Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US using uranium WMDs in Iraq (BARF? Alert)
rediff.com ^ | 3/31/03 | rediff.com Newsdesk

Posted on 04/02/2003 10:59:09 AM PST by Egregious Philbin

The United States and the United Kingdom, which invaded Iraq ostensibly to strip that country of its weapons of mass destruction, now stand accused of using some of the worst WMDs to overcome the fierce resistance an army, weakened by 12 years of United Nations sanctions, is putting up.

Reports say the Americans used depleted uranium shells, a sub-nuclear weapon, in Al Kifl, a small town on the Euphrates river south of the Iraqi capital Baghdad.

Several newspapers and Web sites, among them MSNBC, The Independent of London, and the Sunday Herald of Glasgow, have reported their use.

"All you can see is burned out vehicles," NBC's Dana Lewis reported when he entered the town on Saturday.

Three days earlier, the 3rd Mechanized Infantry had tried to take the town, but encountered fierce resistance from Iraqi soldiers who set up sniper nests all along the main road, firing from doors, windows, market stalls, and patches of open ground, MSNBC reported.

A tank unit then fired "two 120mm high velocity depleted uranium rounds straight down the main road, creating a powerful vacuum that literally sucked guerrillas out from their hideaways into the street, where they were shot down by small arms fire or run over by the tanks," the Web site quoting the unit's commander, said.

The Balochistan Post of Quetta said the vacuum created had such intensity that the soldiers were not only sucked out into the open from their hideout, but their flesh and blood was also sucked out of their bodies.

The tank unit commander, who refused to give his name, said the scene was "mad chaos like you cannot imagine".

He told MSNBC, "You couldn't see anything except all those hues of red and the sound of fire from all sides. I'll have nightmares about it."

'Depleted' uranium is what is left after enriched uranium is separated from natural uranium to produce fuel for nuclear reactors. During this process, the fissionable isotope Uranium 235 is separated from uranium. The remaining uranium, which is 99.8% uranium 238, is called 'depleted uranium' and is also used to produce weapons of mass destruction.

Neil Mackay, investigations editor of the Sunday Herald, said the use of such shells flouts a United Nations resolution classifying the munitions as illegal WMDs.

Depleted uranium weapons contaminate the land and cause ill-health and cancers among the soldiers using the weapons, the armies they target, and civilians in the region, leading to birth defects in children.

Their use is a war crime, according to Professor Doug Rokke, former director of the Pentagon's depleted uranium project.

Rokke told the Herald: "This war was about Iraq possessing illegal weapons of mass destruction -- yet we are using weapons of mass destruction ourselves... Such double standards are repellent."

The latest use of the shells, according to the Herald, came on Friday when an American A10 'tankbuster' plane fired a depleted uranium shell killing one British soldier and injuring three others in a 'friendly fire' incident.

Such weapons have been blamed for the effects of Gulf War syndrome, typified by chronic muscle and joint pain, fatigue and memory loss, among 200,000 American soldiers after the 1991 conflict.

They are also cited as the most likely cause of the increased number of birth deformities and cancer in Iraq after 1991.

A UN sub-commission said, "Cancer appears to have increased between seven and 10 times and deformities between four and six times [in Iraq]."

For instance, one Baghdad hospital reported eight cases of babies born without eyes, or anophthalmos, in two years. Seven of the fathers had been exposed to American depleted uranium anti-tank rounds in 1991. Normally only one in 50 million births is anophthalmic.

The Pentagon had admitted that 320 metric tons of depleted uranium were left on the battlefield after the first Gulf war, though Russian military experts say 1,000 metric tons is a more accurate figure.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last
While looking for articles about evidence of WMDs uncovered in Iraq - haven't found any - I found this. The Balochistan Post Of Quetta article quoted is truly outrageous, click on it only if you want to read an even more inflammatory chunk of anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism.

Has anyone seen this reported elsewhere?
1 posted on 04/02/2003 10:59:09 AM PST by Egregious Philbin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
The Balochistan Post of Quetta said the vacuum created had such intensity that the soldiers were not only sucked out into the open from their hideout, but their flesh and blood was also sucked out of their bodies.

Dang it, I need one of those. Gotta go check ebay...

2 posted on 04/02/2003 11:01:40 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
Why, I hear that a single depleted-uranium shell can wipe out a moderate-sized city, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. It's a darn WMD, fersure.
3 posted on 04/02/2003 11:05:01 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
Cancer appears to have increased between seven and 10 times and deformities between four and six times [in Iraq].

What they neatly forget to mention is that low-level exposure to Saddam's mustard gas -- a DNA alkylating agent -- could very easily be the source of these cancers and birth defects. In fact, increased cancers and birth defects have been noticed among the Kurds in northern Iraq also ... who were not exposed to DU munitions, but were exposed to mustard gas.

4 posted on 04/02/2003 11:05:39 AM PST by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
Very interesting to see this article come out and given a call to a local Houston talk show yesterday (Chris Baker), it appears a different strategy is being taken with regard to this war.

