Regarding #8, where does "the UN" list DU as a "weapon of mass
destruction"? (And when did the UN start defining the term, rather
than treaties? And why can't I find "Depeleted Uranium" on the UN
WMD page?)
Why doesn't the WHO
(doubtless Bush toadies?) think DU is So Horribly Dangerous? Why
doesn't anyscientific or medical
body think it's so dangerous as you say?
I submit that the reason is that the actual science doesn't agree
with your implications and statements about the dangers of depleted
uranium.
Is your ignorance about the radiological physics of depleted
uranium wilfull or simply accidental and convenient to you? (As for
chemical dangers, well, it's no worse than the lead in
normal bullets. I guess we need a trust fund for lead poisoning
before undertaking wars, right?)
(Lastly, regarding 7, are you sure EvilHalliburton was contracted
to provide water? And, er, there's no shortage of water for the
troops. There were complaints about a lack of bottled
water... the copious water from the ROWPUs is evidently not quite
as tasty as Evian, even though it's good, drinkable water.
But, well, hey. Any excuse to blast Halliburton, right? Just 'cause
their stock is down, what, 50%
since 2000? )
Sorry (sort of) for the rant, but if there's one thing I can't
stand it's blathering on about DU that ignores, well, the actual
state of the science (physics and medicine) involved.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by Sigivald:
Show all comments by Sigivald.