Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Iraq Depleted Uranium

  1. Sep 26, 2004 #1
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 26, 2004 #2

    graphic7

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    What's new?

    There were never any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and none will ever be found. I wouldn't mind seeing the Bush administration prosecuted for ignorance, but that will never happen. This is the sort of thing that happens when an idiot (take a look at his college transcript) gets in office.

    *Awaits for the "Dubya" to express his garbage*
     
  4. Sep 26, 2004 #3

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Let's be nice. If you take a jab at someone, they will jab back, then it quickly deteriorates from there.
     
  5. Sep 27, 2004 #4
    Actually that is a LIE. he used them against Iran and his own people.

    Perhaps he destroyed the rest in anticipation of a gree light from the UN inspectors.

    But let's be honest here. yes there were WMDs.
     
  6. Sep 27, 2004 #5

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Biased information yes. Point? No. No point, just USA bashing. This is an old and tired subject.

    graphic7 - again, your post has nothing at all to do with the link.
     
  7. Sep 27, 2004 #6
    I was hoping that somebody with some insight into what the long term biological effects of exposure to this level of radiation might be?

    EDIT: Why is it an old and tired subject the effects (if any) of DU will only just start to become apparent, DU is still being used and could be ruining thousands of peoples lives, as far as I know anyway. btw: its not just the US that uses DU munitions.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2004
  8. Sep 27, 2004 #7
    the level of radiation is miniscule, i believe the adverse effects are mainly due to the chemical toxicity of uranium, much like lead. i think the main problem here is that people see the word "uranium" and think of some green glowing "Captain Planet"-esque radioactive material, which simply isn't true.

    the health effects of depleted uranium have been studied and it is not considered a radioactive hazard. you can read more about DU and uranium in general here if you want http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp150.html.
     
  9. Sep 27, 2004 #8
    Seconded, this is my understanding of it all.
     
  10. Sep 27, 2004 #9
    What I want to know is: What are the other toxic effects? and What happens if it is ingested, wouldnt the radiation be more damaging then?
     
  11. Sep 27, 2004 #10

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    This is a conspiracy theory that has been going around for years. There isn't anything new coming out - DU has been well understood for decades. I've handled the munitions before (the Navy uses it in 20mm anti-air shells) - I wasn't worried then, and I'm not now.

    HazZy is right - with the caveat that what makes it worse than lead is it oxidizes easier (it burns). Then its possible to breathe it.

    We had a pretty long thread on this HERE
     
  12. Sep 27, 2004 #11

    graphic7

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    And you're failing to mention that the United States gave him the materials necessary to make the weapons with full knowledge he was going to do so.

    Again, biased propaganda.
     
  13. Sep 27, 2004 #12
    I'll take the liberty of pointing out that regardless of wether there have been WMDs at one point, there arnt anymore, or weren't when bush invaded, therefor it was a bs reason.
     
  14. Sep 27, 2004 #13

    graphic7

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    But Smurf, let me emphasize again. If there were WMDs, we gave them to him - it's that simple.
     
  15. Sep 27, 2004 #14
    I believe the response to that when I pointed it out was something like:
    We did give him the ingredients but we did not expect him to make Chemical and Biological weapons out of them, proove your assertations - Something along those lines.
     
  16. Sep 27, 2004 #15

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    So you first said there were never any, now you are admitting there were? :uhh: Lets just be clear here...
     
  17. Sep 27, 2004 #16
    Don't try to turn this around russ, he said there are none now, which there arn't, but there were way back when Iran and Iraq were going at it, which there were. And the US did give them to him.
     
  18. Sep 27, 2004 #17

    kat

    User Avatar

    Yes, yes, and surprise surprise ....there is a reason why there is a response that goes something like that...maybe it's time to jump on the logic wagon bucko...

    Of course, this has nothing to do with DU, so again the left wing american bashing tag team takes us off into some tangential universe...

    I believe that DU is found to be less dangerous then that which is found naturally occurring...here and there and everywhere...the person most in danger when dealing with DU is the soldier who is firing the weapon and handling the munition.
     
  19. Sep 27, 2004 #18
    I believe that you are wrong, Kat. When the munition strikes a target, some of it vaporizes, which means that it has opportunity to spread around and be ingested or inhaled.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1506151.stm
     
  20. Sep 27, 2004 #19

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Actually, thats not what s/he said:
    If its an honest mistake, fine - but judging from recent posts, I don't think it was. That's why I pointed it out.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2004
  21. Sep 27, 2004 #20

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Well, if you want to be technical, the people in the most danger is the crew of the tank... :rofl:
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Iraq Depleted Uranium
  1. Depleted Uranium (Replies: 19)

  2. Iran's uranium (Replies: 31)

  3. Iraq WMDs (Replies: 11)

Loading...