Kind of Nuclear Weapon Used in Lebanon War Isotope Finding Suggests

Scientific evidence now suggests that uranium-based munitions may have been used by Israel against targets in Lebanon. Soil samples from two bomb craters in Khiam and At-Tiri, the scene of fierce fighting between Hizbollah guerrillas and Israeli troops last July and August, show "elevated radiation signatures". Both have been forwarded for further examination to the Harwell laboratory in Oxfordshire for mass spectrometry - used by the Ministry of Defence - which has confirmed the concentration of uranium isotopes in the samples. First it was the cluster bombs for no reason but pestering civilian life, used by IDF in the last 72 hours of the war. Then it was the use of phosphorous bombs. Both routinely denied by the Israeli forces until evidence becomes too overwhelming.




Undeniable proof now emerges from the scorched soil of South Lebanon, weapons of nuclear fission have been used in this summers proxy war. That it was not only a rehearsal for wars to come, but also a testing ground for the weapons to be used, becomes evident.

Dr Chris Busby, the British Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, took two soil samples thrown up by Israeli heavy or guided bombs, and they showed "elevated radiation signatures".


Now we are talking radiation source of enriched uranium, reactor grade or possibly weapon grade, not "just" depleted uranium, DU, the controversial material used in panser-penetrating munitions, for the first time in Gulf War 1, and now believed to be the cause of the widespread cancer epidemic of Southern Iraq.

What might this stuff cause to civilians in the years to come? The DU has a halftime of 5.5 millions years, I suspect this isotope with a ratio of 108, isn't any better. The report certainly states it to be much more radioactive.

I don't know enough about it, only that what the Busby report says:

"At worst it's some sort of experimental weapon with an enriched uranium component the purpose of which we don't yet know. At best - if you can say that - it shows a remarkably cavalier attitude to the use of nuclear waste products."





[edit on 28-10-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

Hmm... perhaps it's some sort of tactical nuke, small enough where it might not show up on satellite, and nobody would know what hit them. Or perhaps it was some sort of dirty bomb. Either way it's probably not good for the people in the areas hit by such weaponry.

Although on the other hand Hezbollah may have acquired weapons grade uranium and decided to use it to frame Israel. That could be the case if they got the uranium but couldn't make a bomb with it.

[edit on 10/28/2006 by cyberdude78]

Whatever they were using it seemed like a good opportunity for Israel and the US to test out some of their new toys if you ask me.

Depleted Uranium shells would do this. Nearly every advanced military force in the world uses it. It's not a fission weapon either. The Uranium is used for its penetrating power not it's radioactivity(which some still dispute despite all the evidence to the contrary). I find it hard to believe that a Fission weapon would go undetected.

[edit on 28-10-2006 by sardion2000]

Originally posted by sardion2000
Depleted Uranium shells would do this. Nearly every advanced military force in the world uses it. It's not a fission weapon either. The Uranium is used for its penetrating power not it's radioactivity(which some still dispute despite all the evidence to the contrary). I find it hard to believe that a Fission weapon would go undetected.

[edit on 28-10-2006 by sardion2000]

I believe you are correct, and I agree with you. To add a bit, DU munitions also partially vaporise on penetration. CBUs, (cluster bombs), containing bomblets with DU shrapnel have this same property. The understanding here is that "Depleted" Uranium isn't really "depleted", but retains 40% of it's original radioactivity. Exposure to the ionic gasses and particlate debris from the use of DU munitions in the Iraq War has been cited as one of the causes of "Gulf War Syndrome" and it's myriad symptoms, and certain illnesses in Iraq Vets that mimic radiation sickness.

My own opinion, based on what I have come to understand about the use of DU munitions, is that they should be banned from use in warfare. Though our soldiers are told otherwise, these weapons are far from safe, are a source of Ionizing Radiation, and expose those in the area during and after their use to dangerously high levels of Beta and Gamma radiation.

Originally posted by sardion2000
Depleted Uranium shells would do this. Nearly every advanced military force in the world uses it. It's not a fission weapon either. The Uranium is used for its penetrating power not it's radioactivity(which some still dispute despite all the evidence to the contrary). I find it hard to believe that a Fission weapon would go undetected.

They said it was enriched uranium rather than depleted uranium.



Pie

They said it was enriched uranium rather than depleted uranium.

Just a word. DU comes from partially spent nuclear reactor fuel, which is "enriched uranium" to start with, so, DU munitions have the same radiation signature. Other than the amount of radiation observed, there is no way to tell the difference between the two.

It all depends on who's saying what compared to what you know. What I know about nuclear material is a good deal more than the average Joe--or NP reporter. I worked in the Industry for 16 years and also in the Service. Radioactive material is nothing to play around with, "depleted" or not.

Originally posted by Ed Littlefox

Just a word. DU comes from partially spent nuclear reactor fuel, which is "enriched uranium" to start with, so, DU munitions have the same radiation signature. Other than the amount of radiation observed, there is no way to tell the difference between the two.

Im not knowledgable about it and I agree both are dangerous but if one is depleted and the other enriched , wouldn't that mean that the enriched uranium would be more pure then uranium thats spent? (ie: from a fuel rod)

This article was also posted on the independent

The Khiam sample, with 108 parts U-238 to one of U-235 - just under one per cent - is clearly enriched - but not much. So, in the absence of any palpable military advantage, in terms of its mass and its ability to generate heat and fire compared with DU or natural uranium, why was this enigmatic material used? There are several possibilities. The first is that there was a simple mistake - that uranium with an elevated U-235 content was used instead of DU or natural uranium. The Khiam sample was very small - 25 grams. Contamination with soil could easily obscure a higher degree of enrichment. Spent nuclear fuel - after the power has been generated - typically contains 2.5 per cent U-235, but it can be as low as 1.5 per cent - close to the Khiam sample level. So the uranium in the Khiam projectile could just have been spent nuclear fuel.

