The Forgotten Holocaust Remembered

[#juan]

Eagle I think the problem with comparing the VietNam war with the Gulf war is the time separation. At least some VietNam veterans could have died of old age by now. A 25 year old soldier in 1965 would now be 69 or 70 years old.

The other thing is that a lot of Gulf War vets died of exposure to radioactive materials....At least that is the thinking in the articles I presented.

There are many links to DU deaths. The stuff is dreadful crap. If you don't believe it is radioactive, you should certainly believe it is toxic. Our military is using it as well and I'm not happy about that either.

 

[EagleSmack]

Eagle I think the problem with comparing the VietNam war with the Gulf war is the time separation. At least some VietNam veterans could have died of old age by now. A 25 year old soldier in 1965 would now be 69 or 70 years old.

The other thing is that a lot of Gulf War vets died of exposure to radioactive materials....At least that is the thinking in the articles I presented.

There are many links to DU deaths. The stuff is dreadful crap. If you don't believe it is radioactive, you should certainly believe it is toxic. Our military is using it as well and I'm not happy about that either.

But they are comparing the deaths of ALL military persons that were in the service at the time of Desert Shield and Desert Storm. If you see in that article it stated "Non-Deployed" and "Deployed". They are counting the deaths of military personell based in the states or stationed elsewhere...ones who were never near Iraq or Kuwait.

Why?

To boost their numbers, that is why.

Of course DU is radioactive. From what I read DU is used today in non-military applications as well.

DU is a flashy topic. When the US/French/and British tankers plowed through Soviet made armor with barely a fight by using DU it P---ed a lot of people off at the efficiency.

 

[#juan]

DU violates four fundamental international rules on the use of weaponry: [SIZE=+1]1./Its effects go beyond the battlefield;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]2./Weapons should only be used during a conflict and their effects must not have any effect after the conflict has finished;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]3./Unacceptable, prolonged suffering is caused by the munitions;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]4./The environment has been damaged by the weapons.[/SIZE]

 

[ironsides]

Eagle I think the problem with comparing the VietNam war with the Gulf war is the time separation. At least some VietNam veterans could have died of old age by now. A 25 year old soldier in 1965 would now be 69 or 70 years old.

The other thing is that a lot of Gulf War vets died of exposure to radioactive materials....At least that is the thinking in the articles I presented.

There are many links to DU deaths. The stuff is dreadful crap. If you don't believe it is radioactive, you should certainly believe it is toxic. Our military is using it as well and I'm not happy about that either.

Hey, I'm one of those veterans your referring to, been in both places. Retired of course but still healthy.

:lol:

 

[Colpy]

DU violates four fundamental international rules on the use of weaponry: [SIZE=+1]1./Its effects go beyond the battlefield;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]2./Weapons should only be used during a conflict and their effects must not have any effect after the conflict has finished;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]3./Unacceptable, prolonged suffering is caused by the munitions;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]4./The environment has been damaged by the weapons.[/SIZE]

I don't know where you came up with this.........but it is exceptionally silly:

1. Weapons as simple as bullets go beyond the battlefield.....innocents are struck by stray munitions regularly........ It might be nice to fantasize about going back to the days of sword and mace....but not very sensible.

2. There are still people being killed on World War One battlefields by unexploded munitions........see the comments on sword and mace.

3. Sorry, that eliminates sword and mace.....and leaves us with the option of nasty words flung at ten paces....and even then one runs the risk of psychological harm.

4. Shall we go back to those World War One battlefields? Or the fields sown with salt by the Romans? Or the forests devastated by war over the past millenium? Or Hadrian's Wall?

Silly. Exceptionally silly.

 

[#juan]

Hey, I'm one of those veterans your referring to, been in both places. Retired of course but still healthy.

:lol:

It wasn't meant to be funny.
Unfortunately a lot of U.S. soldiers are not still healthy. DU in it's pure form is only mildly radioactive but it is very, very toxic. Depleted uranium bullets fired from the Gattling gun in the A-10 for instance, burn in the air and release a highly toxic depleted uranium dust that has killed thousands. The dust has a half life in the billions of years so it never goes away.

 

[#juan]

I don't know where you came up with this.........but it is exceptionally silly:

1. Weapons as simple as bullets go beyond the battlefield.....innocents are struck by stray munitions regularly........ It might be nice to fantasize about going back to the days of sword and mace....but not very sensible.

2. There are still people being killed on World War One battlefields by unexploded munitions........see the comments on sword and mace.

3. Sorry, that eliminates sword and mace.....and leaves us with the option of nasty words flung at ten paces....and even then one runs the risk of psychological harm.

