Depleted uranium is obtained during the process of destroying nuclear weapons. Depleted uranium was used in the first Gulf War. The United States coated with depleted uranium, 1000 anti-tank artillery projectiles and the Brit’s 100. A depleted uranium missile cuts through a tank like a hot knife through butter. At the moment of impact the missile so coated turns what was a tank into thousands of shards of radioactive porcelain, which spreads over the vast sands of that sad state, virtually forever. Now, in Gulf War II, the numbers are hugely greater. Iraqi and now Afghanistan’s people are literally, cooked. Young Iraqi and Afghan women, in their sandals, trudging though the sands, will die terrible deaths. Their children, those who live, may well be born with savage birth defects. Afghan and Iraqi peoples will suffer through endless centuries for our wars of aggression. Birth defects in Fallujah have already increased ten fold.
In simpler times, a state would declare war and thereafter the war would end. Now, we make wars upon whole nations though a very small number of combatants are our supposed enemies. These the macabre gifts that keep on giving for hundreds of years, thousands of years, and in the case of depleted uranium, for millions of years. We are, in effect, making wars that will never end. Thousands of years from now, we will still be slaughtering people in these two wars of choice gifted us by two presidents named George Bush.
Now our leaders want us to accept millions of tons of depleted uranium here in Utah. Depleted uranium is in fact already here. Much more is on the way. We are now being told that foreign waste will be on the way too. And we find that the state of Utah has no real choice in this matter. Our two Senators from Energy Solutions, Hatch and Bennett, protect their money spigot by lamenting that our cause is just but they can do nothing for us, pointing to Utah politicians. Police power, that is, the power and the obligation to protect our health and well-being, does reside here and the Governor should stop all trains with depleted uranium and demand that the train turn right around and go back where this deadly poison came from. But real power is with Hatch and Bennett. The Commerce Power of Congress will trump anything the state can do to preclude entry of this most toxic of poisons. These two villains are bought and paid by Energy Solutions. One of our congressmen has been a paid employee of Energy/Solutions. Hatch and Bennett are the only people who have the law…the Commerce Clause…by which all these issues will be judged and determined.
If Osama Bin Laden and his henchmen had planned this idea of bringing nuclear material into our country’s innards he would be captured and imprisoned. Just how do the owners and all who profit by destroying our land, water, and all life forms, and the politicians who make this atrocity possible, stay out of jail when quite obviously they are among the most successful terrorists in our history?
Ed Firmage
Salt Lake City, Utah
#1 by Larry Bergan on December 23, 2009 - 4:23 pm
Hatch and Bennett’s silence on this atrocity against Mormons has been deafening.
#2 by Ronald D. Hunt on December 23, 2009 - 10:32 pm
Good chunk of that waste came from Southern Utah back in the 40’s, 50’s and 60’s when it was originally mined.
Southern Utah has naturally occurring uranium in the soil as well. In fact their are area’s where the granite in Utah is radioactive enough to be considered to hot to use as construction material.
Really the reactionary fear of radiation in unfounded, we are surrounded by radiation in our everyday lives so we should learn to respect and understand radiation instead of fear it.
Utah has vast stretches of useless waste land that are perfect for waste storage, and waste storage would be a good source of jobs and revenue for the state. If they take the Billion dollars from the Italian waste proposal that’s a Billion that won’t get cut out of education, medicaid, the department of air quality, etc.
Really I don’t see anything wrong with radioactive waste storage, we just need to make sure we have well though out regulations on it, and tax the hell out of it.
#3 by cav on December 24, 2009 - 1:23 pm
My waste is RED HOT,
Your waste ain’t Doodly-squat!
#4 by Ken Bingham on December 24, 2009 - 1:35 pm
Cav
Sounds painful.
#5 by Bubba V. on December 27, 2009 - 9:30 am
I’m pretty suspicious of nuclear energy and nuclear waste. Don’t want it.
#6 by Bubba V. on January 20, 2010 - 1:19 pm
Is the new administration doing anything to stop the use of these weapons in the Middle East?