Chris Bellamy is professor of military science and doctrine at Cranfield University

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Although on the other hand Hezbollah may have acquired weapons grade uranium and decided to use it to frame Israel. That could be the case if they got the uranium but couldn't make a bomb with it.

Notice I don't say Israel in the thread title! First thing that went to my mind, could be they hit some stockpile of Hizbolla dirty weapons. Remains to be seen - or claimed.

And PieMan, thanks for the supporting link and setting clear, this IS NOT Depleted Uranium.

Anybody come forward with suggestions, as to what kind of weapon it might be.

I remember Rummy and Cheney about a year ago (maybe more) started talking about producing "usable nukes" at a scale of, I think, 500 per year.

What was the EXACT Isotope detected and in what concentration?

Remember uranium 235 appears naturally in uranium at a ratio of 1:40. IF it was discovered that U-235 was appearing at a greater rate than 1:40, then it was indeed enriched uranium. It makes no sense though....why put enriched uranium in a bomb unless it was a fission bomb. It was obviously not a fision bomb because even small ones would cause a massive explosion and you need a minimum amount to sustain a fission reaction. in other words, there can be no fission grenades or any other weapon that uses fission with an extremely low-yield. (I mean low enough that the explosion could be passed off as a conventional weapon). Even if you could, why? Enriched uranium is a valuable resource that has other applications and this appears to be a waste.

the only possibility that would make sense is that I israel wants to see the effects of a dirty bomb on a population in case a future terrorist attack utilized a dirty bomb.

or

Hezbollah is attempting to frame israel by claiming they used a nuclear based weapon so that when Iran acquires them (seems more like an issue of when than if) they will have no heartburn about using them on Israel.

I think the best explanation is that it is not fully depleted uranium and has residual isotopes in the metal.

Hey Xphiles,

Remember uranium 235 appears naturally in uranium at a ratio of 1:40. IF it was discovered that U-235 was appearing at a greater rate than 1:40, then it was indeed enriched uranium.

You're not quite right about the ratio. Please go to Wiki for information.

Enriched uranium is uranium whose uranium-235 content has been increased through the process of isotope separation. Natural uranium consists mostly of the 238U isotope, with about 0.72 % by weight as 235U, the only isotope existing in nature in any appreciable amount that is fissionable by thermal neutrons.

The case here seems to be, the sample contains a little less than 1 per cent U-235. In DU content will be only 0.25 per cent. Not likely the to be any mistake 4x richer than DU. Question remains as to why.

Findings of uranium isotops are not new to the Lebanon war. Lots of refferences when you google the subject, dating back to the days of the war.

Here is one concerning Khiam and possibly the very same crater:


The new information is that the "unidentified radioactive materials" now has been identified.

Wonder why it took so long?

Nothing has been "identified", someone is claiming that the US gave Israel a bunker buster with a DU penetrating warhead, this however is not a "nuclear weapon".

I would say that this is more propaganda B.S. unless someone can produce more information as to the specifics of this "elevated radiation signature."

How about the bombs used by hezbollah against Israel and in Israel soil, are they also tested to see if they got the same results.

I do not bite into the hezbollah framing theory.

Salting the earth now are they?
tssk tssk ...

It seems apparent that Israel wanted to inflict some lasting damage, and thought how neat it would be to have some cluster bombs blow a few lebanese children up post war...
what a bonus...

I find no fault with the Israeli people here, but I find huge fault with the IDF leadership, that would authorize very devious munitions, that would inflict lasting damage...

it shows a pure sign of what the IDF is looking for...
exactly what they claim the enemy is doing... to wipe out or expulse the enemy from their boundaries.

cant really blame them for what they want, but hugely about how they do it.
DU, cluster bombs, Phosphorous...
all speak of a lack of wanting peace...

There's no way a true nuclear weapon was detonated on the surface in Lebanon. That would have set alarm bells ringing from satellites, geological insturments, air sniffers, everything.

If anything it is just DU, which I still am not convinced is much worse than lead.

Please notice, I titled the thread "Kind of Nuclear Weapon.."
The question in line is what kind of weapon??
Please research accordingly.

As for the DU, it seems to be ruled out. My arguement repeated.

The case here seems to be, the sample contains a little less than 1 per cent U-235. In DU content will be only 0.25 per cent. Not likely the to be any mistake 4x richer than DU. Question remains as to why.

My guess is to intendently inflict some long term damage. The motive might not be to harm, but to conduct a long time study (as what to what will happen with their own promised land). They are opening the gates of Hell - and they know it!

My own research on this thread have lead me through hundreds of sites, and what I've come across is weapons, so devilish unbelievable to be true, being applied, in Gaza, in Iraq, as they were in Lebanon.

From memory I quote, as I cannot refind the site, "in every war new weapons are being tried out, as old ones are being abandoned".

khunmoon,

Yes, this is pretty strange if true, that seemingly slightly enriched uranium would be used in shells, but in the end I don't think it matters much what type of uranium it was as long as supercritical mass wasn't achieved and a fission (perhaps with fusion) reaction started.

Djohn,

We gotta take it for true, the source in mind.
My guess, it is a long time study in the exposure to low radiation levels.

Maybe it happenned in another previous war? Or not. I'll go with DU.