StarDestroyer.Net BBS

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?obje ... 2B566B5214

Radioactivity Detected in Bosnia Where NATO Used Depleted Uranium Shells
VOA News
11 Nov 2002, 20:40 UTC

United Nations environmental experts have said they have
detected radioactivity in three areas of Bosnia where NATO forces used depleted uranium shells during an air strike in 1995.

U.N. Environment Program officials Monday warned against deploying forces in those areas for fear of a possible health risk coming from the radioactive material.

The head of the U.N. team, Pekka Haavisto, said the three places of concern were an ammunition storage site near Sarajevo, a nearby tank repair factory and a military barracks in Han Pijesak in eastern Bosnia.

The areas were hit by NATO air strikes using depleted uranium armor-piercing rounds in 1995 as part of an effort to curb attacks by Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Investigators had probed 14 sites over the past month.

NATO authorities last year launched a probe into the possible link between the use of depleted uranium ammunition in the Balkans and increased cancer rates among peacekeepers who had served in the area. But a committee reported that medical research so far had not proved any link between the weapons and the health problems.

Hmm...

It's always something......

I don't know about DU. Have you seen any pictures of deformed Iraqi babies whose birth defects have been linked (most likely) to DU? Horrifying stuff. You can either do a search for "Iraqi Birth Defects" on google, or just take my word for it, which I recommend.

I wonder if it's from radiation or from heavy metal poisoning? Either could be caused by spent DU rounds. There really isn't much radiation in DU rounds so I don't see how it could be radiation.

Um... depleted uranium isn't really all that radioactive. In fact, sometimes depleted uranium has actually been used for radiation shields, because it's so dense. Certainly not enough to deform Iraqi babies on radiation. If they eat the stuff, they might get poisoned from the heavy metal, but that's true of lead as well.

A burnt out modern main battle tank ain't exactly a healthy thing to be around even if it hasn't been hit by DU.

DU is more of a problem from a toxicity point of view than radiation.

Keep the DU! It's simply the best, period.

Einhander Sn0m4n wrote:Keep the DU! It's simply the best, period.

Latest models of tungsten rounds have better penetration capabilities.
DU is not really better than conventional rounds.

Bah! It's propoganda.

The reson they use DU is so that they have somthing to do with the stuff. It's practically useless. It's cheaper than the alternatives though.

The proliferation of DU is also a problem

NecronLord wrote:The reson they use DU is so that they have somthing to do with the stuff. It's practically useless. It's cheaper than the alternatives though.

No,it is not useless.It is slighty better at armor penetration thal older models,but not latest ones,of tungsten rounds.Plus there is a limited incendiary effect.But in effects it is more a way to get rid of a waste material.

Pu-239 wrote:The proliferation of DU is also a problem

Not really. Worthless for nuclear bombs, thus the whole D part of the name, and dirty bombs, alpha partials are stopped by large amounts of moister in the air or thin sheets of newspaper.

And its use as armor or tank shells is really not much of a threat. Anyone who can get enough of it to use it for such has sufficent resoruces that they could just as easily use other things, there is no added threat just convenience for them. DU is pretty much worthless of anything but shells, armor and select forms of radiation shielding.

Sea Skimmer wrote:DU is pretty much worthless of anything but shells, armor and select forms of radiation shielding.

And weights in aircraft......Several early model 747s have DU slugs in
their engine pods to correctly weight them down...

i got a question...why is this whole stuff called Jihad and not Crusade?

Since it is U-238, can't you convert it to plutonium in a breeder reactor, meaning there actually is a use in power generation or weapons, assuming the US can do this neglecting the political reasons not to. Too bad we got too many enviromentalists and paranoid people.

Lex wrote:i got a question...why is this whole stuff called Jihad and not Crusade?

Aren't they pretty much the same thing?

Lex wrote:i got a question...why is this whole stuff called Jihad and not Crusade?

We've got explosives.

And Weemadando started it all by screaming "JIHAAAAAAAAAAD!!!" at the top of his lungs.

Pu-239 wrote:Since it is U-238, can't you convert it to plutonium in a breeder reactor, meaning there actually is a use in power generation or weapons, assuming the US can do this neglecting the political reasons not to. Too bad we got too many enviromentalists and paranoid people.

"Depleted uranium" is spent reactor fuel, right?

Can't reprocess spent reactor fuel into useable fuel again. Thank you, Jimmy Carter...

yeah damn the paranoid enviromentalist types like Jimmy.

Actually I'm not sure, I think it's the U-238 removed during enrichment, not the stuff left in the reactor fuel. So technically it's not spent fuel . The enviromentalists are stupid since recycling spent fuel will reduce much of the volume of waste.

Nevermind. Does reprocessing refer to the extraction of plutonium from spent fuel or putting the seperated U-238 in a breeder reactor?

DU is uranium with the U-235 removed, leaving only the U-238.

Reprocessing is a process in which useable fuel is extracted from spent fuel rods. This both produces more fuel which can be used again in a reactor and also greatly reduces the amount f high-level radioactive waste that must be disposed of. However there are only a couple plants currently running that do this because its cheaper to mine more uranium and procrastinate on a long term storage site for the waste.

As planned the US government was going to operate several plants to handle all US spent fuel, which would have left us with a small fraction of the waste we have today. However due to expense, what was suppose to be a net gain process was actually a massive net loss resulted in funding being cut quickly.