Thread: americans/Brits using depleted uranum in bombs and shells

Originally Posted by shark!

uh no! poorly paid hired hitmen are getting sick!

I guess I was a poorly paid hired hit man.

LOL, fuck off.

Depleted uranium is used in a lot of weapons because its great for armor peircing rounds. Its used heavily in tank rounds. They can be made into any kind of ammo and you will seen them shot out of rifiles and stuff too but the huge tank rounds are how we spread most of it, because they are just so big.

I have seen the pictures of the birth defects and stuff but really I have no need to post sick pictures of that. I am sure you can google it. When you use nuclear bombs the raidoactive stuff disappears fairly quickly as most of the energy is released in the explosion. This stuff it stays around forever at low levels. Calling in a small nuclear bomb probably isn't the best way to put it. Its more like a poison. We are covering the entire area with poison, which will last billions of years. The stuff gets into the soil and into the food supply. It gets into the water and they don't have the best filtration over there, so they end up drinking it.

Of course anyone who is hit by the round dies. That is our goal however. The problem is everyone else who dies a slow death. Increased cancer rates, huge amounts of birth defects and other medical problems they are having. This stuff will never go away, the wind blows the dust all over the place.

The reasons this kind of stuff doesn't come out very much is because it puts our country in a very bad light. Its not an anti bush thing and you can't blame him for it. Its an anti US army thing and everyone loves to yell, "support our troops" bullcrap, so they are slow to point the blame at the armed services. This stuff isn't made up though, the government has its own reports showing the dangers of it. We know what it does, its a fact not some theory someone came up with.

Originally Posted by Alric

The reasons this kind of stuff doesn't come out very much is because it puts our country in a very bad light. Its not an anti bush thing and you can't blame him for it. Its an anti US army thing and everyone loves to yell, "support our troops" bullcrap, so they are slow to point the blame at the armed services. This stuff isn't made up though, the government has its own reports showing the dangers of it. We know what it does, its a fact not some theory someone came up with.

I don't know much about that, and it sounds really terrible. It just seems like such a story would be hog Heaven for sensational journalism. I don't see why it wouldn't make Anna Nicole Smith look like a rat that lived for three days and died in the sewer. Even American journalists have no qualms about humiliating the military. If Abu Ghraib wasn't suppressed, it seems like American military caused uranium poisoning all over the place wouldn't be either. The New York Times would be having orgasms just thinking about printing a story about it every single day, like they did with Abu Ghraib. If the government is keeping people like that so low key, it is pretty shocking.

Just because the new york times doesn't report it doesn't mean its not true. There are articles about it all the time. Just because its not fox or cnn doesn't mean you should just disregard it.

Honestly there is very little real criticism of the government. The news is more focused on stuff making money than reporting news. Things they can really hype up to sound bad but are actually not to bad. And lets face it, there is more than a small amount of propaganda in a lot of new sources.

This is obviously one example of it. How come they don't report it? That is a serious question you should ask. Here is another, how come you rarely hear reports of the north american union? You hear people talking about illegal immgrents all the time but you rarely hear about the plans the government has to earse the border with mexico, to make an EU type government between mexico and canada. Suddenly all the crap they do makes sense, why secure the border if your going to allow free travel across it within a few years anyway? But its never talked about.

Heck back to Iraq, they talk about the bombings and how many people die every day in iraq. How come they don't say anything when they lockdown baghdad because they fear uprisings however? A couple of times they had to totally stop all travel in the city because they thought the new government might be overthrown, yet you hear nothing of it.

How come they never mention how much trouble our economy is in? They like to complian about minor numbers or cheer on our economy when a few things point up. Yet they rarely talk about how serious our countries debt really is. If you go look at smaller news groups, you will see aritcles on it all the time about how our country is bankrupt, how theres no way we can pay for social security in the coming years. A while back when the government stopped reporting how much money it was creating, there wasn't any news on it. Given the serious nature of it, you would think it should be. It wasn't however. And incase you don't know why its important, its because thats the cause of inflation and without them reporting it, inflation can balloon out of control without anyone seeing before its to late.

So who knows why they report what they. All I know is that if you only listen to one or two news sources your not getting the entire story.