Punks, Politicos and Scientists of The World Unite!

June 1, 2006 9:08 AM

Punks, Politicos and Scientists of The World Unite! Depleted Uranium Bill passes the house. To pass the bill, Dr. McDermott took a less traditional route, working with bands like Anti-Flag and speaking to people outside the political sphere.
posted by usedwigs (16 comments total)

I wonder how this was sold as a popular issue. Aren't active-duty soldiers (and nearby civilians, I guess) the only ones who would be in danger if depleted uranium dust turned out to be really dangerous?
posted by grobstein at 10:11 AM on June 1, 2006

While a study to determine the effects of DU can only be a good thing, I have some reservations about a complete ban on DU weapons. I can understand not using DU rounds in automatic weapons (ie the GAU-8/A on the A-10), but DU is incredibly useful for penetrators in tank rounds - which obviously fire very slowly and are infrequently used. There are two properties of DU that make it so useful: first, when DU impacts tank armor it fractures in such a manner as to keep a sharp point forward, rather than squashing flat. Secondly, in a high-energy impact the resultant dust is pyrophoric - meaning that it burns on contact with the air.

For most purposes there's little reason (that I'm aware of) outside of economics to use DU instead of tungsten, but for the particular requirements of single-shot tank projectiles, it really seems like the best option. More to the point, if its use was restricted to that single application - and not used for training rounds - it seems like it would be rare enough to not be a major concern. I know Congress sucks at nuanced legislation but it seems appropriate here.
posted by Ryvar at 10:20 AM on June 1, 2006

Good, good, good.
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 10:20 AM on June 1, 2006

Like you have enemies that can field tanks for more than the first five minutes of any war...
posted by Artw at 10:21 AM on June 1, 2006

Artw: that's my point, basically. American air superiority means that ground battles between tanks - the only time DU is really called for - are extremely rare. There's little environmental impact in banning that particular use, and unlike other uses such a ban puts our soldiers at risk.

One other thing worth mentioning is that there's no 'encouraging the production of' argument here. The reason DU is so cheap is that it's a byproduct of nuclear fuel enrichment. Much like leather we will always have tons of the stuff lying around as other processes are the driving factor.
posted by Ryvar at 10:33 AM on June 1, 2006

"American air superiority means that ground battles between tanks - the only time DU is really called for - are extremely rare."

Same arguement for Mines exists, but we fail to ban them either.
posted by Elim at 10:45 AM on June 1, 2006

Elim I think you're missing my point: landmines are of limited utility but directly threaten millions of civilians across the world, whereas DU rounds used in tank ammunition are of limited utility but do not. The problem with DU is using it in tank armor so that ANY direct hit results in tons of DU dust in the air, and using it in 20mm and 30mm gatling guns that leave thousands of rounds buried in the dirt. What I'm saying here is that DU needs to be restricted except in the one instance where it's both justified and relatively harmless by virtue of limited usage.
posted by Ryvar at 10:54 AM on June 1, 2006

Same arguement for Mines exists, but we fail to ban them either.

Yeah, but we've supported demining efforts, and just don't want to sign onto an accord banning mines because of the Korea border situation.

Anyway, this is a small step, but good news.
posted by ibmcginty at 10:54 AM on June 1, 2006

Ryvar, I was being even less specific than that. nether are all that useful in all but a few instances and both have longlasting non war related fatalities. but both are great money makers for arms dealers.

As if a good aerial fuel munitions won't clear a path through a mine field in minimum time. besides I don't even think a mine field would slow down NK if they've a mind to attack.

The only thing that filed may do is kill farmers after the korean conflict is finally over. I get the eerie feeling the companies that make them may branch into prosthetics.
posted by Elim at 11:24 AM on June 1, 2006

Elim: again you seem to be missing the point. Landmines are pretty common in southern Asia and kill a lot of people there while accomplishing very little. DU rounds used by tanks for the specific purpose of destroying tanks (anti-infantry HE rounds don't use DU, obviously) are not commonly used and therefore do not kill many civilians via longterm effects and are extremely effective in the instances where they are used. The other uses of DU are what pours it into the environment and has longterm effects. More importantly they do so completely needlessly because tungsten would suffice for those uses and therefore DU for those purposes should be banned.

I don't know how much clearer I can make this.
posted by Ryvar at 11:50 AM on June 1, 2006

Ryvar, we are arguing two different points, yes, I concede that, your arguing my point isn't yours, yeah we know that, I was adding that you point is not "unlike" mine. this semantic battle need not be.

I would add, however, DU rounds were HEAVILY used in Iraq when I was there in 91, HEAVILY! as in Wantonly and with little regard, if we had them we used them.
posted by Elim at 12:01 PM on June 1, 2006

Congress passes bill calling for study of issue.

Somehow this is a brilliant tactic? That's what congress does with every issue it doesn't want to take action on but wants to look like it is taking action on.
posted by obfusciatrist at 1:05 PM on June 1, 2006

Has it been established that DU poisoning is the cause of Gulf War Syndrome?
posted by Artw at 2:44 PM on June 1, 2006

Has it been established that DU poisoning is the cause of Gulf War Syndrome?

No, that's part of the reason we need more studies. :(
posted by overanxious ducksqueezer at 2:48 PM on June 1, 2006

In the "smoking may or may not cause cancer" sense of needing more studies, or in the sense of actually needing some studies?
posted by Artw at 8:18 PM on June 1, 2006

DU is known to be poisonous, but DU poisoning is not well understood compared to, say, lead poisoning.
posted by Ptrin at 8:49 PM on June 1, 2006