The use of depleted uranium munitions has been fiercely debated, with opponents like the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons saying there are dangerous health risks from ingesting or inhaling depleted uranium dust, including cancers and birth defects.

  • Avid Amoeba
    link
    fedilink
    301 year ago

    I’m sure Ukrainian soldiers on the front line are worried about cancer and birth defects.

    • flipht
      link
      fedilink
      281 year ago

      It’s not about them. It’s the children who find the spent ammo later.

      This crap is the reason that there are birth defects spikes anywhere the US military operates.

      • kitonthenet
        link
        fedilink
        261 year ago

        Ok but the alternatives are not environmentally conscious either, finally the people who’s land it is should be the ones making choices about the conditions of that land

        • @CookieOfFortune
          link
          71 year ago

          The alternative bring tungsten? It’s very stable so anything besides eating a spent rod isn’t going to have effects. If it’s in the air it’ll just be inert. Even if it gets in your lungs it’ll be like any other dust. DU on the other hand would keep emitting radiation internally.

        • Square Singer
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          But which people? Government or the people who actually own the land?

          And I guess, their favourite choice of “Don’t use any weapons on my land and just clear off voluntairily” is not an option.

          I don’t get why people hate on the Ukraine for using weapons to defend themselves. Not like they chose to be attacked.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        191 year ago

        Is ammo made from lead that much better? I honestly don’t know. Sure the radiation sucks but Uranium, at least the isotope they’re sending is “barely” radioactive. It’s the same Uranium people had in their plates etc. The toxicity is probably the far more relevant factor but I don’t know how Uranium compares to lead.

        • Cethin
          link
          fedilink
          English
          181 year ago

          Depleted uranium is not really that radioactive. Everything is technically radioactive eventually though. Depleted uranium is what’s left behind when you seperate the radioactive stuff out. It’s a heavy metal still, so isn’t good for you, but heavy metals will always be involved. Trying to have a war using only healthy, organic, ethically sourced munitions isn’t going to happen.

        • @AnUnusualRelic
          link
          51 year ago

          It’s nothing to do with radioactivity, it’s the toxicity that comes with most heavy metals.

      • Avid Amoeba
        link
        fedilink
        181 year ago

        This makes sense.

        I imagine there’s a lot more reasons for birth defect spikes post US mil ops in addition to this. The military isn’t exactly an environmentally conscious operation. ☠️

        • flipht
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Sure, burn pits and other crap will help.

          But this kind of ammo, kids will find and hang on to. They bring it home, add it to their collection of other cool shit they’ve scavenged…and then their brothers and sisters are born with malformed limbs, mishaped heads, etc.

          There have been a lot of stories written about it over the years. The one I read was specifically about Iraq I believe, but it was a while ago.

          • JJROKCZ
            link
            61 year ago

            You’re acting like being near this stuff is akin to standing in Chernobyl while it just isn’t true

      • cooljacob204
        link
        fedilink
        16
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The amount of Ukrainians dying right now will pale in comparison to those effected by the munitions.

        The controversy around depleted uranium rounds is way overblown.

        Even in Iraq the evidence is super inconclusive. And yes birth defects rose however the entire country basically collapsed for years and nothing clearly indicates it was the DU used.

        Don’t get me wrong, it’s nasty stuff. But this is war, more people are getting killed by bombs then any DU related cancer can cause.

        • In Basra the rate of leukemia in children rose dramatically and that is too specific of a disease to not be linked to DU exposure due to the heavy use of it in surrounding tank battles.

            • Because the issue is specific to the region and started specifically after the tank battle where DU ammunition was used. If it would be a general issue with some dangerous chemical being used, we’d expect to see similiar issues in other regions. Of course it is hypotheticakky possible that at the same time some dangerous and persistant chemical exposure happened in the region, but that is not plausible and also the US would have a strong interest in finding such an alternative explanation. But there isn’t any research published, that provided an alternative.

              Also look into the wording of the US when sending the ammunition to Ukraine. They state that no radiation hazard is to be expected for the Ukrainians. They do not talk about a toxicological hazard.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            21 year ago
            1. correlation ≠ causation. 2) if the disease is caused by DU, is it due to the radioactivity or the fact that DU is a heavy metal?
            • i never said it had to be because of radiation. Even just in its effect as a heavy metal it seems to be much worse. Also it could be that it becomes airborn more easily than other metals such as lead, so the wreckage of tanks shot with DU are more dangerous to the people cleaning them up.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -21 year ago

                Why are you so worried about speculated harms when Ukrainians are actually being raped, tortured, and murdered by russians? Your lack of humanity is showing

                  • @severien
                    link
                    1
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    How about letting Ukrainians make that cost/benefit analysis for their own country? I think they’re grown-ups, no need to patronize.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    01 year ago

                    Weighing costs and benefits happens with a comprehensive set of actual facts, not a hodgepodge of speculations and fearmongering that play into the fascists’ hands

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      Yes, Ukrainian soldiers on front line are worried about cancer and birth defects. They are rational human beings who hope to return to their homes and live long lives and grow healthy children, not some subhumans with only intent to kill, kill, kill, as you wish to think.

      • Avid Amoeba
        link
        fedilink
        -3
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t know how rational this is. Given how many soldiers have died so far, if I were a Ukrainian sent to fight on the front line, I wouldn’t expect to be coming back. Rather I’d hope that I contribute to the defeat of the enemy, so that my children or my comrades children don’t grow up under Russian rule. I’m not in their shoes of course. There’s no universal motivation so maybe what you say is more prevalent. That said, this war might not end without soldiers doing a lot more killing so “kill, kill, kill” might be an appropriate viewpoint.

    • @bouh
      link
      51 year ago

      You will get cancer sooner by staying in the sun on a beach or anywhere.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -4
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Everyone should worry. Depleted uranium will contaminate large crop production areas and later these grains will be sold all around the world. Everybody will eat some.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          51 year ago

          There are multiple different isotopes of uranium, depleted has less of the kinds good for bombs or fuel.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Depleted means that the radioactive isotope is lower in concentration. It still is somehow radioactive (it’s almost fine if not ingested) and still remains a heavy and toxic metal.

            • krolden
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              When they explode, they spread radioactive dust into the surrounding area. If that area is ever farmed it can contaminate the crops and cause cancer to anyone breathing in the dust

          • @bouh
            link
            -11 year ago

            Banana is somehow radioactive too you know. Or granit. Anciant Greece monument often are above the radiation levels allowed in a nuclear power plant.

            Also, while you talk about it, lead is far far more toxic than depleted uranium. Many metals are toxic actually, that’s why your government monitor water meant for consumption.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -31 year ago

          Are you denser then Uranium? Why do you think there is an issue with waste from nuclear power plants? Hint: it is radioactive!