Iraq - It's Not So Good After All
Published March 28, 2004
Many say Iraq is better off today than it was under the rule of Saddam Hussein--that the end justified the means. Well, "There Are No Words ... Radiation in Iraq Equals 250,000 Nagasaki Bombs" points out that the end isn't as rosy as some claim. My only hope is that this piece is wrong in its facts. According to the author, Bob Nichols, we have been using tons of depleted uranium in Operation Iraqi Freedom in the form of "bullets, 120 mm tank shells, missiles, dumb bombs, smart bombs, 500 and 2,000 pound bombs, [and] cruise missiles." So far in Iraq, 4,000,000 pounds of uranium have been used--4,000,000 pounds that lingers as "Uranium Dust (UD)." To give us a picture of the situation, Nichols offers the following:
- When US Troopers or Iraqis breathe even a tiny amount into their lungs, as little as One Gram, it is the same as getting an X-Ray every hour for the rest of their shortened life.
- The uranium cannot be removed, there is no treatment, there is no cure.
- It [UD] lasts virtually forever.
- How many Nagasaki Nuclear Bombs equal the Radiation loosed in the 2003 Iraq war? Answer: About 250,000 Nuclear Bombs.
Go to Traprock Peace Center for more information.
- Iraq - It's Not So Good After All
- Published: March 28, 2004
- Type:
- Section: Culture
- Writer: Dirtgrain
- Dirtgrain's BC Writer page
- Dirtgrain's personal site
- Spread the Word
- Like this article?
- Email this
Save to del.icio.us
Comments on this articleComments
...and it's 1,2,3, what are we fighting for?, don't ask me I don't give a damn, next stop is????
I wish only 603 people died of Cancer in this country.
Rick, the point about using DU weapons is that they increase cancer and birth defects virtually forever.
In one portion of Iraq, the number of deaths went from 34 to 603 annually. That's an increase of 1,674%.
Your sympathies are noted.
I highly doubt 4,000,000 pounds were used. Thats an awful lot. I bet that's also too expensive to even concieve of using. Also the reason that more people have died of cancer in Iraq, is probably because they have better hospitals now that can actually diagnose cancer as before people just died for whatever reason.
It's just a TEENSY bit more involved than you imagine....
link
Add your comment, speak your mind
(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/14150)
It's definitely a problem, so here's a less inflammatory reference from last year for readers:
"Although there is no firm consensus, nuclear experts and laymen alike generally agree that depleted uranium, which is toxic as well as radioactive, is at the very least a potential cause of cancers and birth defects. Some Iraqi physicians and others blame depleted uranium weapons used in the 1991 Gulf War for a major increase of cancers and birth defects that occurred a few years later. It is also a prime suspect for the Gulf War Syndrome that has sickened and killed thousands of U.S. veterans.
"After NATO's use of DU weapons in Kosovo in 1999, the Council of Europe parliamentarians called for a worldwide ban on the manufacture, testing, use and sale of weapons using depleted uranium, asserting that NATO's use of DU weapons would have "long term effects on health and quality of life in South-East Europe, affecting future generations." The call went unheeded.
"The U.S. and British use of DU during the latest conflict, also alarms doctors in Iraq. Cancer had already increased dramatically in southern Iraq. In 1988, 34 people died of cancer; in 1998, 450 died of cancer; in 2001 there were 603 cancer deaths. The rate of birth defects also had risen sharply, according to doctors in Iraq."