic (birth defect-causing), and potentially carcinogenic properties, uranium exposure is associated with a variety of illnesses. The chemical toxicological hazard posed by uranium dwarfs its radiological hazard because it is only weakly radioactive, and depleted uranium even less so.

Early studies of depleted uranium aerosol exposure assumed that uranium combustion product particles would quickly settle out of the air and thus could not affect populations more than a few kilometers from target areas, and that such particles, if inhaled, would remain undissolved in the lung for a great length of time and thus could be detected in urine. Uranyl ion contamination has been found on and around depleted uranium targets.

DU has recently been recognized as a neurotoxin. In 2005, depleted uranium was shown to be a neurotoxin in rats.

In 2001, a study was published in Military Medicine that found DU in the urine of Gulf War veterans. Another study, published by Health Physics in 2004, also showed DU in the urine of Gulf War veterans. A study of UK veterans who thought they might have been exposed to DU showed aberrations in their white blood cell chromosomes. Mice immune cells exposed to uranium exhibit abnormalities.

Increases in the rate of birth defects for children born to Gulf War veterans have been reported. A 2001 survey of 15,000 U.S. Gulf War combat veterans and 15,000 control veterans found that the Gulf War veterans were 1.8 (fathers) to 2.8 (mothers) times as likely to report having children with birth defects. In early 2004, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service attributed birth defect claims from a February 1991 Gulf War combat veteran to depleted uranium poisoning.

In 2005, uranium metalworkers at a Bethlehem plant near Buffalo, New York, exposed to frequent occupational uranium inhalation risks, were alleged by non-scientific sources to have the same patterns of symptoms and illness as Gulf War Syndrome victims.

The NATO countries of France, the United Kingdom and the United States have consistently rejected calls for a ban, maintaining that its use continues to be legal, and that the health risks are entirely unsubstantiated. The UK government further alleges that cancers and birth defects in Iraq could be blamed on the Iraqi Government's use of chemical weapons on its own citizens.

"Considering the disturbing reports on the ill effects of DU weapons in the Gulf and the Balkans, it is saddening to note that so far appeals for a moratorium coming from different quarters have not yet prevailed. Killing first and asking questions later has, however, never been a sensible solution"

- United Nations Sub-Commission on Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, at paragraph 171 under the title "Moratorium" for the use of military DU rounds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Military_applications

EDIT - Unfortunately I don't see this issue being addressed by anyone soon, because pulling DU out of the entire military ammunition apparatus did not happen since 1991 and Gulf War Sickness when VA vets complained, and I don't see it happening now. This being all sickly ironic given that --

Aircraft may also contain depleted uranium trim weights (a Boeing 747-100 may contain 400 to 1,500 kg). This application of DU is controversial. If an aircraft crashes there is concern that the uranium would enter the environment: the metal can oxidize to a fine powder in a fire. Its use has been phased out in many newer aircraft; Boeing and McDonnell-Douglas discontinued using DU counterweights in the 1980s. Some amount of depleted uranium was released eg. during the Bijlmer disaster, when 152 kg was 'lost'. Counterweights are manufactured with cadmium plating and are considered non-hazardous while the plating is intact.

So unsafe in airplanes, safe in war zones. Huh.

aren't A10's fitted with depleted uranium rounds every x rounds, to this day? i don't think it's illegal per the Geneva convention, though I certainly disagree with the usage in this manner...

According to Wikipedia:

The gameplay of E.T. consists of maneuvering the fictional alien character E.T. through several screens to obtain the three pieces necessary to assemble a device to "phone home". The phone pieces can be obtained by finding them scattered randomly in various wells (pits) or the player can collect nine Reese's Pieces and then "call Elliot," who will then bring him a phone piece. Additionally, the player must avoid an FBI agent and scientist in pursuit. If the scientist catches E.T., the player is carried to the Washington D.C. screen, although a skillful player can escape just before the scientist carries E.T. to the next screen. If the FBI agent touches E.T., one phone piece will be confiscated and randomly hidden in one of the wells (if E.T. has no phone pieces, all Reese's Pieces that E.T. has collected will be confiscated and if E.T. is carrying nothing, there will be no penalty).

...

E.T. is also given a limited supply of energy and starts the game with 9999 points. Any action, including movement, depletes the energy. E.T. can use Reese's Pieces at an "eat candy" zone and press the button to replenish energy. If E.T. reaches zero energy, he will turn white and die. Three times per game, Elliot will then appear to revive E.T. by "merging" with him, letting the player continue with 1500 points. Locating and reviving a wilted flower adds an extra revival from Elliot. If E.T. dies more times than Elliot can revive him, the game ends.

