Depleted Uranium (DU)

Ok after quite a lengthy , informative and educative debate in the A&M section in the RHS thread plenty of us discussed about DU rounds used in Iraq/Afghanistan/Balkans and debated about there lethality and ability to pollute the envoirnment and finally kill people ....

I would like people to post more about this controversial issue which seems to have been deemed un-harmful by the US army as they still seem to use it mainly because they can get it for free from Nuclear reactors (its them supplied to defense contractors who are allowed to make projectiles from them , in other words its an efficient way of disposing off nuclar waste ) ... what do you all think?

Is it RIGHT to use them ? You dont only kill amroured vehicles with it but spread RADIATION , which doesnt kills only the people involved in combat but civilians and the surrounding populace as well , not only that it can infect future generations too! Do we really need a weapon such as that?

So whats your verdict on this? Post away....

P.S: Also if someone can try and list all the ammos it is used in so far i know its used in A-10's , Abrams tanks , British Challengers , some AAV's too , AC-130 gunships used it in Afghanistan there are some more which i cant remember right now ....

DU tested...

Thats the link i posted in the IRAQ thread but i feel it should be moved here ...

Findings of the 1994 test, cited in the DOD's Environmental Exposure Report, are based on one tank explosion that produced a flume of aerosolized radioactive uranium oxide that burned for five hours. Analyses of this poisonous aerosol revealed that approximately 33 percent of the residual oxides were capable of entering the lungs in unprotected breathing (Rostker, 2000). The single-case report was not extrapolated to determine the effects of multiple explosions that occurred during the 1991 Gulf War.

U.S. government and military assertions continue to minimize or deny the environmental and health dangers of DU but their statements are inconsistent with certain of their own reports. For example, at the same time dangers are being minimized a contradicting report reads: "If DU enters the body, it has the potential to generate significant medical complications. The risks associated with DU in the body are both chemical and radiological...Personnel inside or near vehicles struck by DU penetrators could receive significant internal exposure" (U.S. Army Environmental Policy Institute Report, 1995).

Thats the excerpts from there.

The problem with the DU rounds is not the radiation (which is minimal as pro-DU people always point out). The problem is that DU dust which results from impact with targets is toxic, which is not at all surprising since many other heavy metals are toxic to life as well.

But I also know that with the U.S. defence lobby behind DU rounds, they will never be banned, regardless of how toxic they are.

Seems more like disposing off your nuclar waste in an easy manner by spreading it worldwide .

Isnt this similiar to NBC weaponry? I say it should be made illegal to use. The russians use Tungsten use (correct me if i am wrong) why dont they try and use that? Just because they find DU cheaply doesnt means they can go about without any respect of envoirnmental pollution...

I don't have the same opion of DU rounds as I do of NBC ordinance.

I don't have the same opion of DU rounds as I do of NBC ordinance.  

Why not Bernadotte ?

Depleted Uranium = Nuclear waste ... N

Its biologically active once inside your body causing such diseases as Cancer and Leukaemia. B

Its chemical as it mixes with oxygen to form various oxides who if inhaled react with your blood insidecausing god knows whta sort of mutation which might end in what sort of disease later inlife .. C

The line between NBC weapons and "conventional" weapons is pretty blurry at best. I mean, if DU rounds spread toxic aerosols, is it a chemical weapon or not? Was Agent Orange a chemical weapon just because it did not kill people outright? Is DDT, a common insecticide still in the third world, a chemical weapon, because it causes infertility in animals (and humans)?

The reason for the U.S. love of DU is the fact that DU has ideal properties for a penetrator:

1. High density.

2. Easily obtainable (for U.S.).

3. When a DU penetrator hits a target and fractures at the tip it forms a sharp point. Tungsten penetrators form a blunt end as they fracture.

So DU penetrators ARE better than tungsten penetrators. Then again, currently U.S. is shooting obsolete tanks fielded by almost defenceless small countries, not russian state-of-the-art tanks. So why use DU when tungsten would do as well. Hell, you could have killed Iraqi tanks with LAWs...

I don't have the same opion of DU rounds as I do of NBC ordinance.  

Why not Bernadotte ?

Scale.  NBC weapons have the potential to contaminate human environments on a much larger scale.  And if anyone really thinks we can have a 100% environmentally friendly military then perhaps we should start by putting sails on all those nuclear powered aircraft carriers.

The problem with the DU rounds is not the radiation (which is minimal as pro-DU people always point out). The problem is that DU dust which results from impact with targets is toxic, which is not at all surprising since many other heavy metals are toxic to life as well.

But I also know that with the U.S. defence lobby behind DU rounds, they will never be banned, regardless of how toxic they are.

Err?

I think you will find that DU is not as radiactive in the gamma and beta particles which are high energy low mass being electrons and photons but in the low energy high mass protons they are still highly radioactive.

This means on external contact your cloths and skin protect you from alpha radiation but the chance of a DNA hit are higher because of the bigger size. The problem with beta and gamma is they penetrate deeper into the body before the hit thus screwing up DNA in vital organs and blood marrow but their small mass means they are just as likely to pass all the way through you with out a hit.

