In war, the advantages of Depleted Uranium munitions help the United States stomp other countries into the ground. The United States and its NATO allies maintain that Depleted Uranium dust (a by-product) doesn't cause cancer and birth defects, however, 136 countries are citing other research saying that it does. Which side do you think is right? Here is the wikipedia entry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium
Anyone taking "a side" on an issue like this is wrong by definition. My impression of the (limited) evidence I've seen is that DU is indeed a risk to people during and after conflicts where it is used but then so are lots of other modern military remains. I do think DU is a disproportionately high profile issue because of the radioactivity factor, which creates an image of "bad and dangerous" in peoples' minds regardless of the facts. I believe the radioactivity isn't necessarily the key factor in any risk from DU dust. This should be a wider question than just DU and if anything, the blinkered focus on it alone is counter-productive.
My question is why people do "drive by" posts here, re-opening this topic with a new thread over and over again. There must be 20+ threads in here, all about DU, and it is argued to death.
Here--from one of the threads that has beaten this subject to death. You will probably want to read the other posts there, too. Just to get an idea of what the arguments are, even if they are poorly executed by some of the discussion participants. I cut the quote down to the minimum, but it's my post, so I can do that. Feel free to check out the rest of them and follow the associated links. Then please ask something original about this stuff, because, frankly, it's getting rather boring here.
I could care less about which side is right. Weapons kill. Lead kills and we have used lead bullets for hundreds of years, lol.
One and only, lol, Ihave posted hundreds of times in various threads, this may be my first one here, but only here. And I stand by it, Depleted uranium is SUPPOSED by SOME scientists to pose a POSSIBLE threat to health is SOME unknown exposure rates. LEAD is a KNOWN killer and every bullet america sends down the barrel of a 5.56 or 7.62 is lead cored--so much for what really matters. People fear radiation, for some stupid reason, the word URANIUM scares them, get over it.
Preaching to the choir here my friend. I have pointed this out to these folks many times, they just do not get it. I even tell them the other things that DU is used in, does not matter to them at all. In fact, tell them that some of the most valuable dishware was considered to be a cheap giveaway made with uranium, and they would never believe you. But check out the prices today of Uranium Depression Glass, and you would be surprised. http://www.ebay.com/itm/Huge-OPALES...129?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item484207e1d1
I've always held their disregard for the facts of a given situation has far more to do with political motivations than any particular lack of education or intelligence. They're not incapable of 'getting it' so much as 'getting it' does not fit with their political viewpoint; facts and situations need to be adapted to fit their worldview. If that means DU suddenly becomes something that spewed from Three Mile Island and was dipped in Chernobyl reactor water and causes immediate deformation in babies who live within a thousand mile radius of an aircraft weight then that is the line they're pick up and run with, whether they actually believe it to be the tuth or not. And, after a while, a lie told long enough becomes it's own truth.