Four of the six screens are riddled with wells of varying size that E.T. falls into if he gets too close, causing him to lose some energy. In order to get out, the player must levitate E.T. by pressing the controller button and tilting the joystick forward. Since phone pieces and wilted flowers are found at the bottom of wells, this often leads to the majority of the game consisting of players intentionally falling into wells in order to complete the round.

Once E.T. has all three phone pieces, the player may press the controller button at a "call ship zone." This causes a timer to appear and count down the time E.T. has to arrive at the landing zone in the forest. In most cases, E.T. cannot call his ship when a human is present (lower difficulty levels will allow it). Once the player finds the landing zone they may press the controller button again to call the ship. If no humans are present when the timer has run out, the ship will appear and pick E.T. up. This will end that round of play. The player is then given bonus points based on how many Reese's Pieces he has left and may continue playing for another round. Aside from bonus points earned, all rounds are functionally identical and do not increase in difficulty with play.

Remind anybody of anything?

I hope you two are right -- I'm no doomsday junkie; it's not as if I'm longing for the day when it all falls apart etc etc. That said, just because there are theoretical solutions out there (for some, not all, of the problems an oil crash would pose) does not mean they can or will be ramped up in time. As for the standpoint that the market will automatically solve the problem, what about the fact that the market is petroleum-based?

I know a guy who isn't worried about the severe turmoil that oil depletion could cause (and which I think probably will cause). I asked him how he could be so sanguine about it and he said "we'll think of something, because we'll have no other option but to think of something". But just because it may come down to "sink or swim" does not mean that we will automatically manage to swim. We could be destroyed.

...more about the white otter (the even sleepier one), named Nyac:

Nyac has a long tale
By MATT KIELTYKA, 24 HOURS

The Vancouver Aquarium's eldest sea otter may seem no different from its furry companions, but Nyac has one amazing tale.

That's because she's one of the last remaining survivors of the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska 18 years ago.

As many as 5,000 otters were killed in the 1989 spill, but Nyac - then a six-month old pup - was saved by a group of veterinarians and taken to the Vancouver Aquarium for rehabilitation.

"It's amazing, so many other otters died right off the bat," said Dr. Marty Haulena, Nyac's vet for the past year. "She showed us otters could be rehabilitated."

Senior marine mammal scientist Dr. Lance Barrett-Lennard, who saw the aftermath of the Prince William Sound spill firsthand, told 24 hours that oil-covered otters die within mere hours if not treated.

That's because the oil clumps together their thick fur and allows water to contact skin, exposing otters to hypothermia.

Long-term complications such as liver disease and a depleted food supply have also heavily hit the otter population at the Sound.

Nyac survived all of that, however, and is now one of the oldest known otters in captivity and has successfully given birth to three pups.

Aquarium staff will be using this week to remember the 18th anniversary of the oil spill and teach visitors about the lasting effects on the environment, with Nyac taking centre stage.

http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/News/2007/03/20/3789098-sun.html

Related sifts

Iraq is in chaos, with sectarian violence, any force increase will only increase the exposure of US forces to enemy action.
Iraq - The Hidden Story

Russia has been conducting it's own form of energy supply assurances by holding Chechnya under the banner of fight the war on Terror. Which gives them the carte blanche on action as long as they give the Americans the same at the moment.
Dispatches - The Dirty War in Chechnya

The reason the American Energy companies, Oil lobby groups and their contacts (Cheney) in the US goverment would want to flood the market with cheap Iraqi oil is because they are afraid of recent steps in Venezuela, discussions in OPEC towards putting crude oil off the US dollar due to it's military incursions and foreign policy actions. Which would threaten the US current account which relied on the printing of US dollars for oil trade to stabilize the debt. China has the largest US reserves in the world, the US owes them billions. We have become complicit in supporting a communist regime that still oppresses it's population. Even large corporations such as Google that *ahem DO NO EVIL are involved in the Chinese economy.

The Chinese Communist goverment of course finds this a perfect position, they have the US politically by the pursue because at any moment they can pressure OPEC to stay on the US dollar or not, since they are quickly foreshadowing the US in terms of energy usage. If however OPEC would switch to the Euro if say the US continues on it's war path, the US economy will crash rapidly far worse then the great depression.

If we continue to push for war and lack of diplomatic action our position only gets worse, if albeit OK for the short-term. Leading us to only one path and one solution a war for energy supplies, until the lights go out... and there is no Oil left for fight for, and just when we need international cooperation it will be marred by previous hostile actions.
China has US by the purse.

The threat of energy depletion in the long run is more important issue then global warming, and in many ways totally related. As it is better to tackle it when Oil supplies are high and related R&D would be easier compared to when the lights go out and we're fighting wars of dwindling energy domination.
Robert Newman's - A History of Oil

RE: Related sifts, I mean seriously I understand Lara Logan. But Chris Rock + Senator Boxer?