@JTT,
JTT wrote:The US has no problem with assassination just like they had no problem using depleted uranium when bombing Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, ... .
DU is fired from guns, not dropped in bombs. And it is only useful against tanks and armored vehicles.
Quote:Published on Wednesday, March 6, 2013 by Common Dreams
10 Years After Invasion, US Depleted Uranium Continues to Devastate Iraq
US persistent refusal to release data hampering efforts to eradicate contamination
- Jacob Chamberlain, staff writer
Nonsense.
I'm sure we should do more to clean up around the spots where we destroyed enemy tanks, but DU is hardly devastating Iraq.
Quote:A radioactive heavy metal found in weapons used by the U.S. military and other forces in the war on Iraq continues to plague the country as hundreds of sites are still contaminated and causing the spread of the radioactive substance, according to a new report by Netherlands peace group IKV Pax Christi.
Air strikes in Baghdad, March 21, 2003 (Reuters/Goran Tomasevic) Tens years after the invasion, the U.S. has done almost nothing to clean up the toxic legacy of the war and continues to deny the well-documented harms caused by the radioactive residue that remains.
I can agree with the need for a cleanup, but having this Jacob Chamberlain kook concoct fictitious claims to pretend there is some kind of "grave problem" is not likely to further the cause of that cleanup.
Quote:Iraq's depleted uranium clean-up to cost $30m as contamination spreads
Report says toxic waste is being spread by scrap metal dealers, and describes its 'alarming' use in civilian areas during Iraq wars
Rob Edwards
theguardian.com, Wednesday 6 March 2013 11.44 GMT
Yes. A cleanup is in order. But let's not blow everything out of proportion.