4. Shall we go back to those World War One battlefields? Or the fields sown with salt by the Romans? Or the forests devastated by war over the past millenium? Or Hadrian's Wall?

Silly. Exceptionally silly.

Colpy you don't know enough about it to even talk about it and that IS silly.

 

[Colpy]

Colpy you don't know enough about it to even talk about it and that IS silly.

Huh???

Personally, I think I did a masterful job of tearing apart an idiotic set of unrealistic principles.......ones that undoubtedly lie at the very foundation of UN principles or are fundamentals of international law.

Which is why both are a joke.

I did NOT argue about the effects of DU, because that I admittedly don't know anything about.

But I haven't seen any reports of "thousands" dead........

 

[AnnaG]

Seems to me that any weapon that kills or maims a human being has an effect past the battlefield, has an effect after the conflict is over, and unacceptable and prolonged suffering is a result of them. Families are devastated when loved ones are killed. That does not end with the finish of the conflict, nor is the suffering limited to the battlefield, nor is the suffering acceptable and short-lived.

 

[EagleSmack]

Flying steel that rips limbs from your body is ok then?

No prolonged suffereing there folks.

 

[EagleSmack]

It wasn't meant to be funny.
Unfortunately a lot of U.S. soldiers are not still healthy. DU in it's pure form is only mildly radioactive but it is very, very toxic. Depleted uranium bullets fired from the Gattling gun in the A-10 for instance, burn in the air and release a highly toxic depleted uranium dust that has killed thousands. The dust has a half life in the billions of years so it never goes away.

C'mon Juan! The uranium dust has killed thousands?

DU rounds release their energy and radioactivity upon impact.

I'm sorry friend, you have one article that makes the 11,000 claim from 2005. I searched and it was the same article on different web pages. Unsubstantiated figures as well.

DU will be used as long as there are armored vehicles in Apache, M-1, and A-10 gunsights.

 

[#juan]

I don't know where you came up with this.........but it is exceptionally silly:

1. Weapons as simple as bullets go beyond the battlefield.....innocents are struck by stray munitions regularly........ It might be nice to fantasize about going back to the days of sword and mace....but not very sensible.

2. There are still people being killed on World War One battlefields by unexploded munitions........see the comments on sword and mace.

3. Sorry, that eliminates sword and mace.....and leaves us with the option of nasty words flung at ten paces....and even then one runs the risk of psychological harm.

4. Shall we go back to those World War One battlefields? Or the fields sown with salt by the Romans? Or the forests devastated by war over the past millenium? Or Hadrian's Wall?

Silly. Exceptionally silly.

[SIZE=+1]1./Its effects go beyond the battlefield;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]2./Weapons should only be used during a conflict and their effects must not have any effect after the conflict has finished;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]3./Unacceptable, prolonged suffering is caused by the munitions;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]4./The environment has been damaged by the weapons.

1. The range of munitions would mark the boundaries of the battlefield.
2.Lingering radioactivity and toxicity would have an effect after a battle was officially ended,
3.Radiation sickness could be one unacceptable, prolonged suffering effect.
4.If you can no longer grow crops on your fields because of toxic,radioactive dust, I would say the environment was damaged
[/SIZE]

 

[Colpy]

[SIZE=+1]1./Its effects go beyond the battlefield;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]2./Weapons should only be used during a conflict and their effects must not have any effect after the conflict has finished;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]3./Unacceptable, prolonged suffering is caused by the munitions;[/SIZE] [SIZE=+1]4./The environment has been damaged by the weapons.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=+1]1. The range of munitions would mark the boundaries of the battlefield.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]2.Lingering radioactivity and toxicity would have an effect after a battle was officially ended,[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]3.Radiation sickness could be one unacceptable, prolonged suffering effect.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=+1]4.If you can no longer grow crops on your fields because of toxic,radioactive dust, I would say the environment was damaged[/SIZE]

Ah...I wasn't arguing about the criteria fitting DU like a glove....

I was arguing that the criteria themselves are ludicrous.........that weapons throughout history, or at least since we graduated from the use of rocks......have fit the bill quite nicely....including the majority of weapons now judged to be conventional.

 

[AnnaG]

I repeat:

Seems to me that any weapon that kills or maims a human being has an effect past the battlefield, has an effect after the conflict is over, and unacceptable and prolonged suffering is a result of them. Families are devastated when loved ones are killed. That does not end with the finish of the conflict, nor is the suffering limited to the battlefield, nor is the suffering acceptable and short-lived.

 

[#juan]

C'mon Juan! The uranium dust has killed thousands?

DU rounds release their energy and radioactivity upon impact.