#7 by jdberger on January 20, 2010 - 5:32 pm
Mr. Firmage. Just where did you learn about depleted uranium?
One, it’s not used to “coat” anything.
Two, it’s not used in artillery shells.
Three, it’s not used in missiles.
Four, a tank hit with a DU round does not turn to porcelain.
Five, a tank hit with a DU round does not shatter into “thousands of shards of radioactive porcelain, which spreads over the vast sands”.
All of this could have been discovered with a 10 second Google search.
#8 by jdberger on February 10, 2010 - 3:04 pm
Whoops – one more fallacy:
No.
It.
Is.
Not.
#9 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on February 11, 2010 - 1:53 pm
Jdberger–
It’s amazing what a 6 second Wikipedia search can turn up.
One, it’s not clear whether grenades were “coated,” or which parts, or if they were simply made of DU. But the point is still valid.
Two, it’s used in kinetic energy penetrators–a kind of artillery round.
Three, it was used in bunker buster missiles in ‘03.
Four, the tank doesn’t spread like described unless it explodes, but the DU is spread pretty widely. The point is still valid.
Five, this seems a repetition of number four, so no refutation is required.
And the claim about obtaining depleted uranium is not a “fallacy,” it’s an “error.” There’s a difference.
Now that your attempt to invalidate his whole argument on a shallow factoid basis has been thoroughly debunked, would you like to contribute to the discussion?
–Dwight
#10 by Richard Warnick on February 11, 2010 - 3:04 pm
Neither Ed Firmage, jdberger, nor Dwight Sheldon Adams provided any links.
Wikipedia article: Depleted uranium (DU)
DU is a byproduct of the uranium enrichment process. It is a very high density metal, which is why it’s used to make armor-piercing munitions. It is weakly radioactive, but also toxic if ingested.
Looking over the article and sources, I think the health effects of burying DU in the desert are negligible.
#11 by cav on February 11, 2010 - 3:12 pm
Buck-up patriots, this material has to end up somewhere. Right?
Jd, please step forward…it appears you’re not doing anything in your back yard at present, mind if we take a look?
#12 by James Farmer on February 11, 2010 - 3:15 pm
Dwight:
After reading the string of comments, I could not help myself but go to conservapedia to find what the wingnuts have to say about DU.
Following is the single two-sentence entry on DU at C-pedia:
Note the point about health risks. Given that this statement comes from C-pedia – an accepted and authoritative source of information for wingnuts – I don’t understand what all the Utah wingnuts are so concerned about. Heck, we should probably be painting our houses, cars and boats with the stuff!
#13 by Richard Warnick on February 11, 2010 - 4:27 pm
James–
Looks like the right-wingers are positively Clintonian in their extra-careful wording. It’s true there are no known serious health risks from external exposure to DU. Which doesn’t mean it can’t make you sick or even kill you.
I doubt if there are many tanks with DU armor. It’s too expensive and too heavy.
#14 by jdberger on February 15, 2010 - 7:34 am
Richard, there are tons of tanks with DU armor.
#15 by glenn on February 15, 2010 - 8:32 am
After it has been shattered and somewhat vaporized it is toxic. In the Yugoslavian conflict Serbs took DU that had been fired from US shells, and from the bombs dropped(tips are DU for penetrator) they made body armor out of it.
They all died.
Yes, jd DU does serve as armor in some rigs.
#16 by Richard Warnick on February 15, 2010 - 9:10 am
jd and glenn–
I’m genuinely curious. Which tanks have DU armor? Links please.
#17 by glenn on February 16, 2010 - 12:02 am
Done posted the litany but it is moderated in this extended fag show.
#18 by glenn on February 16, 2010 - 12:06 am
M1 Abrams Richard, are you sure you ever served in the military?
For morons that need to be told: From wiki
Design
[edit]Countermeasures
[edit]Armor
Tankers drive an M1A1 Abrams through the Taunus Mountains north of Frankfurt during Exercise Ready Crucible in February, 2005.
