Iraqi Birth Defects Worse Than Hiroshima

Citing the statistics of birth defects after the atomic bomb blasts of WW2 is not relevant to the study of the effects of depleted uranium munitions in theatres of war like the Balkans or Iraq or ones since.

There have been thousands of tons of DU munitions employed in these various conflicts.

Fat Man and Little Boy combined contained much less than 100 pounds of radioactive material, the dust of which probably came down into the Pacific Ocean.

These people probably harness such a deep, churning hatred for Americans, all the guns we got wouldn't matter. Imagine even a small army of bloodthirsty Assyrians with, well, all the wonders of the modern arsenal. All because of some fear over oil and money.

So I guess the point of this thread is, we should have just nuked them instead..

I know the du is toxic, but have our soldiers reported the same effects? The military has lots of women in contact with these types of ammunition. Are the cancer rates higher with soldier the the general population?
The other thing i wonder about is how are civilians coming in contact with the du. Most of the armor piercing shells were shot off in the open desert,. Not all of course but most. Just something to think about.

I wonder... if America/Britain/Qatar/Saudi/Israel were overrun and beaten.. do you think, if the Iraqis had any say in the treatment of civilians in these countries, They would show compassion?.. i fear not =[ Even though a large majority in these countries would never support this outcome.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by MrInquisitive

 

Again, I realize I have to stress this in a place like ATS. I'm not saying there isn't a problem. I'm just saying that jumping to conclusions about the cause(s) of the problem really doesn't help matters. I also realize that on ATS saying something like that is just pissing into the wind.

LOL, well said. It's a no-win situation on here:
a) Pictures or it didn't happen
b) Pictures and we'll jump to any conclusion that the poster suggests

LOL, again - let's just face facts. How can anyone prove anything to everyone on ATS? People have ingrained beliefs and regardless of ANY evidence given, they will never believe it or will say that it mean something else......

Again, LOL

Originally posted by Hoosierdaddy71
So I guess the point of this thread is, we should have just nuked them instead..

No.

I know the du is toxic, but have our soldiers reported the same effects?

There are lots of reports of sickness like radiation related kidney problems. Just google it.

The military has lots of women in contact with these types of ammunition. Are the cancer rates higher with soldier the the general population?

My own guess would be yes, but the numbers might be classified in some way or disguised. DU munitions are big business and so is US foreign policy. Birth defects would probably be found by various tests and scans that are more the rule in America than in a place like Iraq where deformed babies would be more likely to be carried to term.

The other thing i wonder about is how are civilians coming in contact with the du. Most of the armor piercing shells were shot off in the open desert,. Not all of course but most. Just something to think about.

Armor piercing tank shells are only part of the total of DU munitions employed in today's theatres of war by NATO forces. US warplanes are shooting countless rounds of DU bullets at ground forces and civilians.

I don't want to rant and rave about the US government's track record when it comes to controversies over how it treats military personnel, but there is reason to believe that the government would not be forthcoming about any kind of serious issue effecting the health and well being of the troops.

I feel so sorry for the people of Iraq, Syria, Libya and any other country where the Anglo-US-UN (globalists) ruthless foreign policy of invasion/military intervention directly or indirectly has killed thousands of civilians, left many more homeless and as refugees. Last month Iraq saw its biggest death toll in five years during the course of a month reached, 1000 civilian murders through bombings or killings by the on going fighting. The country has no economy, all non-Islamic minorities have either been driven out or murdered, Al Queada has a base there where before there was none and now this.

Don't get me wrong, I am a nationalist without a doubt, but a nationalist as it relates to my people and my country, as I feel all should be as it relates to their country and their people so that within everyone's country there would be at least, unity. The government of Britain, regardless of political ideology, has always made me sick to the stomach (Labour more than most) and governments across the planet are to me, no different. So when I see people suffering in their own country it truly does make me sick to the stomach and even more so when I know that it is my government that has in part caused this.

I believe that politicians should be held accountable for this kind of suffering. The hypocritical cowards brought every Nazi and German military officer that they could find to be held accountable and brought to trial following WW2. To me, when you mount up the last ten years, there is no difference, its just the West has raged wars by proxy for the most part and that has been a part of foreign policy for many decades. When they have overtly intervened it is under the guise of liberation or Human Rights or War on Terror. Correct me if I'm wrong, did not Hitler roll in to Poland and Czechoslovakia for the same reason? The liberation of German populations within those borders who were under attack by the Poles and Czechs?

I don't often agree with compensation, but the poor Iraqi people should be compensated for the suffering that has been placed on their heads by the actions of a few governments and central bankers with vested interests that doesn't include Human life. This highlights one aspect of the fallout of the Iraqi war, but when you look at the day to day living it is just one aspect of much suffering that has fallen upon the Iraqi people.

We think it's radiation...

We think it's DU related....

Because of this we think the American/ European forces are to blame....

No doubt all of these COULD have been contributing factors, but could it for example have been genetic/ human mutations? Could it have been another chemical used before or after hostilities? Could the 'chemical' have been a result of Sunni and Shia warfare rather than American?

As with everyone, I think it's heartbreaking to see children born in this way and I'd like to presume this will be a thing of the past very very soon... but building fact on presumption? Anyone can do that...