The caller to Baker's show first starts his call asking if the U.S. was using depleted uranium shells in its attack and wondered what the consequences on the populace and on American soldiers would be. He continued seemingly innocently in this direction, but eventually wondered whether the U.S. should be using "unconventional" arms in this conflict. Baker pounded away at him on the question of whether the U.S. should be in Iraq, and the guy kept dancing around the question by stating, "I don't agree we should be using depleted uranium", an answer he gave numerous times. He eventually admitted to his opposition to the war, regardless of the type of weaponry, but tried to push the unconventional weapon idea before Baker finally cut him off. Expect to see folks like Amnesty International and other usual suspects to try to bring a false light to this issue after the war is won.

5 posted on 04/02/2003 11:06:29 AM PST by WillVoteForFood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
A tank unit then fired "two 120mm high velocity depleted uranium rounds straight down the main road, creating a powerful vacuum that literally sucked guerrillas out from their hideaways into the street, where they were shot down by small arms fire or run over by the tanks," the Web site quoting the unit's commander, said.

The Balochistan Post of Quetta said the vacuum created had such intensity that the soldiers were not only sucked out into the open from their hideout, but their flesh and blood was also sucked out of their bodies.

One can only conclude that their exposure to radiation was minimal and probably didn't have much long-term affect on them at all. Big deal, I got x-rays at the dentist last week, didn't kill me either.

For instance, one Baghdad hospital reported eight cases of babies born without eyes, or anophthalmos, in two years. Seven of the fathers had been exposed to American depleted uranium anti-tank rounds in 1991.

Well, once again, no need to fret. They won't be breeding after getting turned inside out like that.

6 posted on 04/02/2003 11:07:32 AM PST by Kenton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: Kenton
One can only conclude that their exposure to radiation was minimal and probably didn't have much long-term affect on them at all. Big deal, I got x-rays at the dentist last week, didn't kill me either.

All this DU crap is ridiculous. Take a look at this publication by WHO: WHO - Depleted Uranium. We have more naturally occuring U in our bodies than people would get from a DU attack.

8 posted on 04/02/2003 11:20:44 AM PST by mikegi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
ROTFLOL

This is so funny, it could be from the Onion.
9 posted on 04/02/2003 11:21:37 AM PST by sd-joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
Reports say the Americans used depleted uranium shells, a sub-nuclear weapon,

What an idiot. Depleted uranium is as much a "sub-nuclear weapon" as a grand piano.

10 posted on 04/02/2003 11:24:24 AM PST by pabianice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
Why, I hear that a single depleted-uranium shell can wipe out a moderate-sized city, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. It's a darn WMD, fersure.

Cabela's has a special on them this month. Buy 300 rounds and get afree ammo box. $49.99


11 posted on 04/02/2003 11:31:15 AM PST by P8riot (Looks like Deja Vu all over again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pabianice
Subnuclear, eh? Who operates it, The Atom?
12 posted on 04/02/2003 11:31:35 AM PST by big gray tabby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: P8riot
oops that was 250 rnds sorry.
13 posted on 04/02/2003 11:32:50 AM PST by P8riot (Looks like Deja Vu all over again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: aculeus; general_re; BlueLancer; Poohbah; Travis McGee
... depleted uranium shells, a sub-nuclear weapon ...

For your amusement.

14 posted on 04/02/2003 11:33:28 AM PST by dighton (Amen-Corner Hatchet Team, Nasty Little Clique, Vulgar Horde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mikegi
Hmmm....DU....Depleted Uranium, or Democratic Underground? One and the same, separated at birth?
15 posted on 04/02/2003 11:36:42 AM PST by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Egregious Philbin
During this process, the fissionable isotope Uranium 235 is separated from uranium.

This statement alone discredits the article. The correct term to describe 235U is fissile, not fissionable, since it can undergo the fission process as a result of absorption of a low-energy (thermal) neutron. Fissionable generally refers to those nuclei that will undergo fission, but only if interacting with a relatively high-energy particle.

16 posted on 04/02/2003 11:39:03 AM PST by chimera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dighton
If God doesn't love idiots, why does He make so many of them?
17 posted on 04/02/2003 11:41:44 AM PST by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Kenton
A tank unit then fired "two 120mm high velocity depleted uranium rounds straight down the main road, creating a powerful vacuum that literally sucked guerrillas out from their hideaways into the street,

You gotta love it! Sucked them right out the windows, it did!

...In unrelated news, the Pentagon, reacting to negative news stories about Depleted Uranium weapons, shall henceforth refer to all Depleted Uranium as "Sunshine Metal"...

18 posted on 04/02/2003 11:54:20 AM PST by gridlock (If God didn't love idiots, why did he make so many of them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
If God doesn't love idiots, why does He make so many of them?

Maybe for the amusement of the rest of us.

19 posted on 04/02/2003 11:54:55 AM PST by P8riot (Looks like Deja Vu all over again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
BTW, thanks for the new tagline!
20 posted on 04/02/2003 11:55:06 AM PST by gridlock (If God didn't love idiots, why did he make so many of them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-36 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson