[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

The Nation: The Pentagon's Radioactive Bullet




Here's an article on D.U. and Gulf War vets. Any comments from the
military folk out there?

Donald P. Mercado, O/47-20, B/101      PROFS Nickname: DMERCADO
Radiation Safety Officer        Internet: Don@LMSC.Lockheed.com
Lockheed Martin Missiles & Space            Tel. (408) 742-0759
Sunnyvale, Ca 94089                         Fax. (408) 742-0611
*** Forwarding note from .       --.        10/10/96 14:30 ***
 Received: from eagle by LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP
;
    Thu, 10 Oct 96 14:30:26 PDT
 Received: from envirolink.org by eagle (8.6.11/DEC-Ultrix/4.3)
 	id OAA04330; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 14:22:43 -0700
 Received: from host by envirolink.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
 	id RAA25957; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:07:19 -0400
 Received: from f01n05.cac.psu.edu by envirolink.org (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
 	id RAA25837; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:06:17 -0400
 Received: from mxe115.rh.psu.edu (cesppp184.cac.psu.edu [128.118.97.184]) by
f01
 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961010210745.00882808@email.psu.edu>
 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:07:45 -0400
 Reply-To: mxe115@psu.edu
 Sender: owner-nukenet@envirolink.org
 Precedence: bulk
 From: Mike Ewall <mxe115@psu.edu>
 To: nukenet@envirolink.org
 Subject: The Nation: The Pentagon's Radioactive Bullet
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 X-Sender: mxe115@email.psu.edu
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
 X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.0 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN

 This week's issue of The Nation (http://www.TheNation.com/) has a cover
 story on the Pentagon's use of depleted uranium (DU) in the Gulf War.
 Here's a copy of the article, which can also be found on their website at:

 http://www.TheNation.com/issue/961021/1021mesl.htm


      The Pentagon's Radioactive Bullet
      An investigative report

      By Bill Mesler


      It is about two feet long, cylindrical and far denser than steel.
      When fired from a U.S. Army M1 Abrams tank, it is capable
      of drilling a hole through the strongest of tank armors. The
      makers of this tank-killing ammunition say it is the best in the
      world. But there is one problem with the Pentagon's super
      bullet: It is made of radioactive waste.

      The first time the Army used this "depleted uranium" (D.U.)
      ammunition on a battlefield was during the Gulf War, in 1991.
      Yet despite Pentagon assurances that only a small number of
      U.S. troops were exposed to dangerous levels of D.U., a
      two-month investigation by The Nation has discovered that
      hundreds and perhaps thousands of U.S. veterans were
      unknowingly exposed to potentially hazardous levels of
      depleted uranium, or uranium-238, in the Persian Gulf. Some
      soldiers inhaled it when they pulled wounded comrades from
      tanks hit by D.U. "friendly fire" or when they clambered into
      destroyed Iraqi vehicles. Others picked up expended rounds
      as war trophies. Thousands of other Americans were near
      accidental explosions of D.U. munitions.

      The Army never told combat engineer Dwayne Mowrer or
      his fellow soldiers in the First Infantry Division much about
      D.U. But the G.I.s learned how effective the radioactive
      rounds were as the "Big Red One" made its way up the
      carnage-ridden four-lane Kuwaiti road known as the
      "highway of death." Mowrer and his company saw the unique
      signature of a D.U. hit on nearly half the disabled Iraqi
      vehicles encountered. "It leaves a nice round hole, almost like
      someone had welded it out," Mowrer recalled.

      What Mowrer and others didn't know was that D.U. is highly
      toxic and, according to the Encyclopedia of Occupational
      Health and Safety, can cause lung cancer, bone cancer and
      kidney disease. All they heard were rumors.

      "Once in a while you'd hear some guy say 'Hey, I heard those
      things were radioactive,'" Mowrer said. "Of course,
      everybody else says, 'Yeah, right!' We really thought we
      were in the new enlightened Army. We thought all that Agent
      Orange stuff and human radiation experiments were a thing of
      the past."

      So Mowrer and his comrades didn't worry when a forty-ton
      HEMTT transport vehicle packed with D.U. rounds
      accidentally exploded near their camp. "We heard this
      tremendous boom and saw this black cloud blowing our
      way," he said. "The cloud went right over us, blew right over
      our camp."

      Before they left the gulf, Mowrer and other soldiers in the
      651st Combat Support Attachment began experiencing
      strange flulike symptoms. He figured the symptoms would
      fade once he was back in the United States. They didn't.
      Mowrer's personal doctor and physicians at the local
      Veterans Administration could find nothing wrong with him.
      Meanwhile, his health worsened: fatigue, memory loss,
      bloody noses and diarrhea. Then the single parent of two
      began experiencing problems with motor skills, bloody stools,
      bleeding gums, rashes and strange bumps on his eyelids, nose
      and tongue. Mowrer thinks his problems can be traced to his
      exposure to D.U.

      The Pentagon says problems like Mowrer's could not have
      been caused by D.U., a weapon that many Americans have
      heard mentioned, if at all, only in the movie Courage Under
      Fire, which was based on a real-life D.U. friendly-fire
      incident. The Defense Department insists that D.U. radiation
      is relatively harmless -- only about 60 percent as radioactive
      as regular uranium. When properly encased, D.U. gives off so
      little radiation, the Pentagon says, that a soldier would have to
      sit surrounded by it for twenty hours to get the equivalent
      radiation of one chest X-ray. (According to scientists, a D.U.
      antitank round outside its metal casing can emit as much
      radiation in one hour as fifty chest X-rays.) Plus, the military
      brass argues that D.U. rounds so effectively destroyed Iraqi
      tanks that the weapons saved many more U.S. lives than
      radiation from them could possibly endanger.

      But the Pentagon has a credibility gap. For years, it has
      denied that U.S. soldiers in the Persian Gulf were exposed to
      chemical weapons. In September Pentagon officials admitted
      that troops were exposed when they destroyed Iraqi stores of
      chemical weapons, as Congress held hearings on "Gulf War
      Syndrome." The Pentagon also argued, in its own defense,
      that exposure to chemical weapons could not fully explain the
      diverse range of illnesses that have plagued thousands of
      soldiers who served in the Persian Gulf. Exposure to D.U. --
      our own weaponry, in other words -- could well be among
      the missing links.

      Scientists point out that D.U. becomes much more dangerous
      when it burns. When fired, it combusts on impact. As much
      as 70 percent of the material is released as a radioactive and
      highly toxic dust that can be inhaled or ingested and then
      trapped in the lungs or kidneys. "This is when it becomes
      most dangerous," says Arjun Makhijani, president of the
      Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. "It becomes
      a powder in the air that can irradiate you." Some scientists
      speculate that veterans' health problems stem from exposure
      to chemical agents combined with D.U., burning oil-field
      vapors and a new nerve-gas vaccine given to U.S. troops.
      "We know that depleted uranium is toxic and can cause
      diseases," said Dr. Howard Urnovitz, a microbiologist who
      has testified before the Presidential Advisory Committee on
      Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses. "We also know these soldiers
      were exposed to large amounts of nerve-gas agents. What
      we don't know is how the combination of these toxic and
      radioactive materials affect the immune system."

      Exactly how many U.S. soldiers were exposed to dangerous
      levels of D.U. during the Gulf War remains in dispute.
      Friendly-fire incidents left at least twenty-two veterans with
      D.U. shrapnel embedded in their bodies. The Veterans
      Administration is also monitoring the health of eleven more
      soldiers who were in tanks hit by D.U. but who were not hit
      by shrapnel, and twenty-five soldiers who helped prepare
      D.U.-contaminated tanks for shipment back to the United
      States without being told of the risk. The tanks were later
      buried in a radioactive waste disposal site run by the Energy
      Department.


      No Protection

      The Nation investigation has also discovered that the average
      infantry soldier is still receiving no training on how to protect
      against exposure to D.U., although such training was called
      for by an Army report on depleted uranium completed in June
      1995. On the training lapses, the Pentagon does
      acknowledge past mistakes. Today the Army is providing
      new training in D.U. safety procedures for more soldiers,
      particularly members of armor, ordnance or medical teams
      that handle D.U. on a routine basis. "I feel confident that if an
      individual soldier has a need to know, they will be provided
      that training from the basic level on," Army Col. H.E. Wolfe
      told The Nation. But Wolfe confirmed that even now, not all
      infantry will get D.U. training.

      Although the full hazards of these weapons are still not
      known, the law allows the President to waive restrictions on
      the sale of D.U. to foreign armies. Documents obtained under
      the Freedom of Information Act show that the Pentagon has
      already sold the radioactive ammunition to Thailand, Taiwan,
      Bahrain, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Greece, Korea, Turkey,
      Kuwait and other countries which the Pentagon will not
      disclose for national security reasons. The proliferation of
      D.U. ammunition around the world boosts the chances that
      U.S. soldiers will eventually be on the receiving end of the
      devastating weapon.

      A broad coalition of veterans organizations, environmental
      groups and scientists hope that won't happen. On September
      12, they met in NewYork to kick off a campaign calling for
      an international ban on D.U. weapons. Even the
      conservative-minded Veterans of Foreign Wars and the
      American Legion recently passed resolutions calling on the
      Defense Department to reconsider its use of the controversial
      weapon.

      "Clearly the Department of Defense hasn't thought through the
      use of D.U. on the battlefield and what kind of exposures
      they are subjecting our troops to," charged Matt Puglisi, the
      assistant director of veterans affairs and rehabilitation for the
      American Legion. "It is a very effective weapon, which is why
      the D.O.D. really doesn't want to see it re-examined. We
      only spent a couple of days [in winning the Gulf War]. But
      what if we had a fight that took years and years? We could
      have tens of thousands of vets with D.U. shrapnel in them."


      The Gulf War Test

      The U.S. Army began introducing D.U. ammo into its
      stockpiles in 1978, when the United States and the Soviet
      Union were engaged in intense competition over which side
      would develop the most effective tank. Washington feared
      that the Soviets with their T-72 had jumped ahead in the
      development of armor that was nearly impenetrable by
      traditional weapons. It was thought that D.U. rounds could
      counter the improved Soviet armor. But not until Iraq's
      Soviet-supplied army invaded oil-rich Kuwait and President
      Bush sent an expeditionary force of 500,000 to dislodge it
      was there a chance to battle-test the D.U. rounds.

      American M1 Abrams tanks and Bradley armored personnel
      carriers fired D.U. rounds; the A-10 Warthog aircraft, which
      provided close support for combat troops, fired twin
      30-millimeter guns with small-caliber D.U. bullets. All told, in
      the 100 hours of the February ground war, U.S. tanks fired at
      least 14,000 large-caliber D.U. rounds, and U.S. planes
      some 940,000 smaller-caliber rounds. D.U. rounds left about
      1,400 Iraqi tanks smoldering in the desert. Gen. Norman
      Schwarzkopf recalled one commander saying his unit "went
      through a whole field of burning Iraqi tanks."

      The D.U. weapons succeeded beyond the Pentagon's wildest
      dreams. But they received little public attention compared
      with the fanfare over other high-tech weapons: smart bombs,
      stealth fighters and Patriot missiles (which looked good, even
      if they didn't, as it turned out, work). D.U., perhaps the most
      effective new weapon of them all, was mentioned only in
      passing. "People have a fear of radioactivity and radioactive
      materials," explained Dan Fahey, a former Navy officer who
      served in the gulf. "The Army seems to think that if they are
      going to keep using D.U., the less they tell people about it the
      better."

      As the U.S.-led coalition forces swept to victory, many
      celebrating G.I.s scrambled onto -- or into -- disabled Iraqi
      vehicles. "When you get a lot of soldiers out on a battlefield,
      they are going to be curious," observed Chris Kornkven, a
      staff sergeant with the 304th Combat Support Company.
      "The Gulf War was the first time we saw Soviet tanks. Many
      of us started climbing around these destroyed vehicles."
      Indeed, a study by the Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm
      Association found that out of 10,051 Gulf War veterans who
      have reported mysterious illnesses, 82 percent had entered
      captured enemy vehicles.

      Other soldiers might have been exposed to harmful levels of
      D.U. as they rescued comrades from vehicles hit by friendly
      fire. A Gulf War photo book, Triumph in the Desert,
      contains one dramatic picture of soldiers pulling wounded
      Americans from the burning hull of an Abrams tank that had
      been hit by a D.U. round. Black smoke from the
      depleted-uranium explosion billows around the rescuers. Still
      other G.I.s picked up fragments of large-caliber D.U. rounds
      or unexploded small rounds and wore them as jewelry, hung
      around the soldiers' necks. "We didn't know any better," said
      Kornkven. "We didn't find out until long after we were home
      that there even was such a thing as D.U."

      But the Americans facing perhaps the greatest risk from D.U.
      were those who had been hit by D.U. shrapnel, especially
      those still carrying radioactive fragments in their bodies.
      Robert Sanders, who drove a tank, was one apparent
      casualty. On the third day of the ground war, his tank was hit
      by a D.U. round fired from another U.S. tank. "I had stinging
      pain in my shoulder and a stinging pain in my face from
      shrapnel," Sanders said.

      Military doctors removed the shrapnel. Several years later,
      however, Sanders heard that D.U. was radioactive and toxic,
      so he obtained his medical records. He found an
      interdepartmental fax saying doctors had removed bits of an
      "unknown metal" from his shoulder and that it was "probably
      D.U." Four years after he was wounded, Sanders took a
      urine test for depleted uranium, which revealed high levels of
      it in his system. The Pentagon had never made an effort to tell
      him of his likely exposure.

      Even the end of the ground war on February 28, 1991, did
      not end the threat of exposure to U.S. soldiers. Government
      documents reveal that in one accident alone, at a camp at
      Doha, about twelve miles from Kuwait City, as many as 660
      rounds weighing 7,062 pounds burned, releasing dark clouds
      of D.U. particles. Many of the 3,000 U.S. troops stationed at
      the base participated in cleanup operations without protective
      gear and without knowledge of the potential dangers.


