- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- news
- usnews
- ukraine@sopuli.xyz
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.
I’m sure Ukrainian soldiers on the front line are worried about cancer and birth defects.
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.
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.
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.
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
Turning “we need to weigh benefits and costs” into “your lack of humanity is showing” is quite a take and obviously has nothing to do with reality.
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
How do you you it’s not linked to any of the other hundreds of dangerous chemicals?
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.
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
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.
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. ☠️
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.
To be fair, the impact of DU is mostly because of heavy metal poisoning, not radioactivity.
Agent orange is what plants crave
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.
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.
There isn’t radiation in Depleted uranium.
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.
What does the “depleted” part of depleted uranium mean?
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.
Right, so how are all these large areas and crops going to be contaminated?
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
And what is the level of risk of that happening?
Are you denser then Uranium? Why do you think there is an issue with waste from nuclear power plants? Hint: it is radioactive!
Calls me dense, doesn’t know what depleted uranium is
Sure, whatever makes you feel lighter.
No it won’t
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.
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.