Does Israel use Depleted Uranium?

rightondude

So many gulfwar vets have "mysterious" illneses affecting different parts of their bodies (particularly the lungs). The M1 Abrams tank is coated with it. These kids are getting cuts and scrapes and radioactive dirt in their bloodstreams, food, and water, after combing these bombed out areas.

325,000 or 250,000...something like 40% of the guys and gals that came home from the gulf war are sick and dying. Thats a dirty little secret being kept highly confidential now for as long as possible. How many of the young vets have to start dropping before this story comes raging out in the media like a bull in a china shop? It's coming. These troops got DU particles floating around inside them. Key areas of the body as well like organs and glands. Once in the bloodstream that where they often lodge and "mysteriously" incapacitate. Mysterious yeah right.

Ahnimus

The reality is, the infamous "dirty bomb" is basically the same thing. The only difference being that the RDD is actually designed to spread the isotopes.

rightondude

Exactly. Just because the delivry mechanism is "intentionally" different.

Intentionally different how? Because of the bomb design itself? or what "happens to it in nature" (Donald Rumsfeld voice) after it impacts. Because the delivery method "per se" does not exist on an engineer's spec drawing means it does not exist at all?

I can see how they could slip that decision under the eyes the radar. It really all started when Bush cried the "I'll make any goddam law I wan't" law shortly after the 9/11 thing. Holy cry of the dictator.

Ahhh boy...

El_Kabong

Rockin'InCanada wrote:

Yeah I thought that...curious on just how radiocative it really is? Eg. What is the rate of decay...percentage of it that has decayed?

Fun science type of questions....

Taken from the following 2 UN reports, if you require the links let me know. some different studies by universities and other groups are contained in the report as to contamination and birth defects...

UN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS - 3 August 1998

UN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS - 14 July 2003

"We, of course, agree with the Sub-Commission that the use of weaponry containing depleted uranium in armed conflict is incompatible with existing human rights and humanitarian law. In our numerous oral and written statements on the issue of this weaponry we have set out four tests that all weapons must pass in order to be used in armed conflict: the weapons and their effect must be contained to the legal field of battle (the "geographical" test); the weapons and their effect must cease to function when the armed conflict is over (the "temporal" test); the weapons and their effect must not be unduly inhumane or cause undue suffering (the "humaneness" test); and the weapons can not unduly harm the environment (the "environment" test). Weaponry containing depleted uranium has been increasing in the news and subject of widespread international condemnation, especially as it was so widely used in the new war against Iraq. One study of children born of United States veterans of the first Gulf War shows a more than 60ncidence of disability, deformity and other serious medical problems. Another study shows that United States Gulf War veteran' children have a much higher likelihood of having three specific birth defects: two types heart valve abnormality to children of male veterans, and genito-urinary defects to children born of female veterans. "Gulf WarBirth Defects" in the Lexington-Herald Leader, 4 June 2003. A study of British veterans of the Gulf War, Bosnia and Kosovo reveals that they have 10 - 14 times the level of chromosomal abnormalities than usual. H. Schrader, A. Heimers, R. Frentzel-Beyme, A. Schott & W. Hoffmann, "Chromosome aberration analysis in perifiral lymphocytes of Gulf war and Balkan war veterans," in Radiation Protection Dosimetry, vol.103 no.3, pp. 211-220.

There is increasing evidence that troubling weaponry was also used in Afghanistan, as a Canadian medical research facility found that the urine of Afghani people near where the United States carried out military operations contained radioactive isotopes 100 to 400 times higher than Gulf War veterans from the United Kingdom tested in 1999. The report is posted at http://www.umrc.net. The maximum permissible level for members of the public in the United States is considered to be 12 nanograms per year. The Canadian team recorded an average 315.5 nanograms in people in Jalalabad, Tora Bora and Mazar-e-Sharif. A 12-year-old boy near Kabul tested at 2,031 nanograms. After a second trip to Afghanistan, the Canadian team documented comparable results in a much broader area and larger population group. A prominent Afghani physician reports that there is a dramatic increase in birth defects in Afghanistan and people are experiencing catastrophic health consequences.

Regarding the use of weapons used against Iraq this spring, it is clear that much weaponry containing depleted uranium was used. For example Abrams tanks only use DU ordnance. The bombs fired on Baghdad and other cities as part of "shock and awe" are alleged to have had DU nosecones. Cluster bombs were admittedly used in urban areas in an attempt to protect British troops. Paul Waugh, "Allied use of cluster bombs illegal, minister admits," The Independent, 30 May 2003. While the amount of DU dispersed over Iraq for the second time in less than 15 years is unclear, it is clear that the United States does not intend to clean up the DU nor even fully disclose where it was used and in what amounts.