As has been stated contact to skin can be ignored the skin outer layer that the proton messes up is allready dead and is shed all the time. Even if a proton managed to get to live skin and alter its DNA causing a cancer; it would be shed within a month and a skin cancer is the least of all cancers.

BIG BUT put that DU inside the body and have it flowing round the blood stream into vital organs and the bone marrow and you have walking dead people.

That is why DU is clasifiable as long term WMD

If any one cares to disagree lets move the DU oxide that is being colected in decontam procedures to the streets of their town.

Kind Regards Walker

Well, if you consider DU rounds as NBC munitions, then technically lead rounds are too. Lead is a poisonous metal. So poisonous, in fact, that over here they banned lead buckshot during duck season because it was poisoning the wetlands. Now you can only use steel shot.

DU rounds are nasty, but their primary purpose is to penetrate modern armor, and DU is the most readily available high density substance.

Well, if you consider DU rounds as NBC munitions, then technically lead rounds are too. Lead is a poisonous metal. So poisonous, in fact, that over here they banned lead buckshot during duck season because it was poisoning the wetlands. Now you can only use steel shot.

DU rounds are nasty, but their primary purpose is to penetrate modern armor, and DU is the most readily available high density substance.

Hi Major Fubar

Well in that case Mustard gas aint WMD as it can only affect a small area and is not always lethal lots of blind soldiers survived WWI to prove that.

It is not just question of whether it is mass destruction it is whether is an inhumane weapon under the

Quote[/b] ] 'Convention on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the use of Certain Conventional Weapons that may be deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to have Indiscriminate Effects’. Its short title is the ‘1980 Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons’ (CCW).

The argument being it is indescriminate in effect.

Kind Regards walker

More or less every weapons is indiscriminate in effect. You can point a gun at anybody.

As for DU, there is strong evidence that it is hazardous to the environment and to people coming near it. And yes, I do think they should be banned or modified. Use tungsten instead - sure it's a bit lighter but that doesn't make a difference when you're blasting a t55.

More or  less every weapons is indiscriminate in effect. You can point a gun at anybody.

Hi Denoir

but it don't point it self and pull its own trigger.

Kind Regards Walker

Denoir is right why USE DU in the first place? Why start a whole new weapons race by using dangerous products?

If someone else was using something more powerful then you then its justifiable to use but i dont see any country in the world having a superior tank busting capability then US itself , since russian tungsten isnt AS powerful as DU but its still conventional.

The one thing that bugs me even more is that the military that uses such NBC weapons waged a war against another from using them , and that isnt flame baiting or anything if any MODs think thatway , its a FACT which bugs me no end.

And for people who say DU isnt harmful then would you please explain the massive rise of Cancer rates in Iraq and surrounding countries? And also why is DU being used in Afghanistan? Surely i am CERTAIN they havent got anything that requires DU to bust it open unless there wielding some modern Tanks which we all cant see.

Anybody have any statistics on civilian casualties (sickness, death) that result from DU?  I haven't heard of any.  To be fair, this could just be some scientist trying to scare people for whatever reason.  Sure radiation is bad, but will inhaling minute amounts of DU dust hurt anybody?

ps- DU isn't classified as NBC because it's not a nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon. It's a bullet.

Then dirty bombs cannot be considered as WMDs?

Quote[/b] ]Anybody have any statistics on civilian casualties (sickness, death) that result from DU?  I haven't heard of any.  To be fair, this could just be some scientist trying to scare people for whatever reason.  Sure radiation is bad, but will inhaling minute amounts of DU dust hurt anybody?

Stats i'll try and find some OFFICIAL ones in the meanwhile doesnt the fact that Cancer rates and birth deformity's in Iraq and its surroounding areas are rising higher then USUAL ... ever since the GULF WAR seem a little too suspicious?

This isnt any scientists blabbering mate the UN hasnt even approved of it i guess and the DoD keeps hiding the fact that it is DANGEROUS.

And inhaling RADIATION and particles emitting it ARE DANGEROUS ... they can easily mutate your cells , DNA and if not kill you in a few months slowly by a chronic illness , they will cause complexities later in your life often leading to any form of Cancer.

Quote[/b] ]ps- DU isn't classified as NBC because it's not a nuclear, biological, or chemical weapon.  It's a bullet.

HUh? did you read my previous post?

URANIUM is a NUCLEAR WASTE ... in other words its a nuclear weapon if you leave it out in the open unchecked.

I read somewhere that DU has important incendiary properties that Tungsten does not have. I'm wondering if this strictly refers to chemical oxidation or if a microscopic fission reaction actually occurs when the DU is compressed at the point of impact. Increasing the density of fissile material by extreme compression is commonly used to lower critical mass and initiate nuclear chain reactions in A-bombs.

Does anyone have any info on how DU really burns?

Is'nt Tungsten the heaviest metal we have on earth (without being modified?

Atleast it ignites very easily.

Tungsten= wolfram (the thread in a light bulb that makes the light).

Anyone still wanna say DU is ok after readin this...