The Abrams is protected by armor based on the British-designed Chobham armor, a further development of the British ‘Burlington’ armor. Chobham is a composite armor formed by spacing multiple layers of various alloys of steel, ceramics, plastic composites, and kevlar, giving an estimated maximum (frontal turret) 1,320–1,620 millimetres (52–64 in) of RHAe versus HEAT (and other chemical energy rounds) and 940–960 mm (37–38 in) versus kinetic energy penetrators.[20] It may also be fitted with reactive armor over the track skirts if needed (as in the Urban Survival Kit) and Slat armor over the rear of the tank and rear fuel cells to protect against ATGMs. Protection against spalling is provided by a Kevlar liner. Beginning in 1987, M1A1 tanks received improved armor packages that incorporated depleted uranium (DU) mesh in their armor at the front of the turret and the front of the hull. Armor reinforced in this manner offers significantly increased resistance towards all types of anti-tank weaponry, but at the expense of adding considerable weight to the tank, as depleted uranium is 1.7 times more dense than lead.[21]
The first M1A1 tanks to receive this upgrade were tanks stationed in Germany, since they were the first line of defense against the Soviet Union. US-based tank battalions participating in Operation Desert Storm received an emergency program to upgrade their tanks with depleted uranium armor immediately before the onset of the campaign. M1A2 tanks uniformly incorporate depleted uranium armor, and all M1A1 tanks in active service have been upgraded to this standard as well, the added protection from the depleted uranium armor is believed to be equivalent to 24 inches (610 mm) of RHA. The strength of the armor is estimated to be about the same as similar western, contemporary main battle tanks such as the Leopard 2. In the Persian Gulf War, Abrams tanks survived multiple hits at relatively close ranges from Iraqi Lion of Babylon tanks and ATGMs. M829A1 “Silver Bullet” APFSDS rounds from other M1A1 Abrams were unable to penetrate the front and side armor (even at close ranges) in friendly fire incidents as well as an incident in which another Abrams tried to destroy an Abrams that got stuck in mud and had to be abandoned.[
#19 by glenn on February 16, 2010 - 12:43 am
That is from Wiki, the moron’s fave!! They got it right this time.
#20 by Richard Warnick on February 16, 2010 - 7:49 am
Glenn–
Still no link, but thanks for the info.
I left active duty in 1980, just as the first Abrams tanks were coming into service. The early version of Chobham armor in the M1A1 didn’t incorporate DU.
#21 by glenn on February 16, 2010 - 8:44 am
That was 30 years ago Richard, and you didn’t get the link because in it I questioned whether you had ever been in the military. What you see is the armor portion of wiki’s Abrams page
#22 by Richard Warnick on February 16, 2010 - 10:01 am
Glenn, One Utah’s Mr. Civility.
#23 by glenn on February 16, 2010 - 11:37 am
Richard, you don’t have much credibility in military matters if you don’t know that.
The obvious agenda from your posts demands ridicule with every error.
#24 by Richard Warnick on February 16, 2010 - 12:10 pm
Glenn–
I knew about DU penetrators in 1976 when they were still classified SECRET. I knew what Chobham armor was when it first came into use. Conservapedia said DU was used for “tank armor.” But it’s a DU mesh component added to Chobham armor.
You didn’t know this stuff until you looked it up.
#25 by glenn on February 16, 2010 - 4:33 pm
Sure I did, ask Cliff, he’ll know. That is tank armor no matter what you say Richard. Reactive armor is an add on as well, and it is still called armor. Geeze Rich, what a day for you. I have studied military tactics, strategy and equipment since I was a kid, plus being born German, there is a lot of military gear we use, that they invented. So it is easier for me than you might expect.
Guess you just never kept current.
Did you know that all the main guns on the Merkeva, Abrams, and the Leopard 1,2,3 are made by the same company? RheinMetall of Germany, the people that built the 88mm. Tell me war ‘aint a racket.