I'm sorry friend, you have one article that makes the 11,000 claim from 2005. I searched and it was the same article on different web pages. Unsubstantiated figures as well.

DU will be used as long as there are armored vehicles in Apache, M-1, and A-10 gunsights.

First of all, DU rounds do not release their energy and radioactivity on impact. The radioactivity will be there for billions of years. The energy is simple physics...Mass times velocity.

Here is a link to another Canadian site that has a couple of good scientists who do know what they are talking about:

Depleted Uranium - Far Worse Than 9/11

 

[#juan]

In 1979, depleted uranium (DU) particles escaped from the National Lead Industries factory near Albany, N.Y.,which was manufacturing DU weapons for the U.S military. The particles traveled 26 miles and were discovered in a laboratory filter by Dr. Leonard Dietz, a nuclear physicist. This discovery led to a shut down of the factory in 1980, for releasing more than .85 pounds of DU dust into the atmosphere every month, and involved a cleanup of contaminated properties costing over 100 million dollars.

The U.S. spent a hundred million dollars to clean up a few pounds of DU dust. In Iraq the U.S. has spread thousands of tons of the stuff around the countryside. A cleanup has not been mentioned.:roll:

 

[Stretch]

Then....we really shouldn`t use the term `holocaust` when reminded of the "six million" dead Jews by Hitler`s Germany?:-?
it wasnt 6 million....the number was revised down to around 2 million, by the world court a few yrs back.

 

[Stretch]

Depleted Uranium Children in Iraq
​

Half Life of a Toxic War: Iraq's Wrecked Environment

'The ecological effects of war, like its horrific toll on human life, are exponential. When the Bush administration (parts one and two) and its congressional allies sent troops to Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein's regime, they not only ordered these men and women to commit crimes against humanity, they also commanded them to perpetrate crimes against nature.
Former Chief United Nations Weapons Inspector Hans Blix, prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, said the environmental consequences of the Iraq war could be more ominous than the issue of war and peace itself.
Blix was right.Months of bombing during the first Gulf War by the United States and Great Britain left a deadly and insidious legacy: tons of shell casings, bullets and bomb fragments laced with depleted uranium. In all, the United States hit Iraqi targets with more than 970 radioactive bombs and missiles.'
David Icke Website - Half Life of a Toxic War: Iraq's Wrecked Environment








The Unknown Terror Of Depleted Uranium Weapons

This site provides a wealth of information on the criminal use of Depleted Uranium weapons and their lasting legacy of death
David Icke Website - The Unknown Terror Of Depleted Uranium Weapons







​

NATO: Slaughter of Civilians and Drugs
'On April, 4, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) marked its 60th jubilee. In Serbia, my home country, many people are doomed not to celebrate their 60th birthdays - they will die of cancer. In 1999 NATO bombed Serbia with depleted uranium bombs, which caused a cancer outbreak in the region. Serbia's soil, water and air will remain polluted for a few more decades, taking lives of hundreds of Serbs.
There isn't a single word about it in NATO's official reports. One may read there about NATO's contribution to peace in Kosovo. While NATO exists, there will exist such parallel stories: the one about the alliance's humanitarian mission, the other (which is less frequent) about death and destruction NATO is guilty of.'
David Icke Website - NATO: Slaughter of Civilians and Drugs





[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Video: Depleted Uranium - Iraq's Nuclear Nightmare[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]'A presentation made by Doug Weir of the Campaign against Depeleted Uranium at London Region CND's public Forum on the 3rd Sep 2008'[/FONT]
[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif][FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Watch here...[/FONT][/FONT]

Are American soldiers in Iraq dying due to depleted uranium?

Are American soldiers in Iraq dying due to depleted uranium?



Blowing the N-whistle: Depleted uranium: How dangerous is it?

Another U.S. war crime? Iraqi cities 'hot' with depleted uranium

Iraqi Cities 'Hot' with Depleted Uranium - Dutch Worry About Depleted Uranium As Troops Enter Iraq

The Gift that Keeps On Giving: Depleted Uranium in Iraq

Tons of Depleted Uranium Polluting Iraq

Depleted Uranium more deadly than gas

Isotope Analysis Shows Exposure To Depleted Uranium In Gulf War Veterans

Workers in Iraq proven contaminated with depleted uranium

WHO �suppressed� scientific study into depleted uranium cancer fears in Iraq

Four soldiers from a New York Army National Guard company serving in Iraq are contaminated with radiation likely caused by dust from depleted uranium shells fired by U.S. troops

Testing of New York guardsmen: first confirmed cases of Iraq war depleted uranium exposure








Depleted Uranium - Dogpile Web Search

Depleted Uranium

 

[Spade]

 

[ironsides]

Thats napalm.