Originally posted by Nevertheless
reply to post by purplemer

 

Why are you comparing figures against Hiroshima, when there was no increase in birth defects as a result of the radiation?

Please feel free to view the world through tinted rose coloured glasses if you wish. There are many that would like you to think that everything was fine and dandy after they dropped the bomb.

Of the 500 pregnancies underway when the atomic bomb went off, 21 produced children with severe birth defects, with the highest rates among mothers who were in 8th to 15th week of pregnancy during the blast. That is four times higher than in normal healthy mothers

.

factsanddetails.com...

Congenital Malformations, Stillbirths, and Early Mortality among the Children of Atomic Bomb Survivors: A Reanalysis

www.nap.edu...

The following pictures are just handful of views of the effect the horrific atomic bombing occurences had on their lives. It reveals how directly these new and dangerous technologies can affect the lives of thousands for generations onwards. Yes, nuclear weapons and such may give a nation an advantage over its enemy. However, is this technology really worth the new technology that must be developed because of it? Radiation detection machines? Devices to help a child with 3 arms? The cure for cancer because of the extreme increase in cancer afterwards? Exactly

nnhsphysics.wikispaces.com...

So yes birth defects did occur and yes a statical analysis may be made comparing these to Iraq..

Originally posted by purplemer
Please feel free to view the world through tinted rose coloured glasses if you wish. There are many that would like you to think that everything was fine and dandy after they dropped the bomb.

Thanks, but I'll gladly try to stick to facts than tints.
Also, everything was not fine and dandy after they dropped the bomb. It's murder.

Of the 500 pregnancies underway when the atomic bomb went off, 21 produced children with severe birth defects, with the highest rates among mothers who were in 8th to 15th week of pregnancy during the blast. That is four times higher than in normal healthy mothers

.

Of course. The fetuses were victims exactly the same way as all the other living beings at the time it happened.
This is not the topic. We all know the blast and radiation both killed and wounded innocent people.

Congenital Malformations, Stillbirths, and Early Mortality among the Children of Atomic Bomb Survivors: A Reanalysis

I helped you above.

reply to post by tanser


Could it have been another chemical? That's practically guaranteed. DU isn't radioactive, it's a heavy metal like lead or mercury, and as far as I know not a mutagen or teratogen. Before the American invasion, Saddam was dumping toxic waste all over Iraq, not to mention using various chemical weapons (VX, mustard gas, tabun) during the Iran-Iraq War and over Iraqi Kurdistan.

Originally posted by purplemer
(warning: graphic images)

The United States may be finished dropping bombs on Iraq, but Iraqi bodies will be dealing with the consequences for generations to come in the form of birth defects, mysterious illnesses and skyrocketing cancer rates.
Al Jazeera’s Dahr Jamail reports that contamination from U.S. weapons, particularly Depleted Uranium (DU) munitions, has led to an Iraqi health crisis of epic proportions. “[C]hildren being born with two heads, children born with only one eye, multiple tumours, disfiguring facial and body deformities, and complex nervous system problems,” are just some of the congenital birth defects being linked to military-related pollution.
In certain Iraqi cities, the health consequences are significantly worse than those seen in the aftermath of the atomic bombing of Japan at the end of WWII.

cavnews.wordpress.com...

Some of the military-related pollution they are referring to here is Depleted Uranium.. Evidently in my eyes this is a war crime. It is effecting everyday people and will continue to do so for generations to come. Those that ordered its use and those who used it should be charged with international war crimes..

Some will argue that the use of DU is not a war crime. Look at the pictures below and tell me it is not. There is a lot of evidence to suggest the use of DU causes birth defects...

More pictures available here.. (Contains Graphic Imagery)

www.vice.com...

According to a study published in the Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, a professional journal based in the southwestern German city of Heidelberg, there was a sevenfold increase in the number of birth defects in Basra between 1994 and 2003.

We send our troops to war under false premise and kill over a million civilians. Leaving the country with a legacy of birth defects and no one is held to account. Let us not forget the Nuremberg trials after WW2. I hope those repsonsble for these actions are one day held to account.

If this were true then there should be similar data regarding US soldiers offspring birth defects. The soldiers were exposed to the DU as well. They use this as a means to get service connection with the VA. Do you have any of this data?

reply to post by Cobaltic1978

Who was it that allowed ammunition to be constructed containing depleted Uranium?

No, the better question is who authorized the use of such ammo in civilian areas? DU is designed for specific mission profiles, such as penetrating heavy armor, or bombing deep bunkers. I can't think of a reason you'd use this in Iraq, other than isolated bunkers in the desert or tanks outside of a city.

reply to post by LastStarfighter

No,so far they don't allow that to get through,Gulf War syndrome and birth defects of our children has yet to be proven as service connected.I'm guessing it would be too expensive for them. After most of us die they will come around and admit it in the same fashion as Agent Orange.

reply to post by Gazrok


I can say this if is in the unit inventory they use it until ordered to stop,like Willy Pete,bee hive rounds and flame throwers.
All what we see now is supposed to be secret,they never thought it would be this bad or we would find this out I'm sure.
A simple change in the rules of engagement would stop the practice....unless there is opposing armor INSIDE the town which would be a tactic used once the enemy learned of it.


Guess we'll just have to stop war.