Our organization considers the Iraq situation an atrocity followed by a catastrophe. The international community simply must respond or risk being overtaken in every way by a power that did not and does not intend to abide by the principles of humanitarian law carefully carved out since the first Geneva Convention of 1864 and The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907. The weapons already in use are terrifying enough, without contemplating those planned in the future.

We urge the Sub-Commission to request Mr. Yeung Sik Yuen to continue his work on all these weapons. In the course of his work on this topic he has become one of the few experts in this field and the Sub-Commission is well advised to request him to prepare an additional follow up paper. Indeed, it would take years for another to catch up to his expertise. The importance of this endeavor cannot possibly be overestimated. The fate of the whole world lies in being able to carry out true disarmament. The smaller, poorer countries cannot possible keep up with "arm-chair" wars or they will bankrupt themselves. Even the other developed countries are far, far behind this technological madness. If the United States is allowed to use and develop these weapons, all other countries are reduced to peonage at the mercy of the United States. Therefore, it is essential that the international community find a way to truly rid the world of illegal weapons.

In our Memorandum we identify the four basic rules for weaponry under existing customary and treaty-based humanitarian law: (i) weapons must be able to be contained to legal military fields of action (the geographical requirement); (ii) weapons must be able to cease harming action when the armed conflict is over (the temporal requirement); (iii) weapons may not cause undue suffering (the humanitarian requirement); and (iv) weapons must not unduly harm the environment (the environmental requirement). We conclude that the use of most of the weapons listed in resolutions 1996/16 and 1997/36, especially weaponry containing depleted uranium, would constitute a per se violation of these requirements. We also conclude that production or threat of production, stockpiling and development of weapons whose use would constitute a per se violation of humanitarian law could be viewed as coercive, torture, a serious threat to peace, a threat to the right to self-determination and a threat to the right to life.

Mr. Yeung Sik Yuen's assessment of when weapons are to be considered banned by operation of law is stated somewhat differently but is essentially compatible with ours. However, he adds an essential element that we had not included -- the requirement that all weapons use must be in proportion to the legitimate military objectives. Thus even "legal" weapons might be used illegally -- as when using a large bomb against a small, lightly defended military outpost and causing injury and damage in excess of the actual military gain. This is an important addition, as several weapons systems are now being proposed that would severely tax this rule. One of these, being developed in the United States, would allow the United States to engage in an armed conflict anywhere in the world from its own territory. Code-named FALCON (for Force Application and Launch from the Continental United States), weapons delivery systems are being planned that would carry 12,000 pound bombs anywhere in the world in less than two hours from a US launch. As the United States would not have any military personnel on site, it would be impossible to assess proportionality. And the "enemy" would have no way at all to defend itself as the "enemy" would not have the same weapons capability. The United States is also planning smaller bombs that can be launched into space, and when guided over its target, dropped to earth. These would be able to penetrate 70 feet of solid rock. They are defended by United States officials because it "would free the US military from reliance on forward basing to enable it to react promptly and decisively to destabilising or threatening actions by hostile countries or terrorist organizations." From the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) invitation for bids, posted on its website, reported by Julian Borger, The Guardian, 1 July 2003. We call wars to be waged this way "arm chair" wars. The United State military will not have to leave home, but can effectively destroy a country from their homes. The United States "combatants" never have to see combat, nor the destruction they cause with the bombs they send from home. "

El_Kabong

there's also a doc on it called 'beyond treason'...i haven't gotten around to watching it yet but i've found it online...supposed tobe about hte effects of DU weaponry

Puck78

Ahnimus wrote:

The half-life of Uranium-232 is 4.5 billion years I believe. Let me collect some info and I'll post it.

depleted uranium is uranium 238, not 232.
It has a low level radioactivity, with a main peak at 1001 kev. It can be dangerous if inhaled in huge quantities right after an explosion. It deposits in waters and eventually adsorbed by some plants. At that stage, however, is no more dangerous through radioactivity but through its chemical toxicity, that is quite high.

Puck78

rightondude wrote:

This stuff has a half life of 4.5 billion years. That is 4.5 billion years from now the ill effects will only be just half of what it is today. The stuff is already way up in the atmosphere worldwide. DU has accounted for the same numer of radioactive atoms as 400,000 Hiroshima's as of 2004 statistics (lower) as well I've seen. I was reading Scientists in North America can measure barium particles from it it in peoples hair from just being outside. It's fucked up.

but it also means low intensity. Please don't play with science if you don't know it.

shiraz

Ahnimus wrote:

That last link is in Hebrew, except the text I posted, if someone like Shiraz or Jsand can please translate it?

Its some kind of a "magazine" called "world military R&D", which presents all kind of world wide military R&D mini-articals. that link is for 11/2005 issue, and the specific research you're talking about is related to the US army.