      The Aftermath

      At war's end, U.S. forces left behind about 300 tons of
      expended D.U. ammunition in Kuwait and Iraq, a veritable
      radioactive waste dump that could haunt inhabitants of the
      region for years. In August 1995, Iraq presented a study to
      the United Nations demonstrating sharp increases in leukemia
      and other cancers as well as other unexplained diseases
      around the Basra region in the country's south. Iraqi scientists
      attributed some of the cancers to depleted uranium.

      Some U.S. officials and scientists have questioned the Iraqi
      claims. But former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who has
      made two recent trips to Iraq, observes that "the health
      ministry and doctors particularly in Basra and the south are
      terribly concerned about a range of problems that were not
      experienced before: fetuses with tumors, high rates of
      leukemia." And a secret British Atomic Energy Authority
      report leaked to the London Independent in November
      1991 warned that there was enough depleted uranium left
      behind in the Persian Gulf to account for "500,000 potential
      deaths" through increased cancer rates, although it noted that
      such a figure was an unlikely, worst-case scenario. That figure
      was based on an estimate that only forty tons of D.U. was left
      behind.

      Another study, by Siegwart Gunther, president of the
      Austrian chapter of Yellow Cross International, reported that
      D.U. projectiles "were gathered by children and used as
      toys." The study noted that a little girl who collected twelve of
      the projectiles died of leukemia. Gunther collected some D.U.
      rounds in southern Iraq and took them to Germany for
      analysis. However, when Gunther entered Germany, the D.U.
      rounds were seized. The authorities claimed that just one
      projectile emitted more radiation in five hours than is allowed
      per year under German regulations.

      Cleaning up the radioactive mess in the Persian Gulf would
      cost "billions," even if it were feasible, said Leonard Dietz, an
      atomic scientist who wrote a report on depleted uranium for
      the Energy Department. But the Pentagon maintained in a
      report that "no international law, treaty, regulation, or custom
      requires the U.S. to remediate Operation Desert
      Shield/Desert Storm battlefields."

      Those who suggest otherwise have found that they must fight
      the military industry as well as the Pentagon. In January 1993
      Eric Hoskins, a public health specialist who surveyed Iraq as
      a member of a Harvard team, wrote an Op-Ed in The New
      York Times warning that D.U. may be causing health
      problems in Iraqi children. A few weeks later a harsh letter to
      the editor accused Hoskins of "making readers of limited
      scientific literacy the lawful prey of his hyperbole," which
      reaches the "bizarre conclusion that the environmental
      aftermath of the Persian Gulf war is not Iraq's fault, but ours!"
      The author, Russell Seitz, was identified as an associate with
      the "Olin Institute for Strategic Studies, Harvard University."

      Though the letter appeared to be the work of a neutral
      scientist, the Olin Institute at Harvard was established by the
      John M. Olin Foundation, which grew out of the
      manufacturing fortune created by the Olin Corporation,
      currently the nation's only maker of D.U. antitank rounds.
      Seitz did not answer a request from The Nation seeking
      comment.

      Despite the Pentagon's love affair with D.U., there is an
      alternative -- tank ammunition made from tungsten. Matt
      Kagan, a former munitions analyst for Jane's Defence
      Weekly, said the latest developments in tungsten technology
      have made it "almost as effective as D.U." That assessment is
      shared by Bill Arkin, a columnist for The Bulletin of the
      Atomic Scientists who has consulted on D.U. for
      Greenpeace and Human Rights Watch. "It comes down to
      this," Arkin said. "Is there a logical alternative that provides
      the same military capability and doesn't leave us with this
      legacy? The answer is yes, tungsten."

      But tungsten is more expensive and must be imported, while
      the United States has more than 500,000 tons of depleted
      uranium, waste left behind by the production of nuclear
      weapons and by nuclear generators. Scientists have long
      looked for a way to re-use what otherwise must be stored at
      great expense in remote sites.

      "It's just a cost issue," argued Arkin. "But nobody ever
      thought through what would happen when we shoot a lot of
      this stuff around the battlefield. It's not a question of whether
      a thousand soldiers were exposed or fifty soldiers were
      exposed. We were probably lucky in the Gulf War. What
      happens when we're fighting a war that makes the Gulf War
      look like small potatoes?"


      Bill Mesler is a reporter working with the Investigative
      Fund of The Nation Institute.



      Copyright (c) 1996, The Nation Company, L.P. All rights reserved.
      Electronic redistribution for nonprofit purposes is permitted, provided
      this notice is attached in its entirety. Unauthorized, for-profit
      redistribution is prohibited. For further information regarding
      reprinting and syndication, please call The Nation at (212) 242-8400,
      ext. 226 or send e-mail to Max Block.