Nothing compares to the astronomical cancer rates and birth defects suffered by the Iraqi people who have endured vicious nuclear chastisement for years.(16) U.S. air attacks against Iraq since 1993 have undoubtedly employed nuclear munitions. Pictures of grotesquely deformed Iraqi infants born since 1991 are overwhelming.(17) Like those born to Gulf War I vets, many babies born to troops now in Iraq will also be afflicted with hideous deformities, neurological damage and/or blood and respiratory disorders.(18)

As an Army health physicist, Dr. Doug Rokke was dispatched to the Middle East to salvage DU-contaminated tanks after Gulf War I. His Geiger counters revealed that the war zones of Iraq and Kuwait were contaminated with up to 300 millirems an hour in beta and gamma radiation plus thousands to millions of counts per minute in alpha radiation. Rokke recently told the media: "The whole area is still trashed. It is hotter than heck over there still. This stuff doesn't go away."(19)

And just found out that submarines missiles and Tomahawks missiles are also DU tipped

For years, the U.S. and NATO fired DU missiles, bullets and shells across the Balkans, nuking the peoples of Serbia, Bosnia and Kosovo. As DU munitions were slammed into chemical plants, the environment became hideously toxic, also endangering the peoples of Albania, Macedonia, Greece, Italy, Austria and Hungary. By 1999, UN investigators reported that an estimated 12 tons of DU had caused irreparable damage to the Yugoslavian environment, with agriculture, livestock and air water, and public health all profoundly damaged.(38)

Scientists confirm that citizens of the Balkans are excreting uranium in their urine.39 In 2001, a Yugoslavian pathologist reported that hundreds of Bosnians have died of cancer from NATO's DU bombardment.(40) Many NATO peacekeepers in the Balkans now suffer ill health. Their leukemias, cancers and other maladies are dubbed the "Balkans Syndrome." Richard Coghill predicts that DU weapons used in Balkans campaign will result in at least 10,000 cases of fatal cancer.(41)

Anybody have any statistics on civilian casualties (sickness, death) that result from DU?  

No, the use of DU is fairly new and DoD has been blocking any research on the subject. I watched a CBS 60 minutes show about hundreds of GW1 veterans that sought compensation for DU poisoning and while they had medical support and the courts decided in their favour, DoD managed to block the action.

Here is however a listing of EU cases (Kosovo)

Quote[/b] ]Sure radiation is bad, but will inhaling minute amounts of DU dust hurt anybody?

It's not so much about radiation, as it is that the Uranium Oxide found in DU is chemically very toxic. In Kosovo, we got warned about picking up used bullets and were told that if we picked it up by mistake that we should carefully wash our hands before touching any food.

EU has suggested a full ban on DU weapons, but USA has dismissed that possibility. So NATO is split on the issue.

Here is some more information: The Balkan Syndrome

Edit: For contrast, here's a DoD DU FAQ. They admit that it is toxic but deny that you could get cancer or leukemia from exposure.

Amnesty.org reports

If you want to write a letter to NATO too asking them to stop using this NBC weapons.

Some more info on this hideous 'matter'

Why did the US made it? and did it TEST it?

For Bernadotte:

Quote[/b] ]The term "depleted" is a misnomer since DU contains about 60% of the radioactivity found in natural uranium.

When a DU shell strikes its target, up to 70% of the depleted uranium vaporizes into fine dust, which then settles out in the surrounding soil and water. Over half of the aerosolized particles are smaller than 5 microns and anything smaller than 10 microns can be inhaled. Once lodged in the lungs, these particles can emit a steady dose of alpha radiation.

Its now been labelled as the Agent Orange of the 90's

Agent orange

I read somewhere that DU has important incendiary properties that Tungsten does not have.  I'm wondering if this strictly refers to chemical oxidation or if a microscopic fission reaction actually occurs when the DU is compressed at the point of impact.  Increasing the density of fissile material by extreme compression is commonly used to lower critical mass and initiate nuclear chain reactions in A-bombs.

Does anyone have any info on how DU really burns?  

It's chemical oxidation. Fission requires an exact mass and geometrical form. If it's too dense you'll just get a quick neutron burst, but no chain reaction. If it's not dense enough you won't get a chain reaction. The energy of the neutrons has to be very exact to be able to knock out other neutrons (and start a chain reaction). In nuclear weapons this is regulated through a very exact geometrical lensing of the explosives that slam two pieces of fissile material together (and form the critical mass).

DU uses friction to gain temperature and melt the substance it comes in contact with.

Here are some pics that might explain:

You could visit this website:

Iraqs DU exposure

After going there see there page on DU in IRAQ.

There is still need to remember about burning for years oil fields of Iraq, chemical combat with Iran (and chemical slaughter of Kurds) and hi-tech hi-energy radio devices used by anti-Saddam forces. Presence of DU ammo is easy answer for both "Gulf" and "Balkan" syndroms, but high radiation of connection device could also has it`s result in illness.

There are some information that not only American (smoe versions of M1s), but also Russians (some versions of T80s) use DU as extra armour. It could save the crew inside vehicle but kill many, many human lives years later. See that danger.

DU as NBC weapon? Like someone said lead is also toxic. More to say, the most of bullets are blind and easy could hit civilian.

Bullet hit could cause body damage, gangrenous complications, even death...