Here it is:

Basically it tells us that the *US* army improved the old "Phalanx" system (an interception system for rockets, missiles, artillery & Mortars who was once used only in ships), by adding it an IR (Infra-Red) sophisticated camera, advanced video system to catch up any movments, several radar systems, some kind of weapon system and a special arming (doesn't say exactly what it is). This mobiled improved system was designed for the war in Iraq as a defensive tool for US soliders.

shiraz

Ahnimus wrote:

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Speeches%20by%20Israeli%20leaders/2001/Statement%20by%20Dep%20FM%20Michael%20Melchior%20to%20the%20Durban
These states would have us believe that they are anti-Zionist, not antisemitic, but again and again this lie is disproved. What are the despicable caricatures of Jews that fill the Arab press and are being circulated at this Conference: what are the vicious libels so freely invented and disseminated by our enemies - about the use of poison gas, or depleted uranium bullets, or injecting babies with the Aids virus - if not the reincarnation of age-old antisemitic canards?

http://wwwterrorista.mfa.gov.il/mfa/government/speeches%20by%20israeli%20leaders/2002/press%20conference%20with%20fm%20shimon%20peres%20and%20major%20ge
want to speak about the military situation around the compound of Arafat. There is a lot of disinformation that is given by the Palestinians - not a very new phenomenon. Remember their saying that Israeli Mossad is responsible for the demolition of the Twin Towers in New York, that Israeli soldiers are giving poisoned candies to the Palestinian children, etc. They also say that Israel is using uranium.

http://www.nic.gov.il/MFA/Archive/Articles/1996/WHO%20WILL%20SUBDUE%20THE%20KATYUSHA%20-%2030-Apr-96
"Phalanx" guns, which are in service in both the US and Israeli navies, and are designed to intercept very short-range sea-to-sea missiles. The heart of the system is a radar-directed "gatling" gun with six 20 mm barrels. When a sea-to-sea missile approaches a ship, at a height of only a few meters, and generally at sub-sonic speed, the radar locks onto the missile and immediately activates the cannon that fires a "lead screen" of shells made from depleted uranium, which hit the missile and explode it.

http://www.mod.gov.il/pages/mafat/pdfs/2005-11.pdf
Land Based Phalanx Takes Aim At Rockets, Artillery and Mortars.

All Israeli government websites

After reading it all, I have some comments:

1. (ref 1) Rabbi Malchior is a great supporter for the establish of a Palestinian country, he is (or was) a member of the labor party. Just wanted you to know.

2. (ref 1+2) The Rabbi was talking about Palestinian accusations (made especially by Suha Arafat, btw), about using depleted uranium bullets against Palestinian civilians. Israel denaied doing such thing.

3. (ref 3) This (1996) artical is related to the one I translated here (2005). We are talking about an arming system who is used in ships against other military ships rockets.

4. (ref 4) Like I wrote before, the US army improved the old "Phalanx" system (an interception system for rockets, missiles etc' who was once used only in ships), into an advance weapon system specially for the war in Iraq as a defensive tool for US ground soliders. This is a new technology (the artical is from 11/2005, when the system still wasn't in operational use), so it is not clear whether the US army is already operating it in Iraq, nor whether Israel has received these systems.

I don't know what is there you wanted to prove (or why), but it didn't work.

Puck78

shiraz wrote:

2. (ref 1+2) The Rabbi was talking about Palestinian accusations (made especially by Suha Arafat, btw), about using depleted uranium bullets against Palestinian civilians. Israel denaied doing such thing.

note that depleted uranium is not used in bullets for anti-humans weapons. It is used to cover special anti-tank bullets.
So it can't be directly, anti-palestinian. It can be undirectly, through long term exposition when it dissolves.

(I talk for the sake of science. For the sake of people I'm for a total banning of depleted uranium. More: I'm for a total stop of the arms trade)

shiraz

Puck78 wrote:

note that depleted uranium is not used in bullets for anti-humans weapons. It is used to cover special anti-tank bullets.
So it can't be directly, anti-palestinian. It can be undirectly, through long term exposition when it dissolves.

(I talk for the sake of science. For the sake of people I'm for a total banning of depleted uranium. More: I'm for a total stop of the arms trade)

But we're talking about an anti ship-missiles/rocekts. Palestinians don't have battle ships...

Btw: Science ha? well, we have something in common (:

Puck78

shiraz wrote:

But we're talking about an anti ship-missiles/rocekts. Palestinians don't have battle ships...

yes, i don't know the details of this question. In general depleted uranium is used in ammunitions able to penetrate thick shields. It's property is that it is highly inflammable, so that when it hits the target it starts to burn. This is the problem: burning the particles/dusts diffuse more easily.
It is used both for bullets and to cover rockets. I'm not arguing if it is used by israel against palestine, but if it is it could be used by aereoplanes ammunitions against tanks and thick shields.

shiraz wrote:

Btw: Science ha? well, we have something in common (:

Ahnimus

shiraz wrote:

But we're talking about an anti ship-missiles/rocekts. Palestinians don't have battle ships...

