|
Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on battlefield legacies that are killing and maiming people right now, such as unexploded ordinance (including mines)? It seems almost a crime to divert resources away from these efforts in a hunt for spent depleted uranium rounds. If we are concerned with real lives saved, then how about doing a calculation showing the number of US military deaths avoided due to enemy armor being neutralized? 75 tons of depleted uranium peppering the countryside of Iraq is a small price to pay for avoided sorrow and grief of the families of these brave and noble patriots. I most certainly don't want to be the first on my block to see my son come home in a box or have to go to Washington, D.C., to touch his name on a wall because he never came home. What is our fascination with something that may hypothetically kill us at some distant point in the future rather than the real hazards that will kill you right now? The argument about fear of the unknown and perception of ri$k is certainly getting old. Of course I feel the same way about the EPA radon program. I feel our resources would be better spent on providing smoke and carbon monoxide detectors for households. The deaths that occur each year from fires and carbon monoxide poisoning is very real. Our family can take you to a family grave site that will attest to that. I would bet that some of you reading this message board can do the same. DJWHitfill CHP
|