U.N. Passes Depleted Uranium Resolution in Landslide Vote, page 3

reply to post by DeadFlagBlues

---

I know, I know.... I totally agree, here's our request, I guess....

reply to post by Harlequin

---

I'm still not convinced as others have mentioned, why switch tank guns and adopt a tank round that does not offer the same properties as DU (even if it can match penetration from a longer gun). When we can achieve the same penetration performance from the current gun. Also, the US military's replacement for the M829A2 is M829E3, a DU round which offers increased performance in virtually all aspect. This should be the current benchmark for any tungsten replacement munition being pushed as a replacement.

Also, DU by itself in it's natural state is not dangerous, heck make into a wall piece and hang it in your room, no big problem. When DU is fired however and used in the battlefield then it becomes a health hazard. I support DU use for munitions but even I will not ignore that fact.

Originally posted by SKUNK2
I thought that Tungsten was denser than Uranium, so Tungsten is a more effective ammunition

Skunk

DU can be used to engage the enemy at greater distances than tungsten penetrators or high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) rounds because of improved ballistic properties. When they strike a target, tungsten penetrators blunt while DU has a self-sharpening property. DU ammunition routinely provides a 25 percent increase in effective range over traditional kinetic energy rounds.

On impact with a hard target (such as a tank) the penetrator may generate a cloud of DU dust within the struck vehicle that ignites spontaneously creating a fire that increases the damage to the target. Due to the pyrophoric nature of DU, many of the DU particles and fragments that are formed during and following impact and perforation will spontaneously ignite, resulting in a shift of the particle size probability distribution function to a smaller mean diameter. As a result of physical differences between DU and its oxides, the oxide particles tend to crumble under relatively weak mechanical forces, further shifting the particle size to an even smaller mean diameter.
www.globalsecurity.org...

reply to post by dbates

---

And all three have veto power as well

reply to post by JimmyCarterIsSmarter

---

Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts. Adopted on 8 June 1977 by the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law applicable in Armed Conflicts; entered into force 7 December 1979

It is prohibited to employ methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment.

There, that's laid out in this post, the Geneva Convention, word-for-word regarding said subject. Now, this is a credible magazine, IMO, In These Times, so, here's a simple report to prove the U.S. hypocritical once again:

In a 1998 training manual, the U.S. Army acknowledged the hazards of depleted uranium, requiring that anyone who comes within 25 meters of DU-contaminated equipment or terrain wear respiratory and skin protection. The manual cautioned: “Contamination will make food and water unsafe for consumption.”

And in November 1999, NATO sent its commanders the following warning: “Inhalation of insoluble depleted uranium dust particles has been associated with long-term health effects, including cancers and birth defects.”

Two types of depleted uranium exist. One is “clean” depleted uranium, a byproduct of the processing of uranium ore into uranium-235 (which is used in nuclear fuel and weapons). The other type is created at government facilities as a byproduct of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel (done to extract plutonium for nuclear warheads) and is known as “dirty” depleted uranium because it contains highly toxic plutonium.

www.inthesetimes.com...

Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 5-11-2007 by anhinga]

[edit on 11/5/07 by FredT]

www.agoracosmopolitan.com...



Professor Rocke "The United Nations on 10 September 2001 did rule that uranium munitions were considered a weapon of mass destruction. The European Parliament has issued a proclamation that uranium munitions should be banned from use in the world."

Note the above date...

Iranian sailors chase off pirates attacking U.S. ship
  Posted 2 days ago with 90 member flags

Iraq and Afghanistan veterans to return their medals to protest war on terror at Chicago NATO summit
  Posted 10 days ago with 82 member flags

Fukushima fuel pool is urgent national security issue for America, \'top threat facing humanity\'
  Posted 19 days ago with 80 member flags

Blatant Corruption Exposed as EU Blocks France\'s Ban on Monsanto\'s GMO Maize
  Posted 2 days ago with 79 member flags

Congressmen Seek To Lift Propaganda Ban
  Posted 5 days ago with 73 member flags

Shocking Video Of Kelly Thomas Beating Death Released. Watch With Caution.
  Posted 17 days ago with 71 member flags

Electricity generated from water: BlackLight Power announces validation of its scientific breakthrou
  Posted 3 days ago with 65 member flags

Man Loses $22,000 In New \'Policing For Profit\' Case
  Posted 4 days ago with 63 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: