It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Tahnya86
reply to post by EmperorXyn
The US DID! drop nukes..... End note: Yes, US did drop nukes and this thread proves it.
On or about Sunday 03 March 2002 a single 2,000-pound thermobaric bomb was used for the first time in combat against cave complexes in which al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters had taken refuge in the Gardez region of Afghanistan.
BLU-118/B Thermobaric Weapon
Originally posted by SpaceJockey1
The following makes for interesting reading, if you have any DOUBTS about the dangers of DU (note also that there's been plenty of DU weapon testing on US soil, that's never been cleaned up!
The following is just a snippet of the full article:
[bold]The War Against Ourselves - An interview with Major Doug Rokke by Sunny Miller[/bold]
These consequences last for eternity. The half life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. And we left over 320 tons all over the place in Iraq.
Rokke - We also bombarded Vieques, Puerto Rico, with DU in preparation for the war in Kosovo. That's affecting American citizens on American territory. When I tried to activate our team from the Department of Defense responsible for radiological safety and DU cleanup in Vieques, I was told no. When I tried to activate medical care, I was told no.
The US Army made me their expert. I went into the project with the total intent to ensure they could use uranium munitions in war, because I'm a warrior. What I saw as director of the project, doing the research and working with my own medical conditions and everybody else's, led me to one conclusion: uranium munitions must be banned from the planet, for eternity, and medical care must be provided for everyone, not just the US or the Canadians or the British or the Germans or the French but for the American citizens of Vieques, for the residents of Iraq, of Okinawa, of Scotland, of Indiana, of Maryland, and now Afghanistan and Kosovo.
In this paper, written for a conference on &ldquo:Unacceptable Weapons” at MIT, the author gives an in-depth history of the concern over depleted uranium (DU) weapon fragments as a cause of illness in injured Gulf War veterans and in those exposed to depleted uranium projectiles during the wars in the Balkans.
There has been extensive distortion in the media and on the Internet concerning the effects of DU, but the facts do not warrant such scare tactics. Sound, objective research by RAND, the World Health Organization, the Institute of Medicine, and the National Academy of Sciences has shown that exposure to DU does not produce any medically detectable effects.
The author concludes that the full and unbiased presentation of the facts to governments around the world has resulted in the continued use of DU — even in the face of concerted actions by some to distort the facts and media often more interested in shock value than in presenting the truth.
Depleted Uranium A Case Study of Good and Evil
NATO aircraft fired several tons of armor-piercing weapons made from depleted uranium at Serb military targets in Kosovo in 1999. To assess the danger, if any, of the resulting radiation to soldiers and local people, the United Nations Environment Programme dispatched teams of researchers to Kosovo in November 2000.
At a radioecology conference last week in Monaco (see main text), one of those teams presented results that should calm the nerves of peacekeepers and Kosovars.
New Findings Allay Concerns Over Depleted Uranium
The study described in this report used mathematical modeling to estimate health risks
from exposure to depleted uranium (DU) during the 1991 Gulf War for both U.S. troops
and nearby Iraqi civilians.
The analysis found that the risks of DU-induced leukemia or
birth defects are far too small to result in an observable increase in these health effects
among exposed veterans or Iraqi civilians. Only a few veterans in vehicles accidentally
struck by U.S. DU munitions are predicted to have inhaled sufficient quantities of DU
particulate to incur any significant health risk (i.e., the possibility of temporary kidney
damage from the chemical toxicity of uranium and about a 1% chance of fatal lung
The health risk to all downwind civilians is predicted to be extremely small.
Recommendations for monitoring are made for certain exposed groups. Although the
study found fairly large calculational uncertainties, the models developed and used are
generally valid. The analysis was also used to assess potential uranium health hazards for
workers in the weapons complex.
No illnesses are projected for uranium workers
following standard guidelines; nonetheless, some research suggests that more
conservative guidelines should be considered.
An Analysis of Uranium Dispersal and Health Effects Using a Gulf War Case Study
Is DU a Health Hazard?
■Based on credible scientific evidence, there is no proven link between DU exposure and increases in human cancers or other significant health or environmental impacts.
■The most definitive study of DU exposure is of Gulf War veterans who have embedded DU shrapnel in their bodies that cannot be removed. To date none has developed any health abnormalities due to uranium chemical toxicity or radio toxicity.
■It is a common misconception that radioactivity is the main health hazard of DU rather than chemical toxicity. Like other heavy metals, DU is potentially poisonous. In sufficient amounts, if DU is ingested or inhaled it can be harmful because of its chemical toxicity. High concentration could cause kidney damage.
■According to the World Health Organization (WHO), very large amounts of DU dust would have to be inhaled to cause lung cancer from radio toxicity. Risks of other radiation-induced cancers, including leukemia, are considered to be very much lower still.
International Atomic Energy Agency/Depleted Uranium Factsheet
The following information from the military "Special Assistant on Deployment Health" paints a quite different picture. Unless Rokke can come up with the names of most of the 30 who he alleges have died, I will have to believe the government information, rather than Rokke's claim. Rokke seems to have exaggerated both his role and the number of people who have died since the cleanup. Here is the email from the official government source:
>>>>We can offer some accurate information to correct the record. Rokke is a private citizen and does not represent the Department of Defense. Following the ground war, Rokke was attached for duty to assist technical experts in the recovery and decontamination of radioactive material and equipment.
The team of approximately 10 people was led, not by Rokke, but by a civilian from the Army Munitions and Chemical Command (AMCCOM). Rokke's primary role was to facilitate the recovery operations by ensuring the team had the proper support.
Over the past years, Doug Rokke has reported varying numbers of ill or dead members of "his team." These claims have been researched and are unsubstantiated.
In 1998, our office compiled a list of 29 names of people Rokke reported to be on "his team." Staff members were able to interview 22 of them. Approximately 15 of the 29 people Doug Rokke had identified as being on "his team" actually worked on DU-contaminated vehicles.
Two of the 29 had died, however, in interviews with the others, neither of these two veterans was named as having worked with depleted uranium.
While we respect Rokke's right to express his opinions, the fact that he presents himself as an expert, does not make it so. His role in the Gulf War and at the Chemical School, as well as the specifics of his educational background, do not qualify him as a depleted uranium expert. These areas fall well outside of his area of expertise and responsibility.
authors comments: It seems that as of 1998, not a single member of the team had died of exposure to uranium, contrary to Rokke's claim. Before posting the above text, I contacted Doug Rokke and asked him to comment on this material. He refused to say anything in support of his earlier claim that 30 people had died from his organization and instead showed an intense desire to change the subject.
Originally posted by M1FST91
I really don't want to comment much on this due to my families well being but after serving and coming home a year or so later I was diagnosed with liver cancer and I know of at least 5 others that are close friends of mine have the same thing. I'm not saying its from my deploy but what are the odds.... Oh and my mos is a fighter pilot raptors. Just my experience... Read betw----------------.
UPDATE - June, 2009 - Depleted uranium has become an unfashionable cause for the depleted uranium activists. It is old news. The Traprock Peace Center is now under new management with a new director and it appears that depleted uranium will no longer be a focus of the organization.
The few other organizations that were pressing this issue also are in decline. The website of Dr. Asaf Durakovic is dormant and it seems that he has retired from the fray. Leuren Moret and Doug Rokke seem to spend less time on the road drumming up interest in the subject.
The Military Toxics project has declining revenue. However, I will leave this site on the Internet for a few months longer, to address whatever interest there may still be in the subject.
Alleged Connection Between Depleted Uranium and Birth Defects
by Robert Holloway
One of the most powerful emotional tactics of the campaign against depleted uranium is to show horrific photos of birth defects that are alleged to have been caused by depleted uranium. This argument has been presented to me by several activists and in each case it is done in a way that I find most striking and astonishing.
The astonishing part is that the activists never feel the need to demonstrate any connection between depleted uranium and the birth defects. It is as if the mere presence of birth defects in a country where depleted uranium munitions were used is enough to establish a cause and effect relationship. Perhaps that is at least remotely rational since it seems to be common knowledge that radiation can cause birth defects.
Radiation is known to cause birth defects such as retardation and small . size but these effects are only found with very large doses of radiation and not from uranium, either natural or depleted.
A related but not identical effect of radiation is that of inheritable defects. Bear in mind that a birth defect is not necessarily a hereditary effect. The best expert opinion, including a report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Radiation, is that "radiation exposure has never been demonstrated to cause hereditary effects in human populations".
One of the largest study populations is that of the survivors of the atomic bombing of Japan. According to the U.N. report, "The absence of observable effects in children of survivors of the atomic bombings in Japan, one of the largest study populations, indicates that moderate acute radiation exposures of even a relatively large human population must have little impact."
It is important to note here that the report does not claim that it is impossible for radiation to produce hereditary effects, but that the frequency of hereditary effects (from radiation) is very low compared to the baseline frequency of hereditary effects from other causes even in the case of a large radiation dose.
According to the U.N. report a substantial dose of 1 Gray is likely to produce adverse effects at a frequency of less than one percent of the baseline frequency of these adverse effects. [A one Gray dose is approaching a lethal dose] Another factor that enters into the situation is that when the activists show photos of birth defects, there is normally an absence of information as to the radiation exposure, if any, of the parents.
Two unlikely probabilities, multiplied together, immensely reduce the chances that the observed birth defects were caused by depleted uranium. That unlikely situation does not reduce the shrill cries of alarm from the activist groups, however. A three page summary of the United Nations report can be found at the following link:
Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation to the General Assembly