[ RadSafe ] National Academies Project:Toxicological and RadiologicalEffects from Exposures to Depleted Uranium During and After Combat

[Flanigan, Floyd]

Well then ... use DU ... Like I said .... Bullets are supposed to be
dangerous.

 

________________________________

From: bobcherry at satx.rr.com [mailto:bobcherry at satx.rr.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 10:05 AM
To: Flanigan, Floyd
Cc: dckosloff at firstenergycorp.com; Eric D; radsafe at radlab.nl;
radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: RE: [ RadSafe ] National Academies Project:Toxicological
and RadiologicalEffects from Exposures to Depleted Uranium During and
After Combat

 

What is wrong with tungsten is that it bounces off state-of-the-art
armor as our soldiers happily observed when the enemy fired at them in
the first Gulf war. 

And when our soldiers and airmen shoot at the enemy, they prefer that
their rounds do not bounce off the enemy's armor. I guess they're just
funny that way.

Bob C

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Flanigan, Floyd" <Floyd.Flanigan at nmcco.com> 
Date: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:35 am 
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] National Academies Project:Toxicological and
RadiologicalEffects from Exposures to Depleted Uranium During and After
Combat 
To: dckosloff at firstenergycorp.com, Eric D <edaxon at satx.rr.com> 
Cc: radsafe at radlab.nl, radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl 

> Both safer and safest are inflected forms of the work safe ... hence, 
> not really a word at all ... so ... is it safe to use it in 
> correspondence on a scientific exchange ...? "Safer" becomes "More 
> safe"in its correct form as "Safest" becomes "Most safe" when used 
> correctly. 
> 
> 
> And while we're on the subject of bullet-making materials ... what the

> heck is wrong with using Tungsten? It has a melting point over 10,000 
> degrees F and is heavy as all get-out. In my exper! ience, th