It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Depletted uranium DANGER

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 05:37 AM
link   
hello, this is my first post in this forum

i want to put some light on Deplleted uranium, it was also used in NATO bombing campaign on Serbia 1999...

so here we go...

en.wikipedia.org...




epleted uranium (DU) is uranium primarily composed of the isotope uranium-238 (U-238). Natural uranium is about 99.27 percent U-238, 0.72 percent U-235, and 0.0055 percent U-234. U-235 is used for fission in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. Uranium is enriched in U-235 by separating the isotopes by mass. The byproduct of enrichment, called depleted uranium or DU, contains less than one third as much U-235 and U-234 as natural uranium. The external radiation dose from DU is about 60 percent of that from the same mass of natural uranium.[2] DU is also found in reprocessed spent nuclear reactor fuel, but that kind can be distinguished from DU produced as a byproduct of uranium enrichment by the presence of U-236.[3] In the past, DU has been called Q-metal, depletalloy, and D-38. DU is useful because of its very high density of 19.1 g/cm3. Civilian uses include counterweights in aircraft, radiation shielding in medical radiation therapy and industrial radiography equipment, and containers used to transport radioactive materials. Military uses include defensive armor plating and armor-piercing projectiles. The use of DU in munitions is controversial because of questions about potential long-term health effects.[4] Normal functioning of the kidney, brain, liver, heart, and numerous other systems can be affected by uranium exposure, because in addition to being weakly radioactive, uranium is a toxic metal.[5] It is weakly radioactive and remains so because of its long half-life. The aerosol produced during impact and combustion of depleted uranium munitions can potentially contaminate wide areas around the impact sites or can be inhaled by civilians and military personnel.[6] In a three week period of conflict in Iraq during 2003 it was estimated over 1000 tons of depleted uranium munitions were used, mostly in cities.[7] The U.S. Department of Defense claims that no human cancer of any type has been seen as a result of exposure to either natural or depleted uranium;[8] yet, U.S. DoD studies using cultured cells and laboratory rodents continue to suggest the possibility of leukemogenic, genetic, reproductive, and neurological effects from chronic exposure[4], and ample evidence of the carcinogenic properties of uranium has appeared in the secondary medical literature since the 1950s.[9][10][11][12][13] Also, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service in early 2004 attributed birth defect claims from a February 1991 Gulf War combat veteran to depleted uranium poisoning.[14][15] A 2005 epidemiology review concluded: "In aggregate the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU."[16]





Enriched uranium was first manufactured in the 1940s when the US and USSR began their nuclear weapons and nuclear power programs. It was at this time that depleted uranium was first stored as an unusable waste product. There was some hope that the enrichment process would be improved and fissionable isotopes of U-235 could, at some future date, be extracted from the depleted uranium. This re-enrichment recovery of the residual uranium-235 contained in the depleted uranium is no longer a matter of the future: it has been practiced for several years.[17] Also, it is possible to design civilian power reactors with unenriched fuel, but only about 10 percent of reactors ever built utilize that technology, and both nuclear weapons production and naval reactors require the concentrated isotope. In the 1970s, the Pentagon reported that the Soviet military had developed armor plating for Warsaw Pact tanks that NATO ammunition could not penetrate. The Pentagon began searching for material to make denser bullets. After testing various metals, ordnance researchers settled on depleted uranium. The US and NATO military used DU penetrator rounds in the 1991 Gulf War, the Bosnia war,[18] bombing of Serbia, and the 2003 invasion of Iraq.[19] While clearing a decades-old Hawai'i firing range in 2005, workers found depleted uranium training rounds from the formerly classified Davy Crockett tactical battlefield nuclear delivery system from the 1960-70s.[20] These training rounds had been forgotten because they were used in a highly classified program and had been fired before DU had become an item of interest, more than 20 years before


so.its really dangerous...







tuberose.com...




Depleted uranium (DU) weaponry meets the definition of weapon of mass destruction in two out of three categories under U.S. Federal Code Title 50 Chapter 40 Section 2302. * Since 1991, the U.S. has released the radioactive atomicity equivalent of at least 400,000 Nagasaki bombs into the global atmosphere. That is 10 times the amount released during atmospheric testing which was the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs.





nucnews.net...

Nuclear tac team investigating a DU shot in Serbia

www.mod.gov.rs...



and it is used in A-10 Thunderbolts weaponry system



...

so this is a really bad weapon indeed...

what do you think about usage of it?

thanks




posted on Nov, 8 2009 @ 08:30 AM
link   
Effective shell, no doubt about it.

But the aftermath?
Pure hell.

Baghdad, Kirkuk and Basra are all so polluted with DU dust that they should be considered nuclear wastelands and unfit for habitation for a thousand years or so.
And this dust mixes with the sand, making it drift throughout the plains eternally...
Great stuff


Leukemia in these cities have sky-rocketed, mainly amongst children.
This goes for all the places where this ammunition have been used.

I heard some of the Gulf War Syndromes can be traced back to the handling of these kind of shells/rockets.

Not much more to say about it.

Good to see this subject up for discussion though!
Seems like the US brought the WMD's to a country that apparently had none.



posted on Mar, 3 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   
so if i'm correct...after doing some research about this..all the terrorists would have to do is collect all of the left behind depleted uranium rounds, refine it further, and walla now the towelheads have a bomb capable of fission???????????????????



posted on Mar, 3 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   
And soon enough, those contaminated sands will be picked up by whirlwinds and will eventually circle the globe. No one will be immune. I really wonder how long it will take for the contamination to be totally global. This is a dying planet.



posted on Mar, 3 2010 @ 11:54 PM
link   
images.google.com...

Depleted Uranium babies



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 12:40 AM
link   
I've wondered for awhile how long it would take the US populous to wake up to the fact that in the insane desire to whip out imaginary WMD's, the US was deliberately littering the landscape with WMDs. And it's toxic effects were well known in 2003 due to the first major spike in Iraq after the 1990 Gulf War.

Here's some cheery stats: "In Falluja, which was heavily bombarded by the US in 2004, as many as 25% of new- born infants [1] have serious abnormalities, including congenital anomalies, brain tumors, and neural tube defects in the spinal cord.

The cancer rate in the province of Babil, south of Baghdad has risen from 500 diagnosed cases in 2004 to 9,082 in 2009 according to Al Jazeera English [2].

The water, soil and air in large areas of Iraq, including Baghdad, are contaminated with depleted uranium that has a radioactive half-life of 4.5 billion years." www.globalresearch.ca...

And if you don't consider Global Research to be a credible site, feel free to look elsewhere. This is well documented, and unutterably tragic.



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by DeathTribble
 


Yeah your article newly confirmed:

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Mar, 4 2010 @ 03:04 AM
link   
i am a Vietnam veteran and go to the VA for treatment.
there i meet a lot of the gulf war veterans and none of them now blame DU for GWS.

they blame the drugs vaccines and chemicals they were requiped to use or take.

many of them blame the anti DU people for derailing the government from finding the real cause.

WHY do they blame the anti DU people and not believe DU caused GWS

it is very simple the UK and US troops got GWS and the French troops did not.
all the countries troops used DU ammo and was around the DU contamination.

Of the 25,000 French troops who served in the Gulf War, only 140 have suffered illness related to the war.

By contrast, over 5,000 of 52,000 British troops and 137,862 of 697,000 American troops who served int he war have claimed war-related illnesses.

Why? This isn't proof, but it might offer some strong clues.

French troops were given protective clothing and bottled water to drink. The were not subjected to to organophosphate pesticides or to the inoculations given to American and British troops.

Americans and British, by contrast, got a total of 33 inoculations plus anti-nerve gas agent pills in addition to being dowsed with organophosphate pesticides. They did not get bottled water.

www.whale.to...



posted on Mar, 16 2010 @ 09:48 PM
link   
I've read in recent articles that governments want to start utilizing volcanos as ways to dump DU. Why wont anyone just put it on a rocket and blast it all into deep space? Why has that idea not come to fruition?



posted on Mar, 17 2010 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by PPGrocks
so if i'm correct...after doing some research about this..all the terrorists would have to do is collect all of the left behind depleted uranium rounds, refine it further, and walla now the towelheads have a bomb capable of fission???????????????????


No. The keyword is "depleted". And most the residue is in finest powder form which is what actually makes it so dangerous. One could probably lick an intact DU penetrator like icecream without ill effects (THAT IS GUESSWORK!!!).


Originally posted by AzoriaCorp
...Why wont anyone just put it on a rocket and blast it all into deep space? Why has that idea not come to fruition?


Because we´re speaking of more than a million tons worldwide of the material. Nuclear reactors consume a lot more radioactive material than one might think. And even more depleted uranium is generated during the enirchment of said isotopes.


Originally posted by ANNED
i am a Vietnam veteran and go to the VA for treatment.
there i meet a lot of the gulf war veterans and none of them now blame DU for GWS.

[...]

WHY do they blame the anti DU people and not believe DU caused GWS

[...]
Americans and British, by contrast, got a total of 33 inoculations plus anti-nerve gas agent pills in addition to being dowsed with organophosphate pesticides. They did not get bottled water. ...


It may well be that GWS is not DU-related. Then again their exposure to it was rather short. Which means DU residue still is responsible or at least has an effect on these catastrophic long-term developments especially in newborns.

[edit on 17/3/2010 by Lonestar24]



new topics




 
3

log in

join