Btw: Science ha? well, we have something in common (:

The information I posted suggests that Phalanx are being used against mortars and other ground units. In the description of the Phalanx it stats that it uses "depleted uranium bullets". Also, Israel just received large shipments of DU from the US, or so I hear. It's more effective at killing future generations of people, then it is at penetrating armor. In light of Israel's use of chemical weapons, still trying to pinpoint which one exactly. This isn't such a suprise.

Ahnimus

It would seem by the accounts of Palestinians in that Gaza Strip Documentary posted that two weapons are being used.

They reported that they saw white smoke, which was odorless and seemed harmless, then came yellow smoke and black smoke which smelled sweet. They had extremely itchy skin, one victim said "My whole body is killing me"

The white smoke could be White Phosphorus, banned by the UN for use on civilians. It's just like a smoke grenade, but the health effects are controversial. The yellow smoke I haven't been able to explain, however the black smoke and itchiness sounds like Mustard gas.

shiraz

Ahnimus wrote:

The information I posted suggests that Phalanx are being used against mortars and other ground units. In the description of the Phalanx it stats that it uses "depleted uranium bullets". Also, Israel just received large shipments of DU from the US, or so I hear. It's more effective at killing future generations of people, then it is at penetrating armor. In light of Israel's use of chemical weapons, still trying to pinpoint which one exactly. This isn't such a suprise.

1. based on your info, that new US Phalanx system was designed especially for the war in Iraq and had no US operational use at least till the end of 2005.

2. We don't know if Israel received these systems (I know everybody here and in Europe is talking about bombs).

3. Every new system in the IDF needs to be learned, it requires the creation of training courses and the implementation of that courses so you'll eventually end up with soliders / units who are specializing in that specific system. This can't happen in just a matter of 6 days, nor 6 months.

4. I don't understand what is it that you want. It seems that searching for all the bad things Israel had done (killing civilians & destroying half of Lebanon), might have done (WP bombs - IDF still denays it) or may do is more important than a-c-t-u-a-l-l-y helping the Lebanese (and Israeli) civilians (by putting pressure upon your govt). The thing is, you're not the only one who's acting that way on this board, and I think its a shame - you are basically doing nothing.

Ahnimus

shiraz wrote:

1. based on your info, that new US Phalanx system was designed especially for the war in Iraq and had no US operational use at least till the end of 2005.

2. We don't know if Israel received these systems (I know everybody here and in Europe is talking about bombs).

3. Every new system in the IDF needs to be learned, it requires the creation of training courses and the implementation of that courses so you'll eventually end up with soliders / units who are specializing in that specific system. This can't happen in just a matter of 6 days, nor 6 months.

4. I don't understand what is it that you want. It seems that searching for all the bad things Israel had done (killing civilians & destroying half of Lebanon), might have done (WP bombs - IDF still denays it) or may do is more important than a-c-t-u-a-l-l-y helping the Lebanese (and Israeli) civilians (by putting pressure upon your govt). The thing is, you're not the only one who's acting that way on this board, and I think its a shame - you are basically doing nothing.

I hear stuff and do research into it. The third link I provided at the opening of this thread is admittance of Phalanx use in the US and Israel.

shiraz

Ahnimus wrote:

I hear stuff and do research into it. The third link I provided at the opening of this thread is admittance of Phalanx use in the US and Israel.

Between battle ships, my friend, which is quite irelevant for our area. it is a 1996 artical, the new converted ground system wasn't invented till the end of 2005 (according to the info you gave me).

Ahnimus

shiraz wrote:

Between battle ships, my friend, which is quite irelevant for our area. it is a 1996 artical, the new converted ground system wasn't invented till the end of 2005 (according to the info you gave me).

Well the fourth link talks about Phalanx used against ground forces, and it's in Hebrew, so I can't read it. I nicely asked for someone to translate it. So instead of using that information secretly, how about sharing the contents of it with the rest of us.

shiraz

Ahnimus wrote:

Well the fourth link talks about Phalanx used against ground forces, and it's in Hebrew, so I can't read it. I nicely asked for someone to translate it. So instead of using that information secretly, how about sharing the contents of it with the rest of us.

And once again, you are saying things without even checking them first. I did translated this last artical, but apparently you don't even bother to read the replays for your own thread. "using that information secretly"... god.

Ahnimus

shiraz wrote:

And once again, you are saying things without even checking them first. I did translated this last artical, but apparently you don't even bother to read the replays for your own thread. "using that information secretly"... god.

Ah sorry, I didn't see that. Thanks for translating it. So it's inconclusive wether Israel uses DU or not. We know they have it, and can use it, but wether they do or not is still disputed. For the record I'm not trying to prove anything, just investigating myself.