[ RadSafe ] Fwd: ruling out uranium vapor with x-rays

Brennan, Mike (DOH) Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV
Mon Apr 28 11:01:25 CDT 2008

>> those tanks are shot with DU in a very earnest effort to destroy the 
>> tank and kill the troops in it.

>Attacking the children of combatants is illegal, and is a serious war
crime.  Tungsten is preferable, even if it does have more shrapnel
cancers (one of many ways people die in wars.) The U.S. Navy switched to
tungsten around 1993 under John Taschner's direction.
Their Toxicology Detachment publhjicly recognized the genotoxic and
teratogenic nature of DU as early as 1998.

The primary use of DU projectiles in the Navy was as ammo for close in
missile defense systems.  As the systems were for use at sea against
missiles (and possibly aircraft, though it was usually assumed that
planes would remain outside the range of these systems), neither the
long-range health of enemy combatants nor their children were a factor
in changing.  As I understand it, there were several technical and
logistic reasons for the change, but I have to admit to not having paid
a lot of attention to it.

"Ben", perhaps if you would argue honestly, rather than trying to
misrepresent the positions and actions of others (such as the Navy), you
wouldn't have to keep changing names.

More information about the RadSafe mailing list