i think mandy means depleted uranium from the all the weapons they coat with it ... theres a great documentary you should watch about it, but i can't remember what its called at the moment
this depleted uranium gets in to the atmosphere, there were studys recently saying its been found over texas and the uk
i think mandy means depleted uranium from the all the weapons they coat with it ... theres a great documentary you should watch about it, but i can't remember what its called at the moment
this depleted uranium gets in to the atmosphere, there were studys recently saying its been found over texas and the uk
Yep, and the British Government & Nuclear "watchdog" (or more precisely "propagandist") covered it up.
Uranium poisoning has already affected huge number of people (whole nations), and it's effect is spreading (to the USA as well, thanks to both air currents and the Semen of the US soldiers who served in or around Iraq)
Any project which requires guards on their output for THOUSANDS of years is NOT safe, even ignoring all the problems with existing and planned Nuclear sites.
p.s. Are you in favour of Iran having Nuclear plants ?
Natural uranium poisoning has always occurred as it is a natural occurring element. You will find that your house is actually emitting radioactive radiation too from its building materials. You are even more 'screwed' if you live in Cornwall as you will get more 'Radon poisoning' from the ground. So natural radiation is quite common .... About the article .. it only is affecting a small group of people - so don't quite see how that compares to global warming, which will affect the whole world?
There are no problems with planned nuclear sites - they are so safe they can even withstand a plane being flown right into them. And about Iran .. I do not believe we have a right to tell some countries to have nuclear weapons (even providing them to them) and tell others they can't build nuclear power plants as we think they might use them as a source for bombs
but the documentary is called Beyond Treason - Depleted Uranium , really worth watching, do a bit of research into it - they've even recently been testing weapons coated with it IN AMERICA!
i can upload it if you wanted, i've got the dvd extras as well
babys have been being born in iraq for over decade all deformed from the effects of it from the first gulf war - that shit stays in the environment for thousands of years ...
also, i don't think burying nuclear waste is any type of solution, with subduction, the continuing moving of the earths plates, burying waste is just waiting for a disaster - its saving up problems for future generations so we can live the high life style we do now - its totally wrong
"Lostinthestates", I do not agree. A DU tipped weapon has heat & explosive power. It is also NOT the radiation itself which is the major danger, but the TOXIC effect of the fine particles in the lung and bodies.
"Lostinthestates", why don't you comment on the reports listed on the 2 pages I listed which shows it isn't just a small group of people, but spread internationally.
the documentary is called Beyond Treason - Depleted Uranium , really worth watching, do a bit of research into it - they've even recently been testing weapons coated with it IN AMERICA!
OK one by one - your articles are mainly talking about soldiers who had dealt with this weaponry dying of the radiation. I do not quite understand how he is getting to several 100.000s but that doesn't really matter. I do not see the facts underlying this statement - I have to date not heard of several thousand soldiers falling down like dead flies - so not quite sure where this medical evidence is coming from. I do grant that some soldiers have had effects of the Iraq war. My cousin bore a child that was not fit to life after her husband returned from the Iraq war and they blamed that on stuff he was exposed to while in Iraq. Anyways, to come to the initial point. Soldiers decide consciously to join the army, fully aware of the risk of death they will face. Global warming is hitting the poorest who have not contributed to the demise of the environment. So in my eyes I feel much stronger about the impact of global warming.
Furthermore, the next generation of nuclear power plants can be used to not only generate energy but also hydrogen, which in turn could be used for cars to run on. So you might be against the use of any nuclear power plants but actually you are not only mitigating the exhausts from fossil fuel power stations but you could also reduce the emissions from cars. And while we are talking about carcinogenic materials, you should look at the stuff cars blow out in the first 2 minutes of being started. You might not believe in global warming but you may believe in the bad side effects car exhausts have on your health. So generally it is not quite as black and white as you would like to paint the picture.
OK one by one - your articles are mainly talking about soldiers who had dealt with this weaponry dying of the radiation. I do not quite understand how he is getting to several 100.000s but that doesn't really matter.
Actually it does matter. Did you see Luke's postings about the local population in the Middle East ? They are millions who suffer or will suffer cancers etc. Or don't they count ?
Lostinthestates wrote:
I have to date not heard of several thousand soldiers falling down like dead flies - so not quite sure where this medical evidence is coming from.
If DU worked so quickly, it might be clearer what it is doing. Instead have you seen the problem at the VA hospitals ? How about 50% + of soldiers in gulf war I & II now on long term permanent disability. The cost of that will be crippling on the treasury of all governments affected.
Lostinthestates wrote:
Anyways, to come to the initial point. Soldiers decide consciously to join the army, fully aware of the risk of death they will face. Global warming is hitting the poorest who have not contributed to the demise of the environment. So in my eyes I feel much stronger about the impact of global warming.
So why not get the government of the US, the main contributor of global warming, to pay for free or subsidised energy to the rest of the developing world, rather than trying to get the developing world to "slow down" development .. which is what the developed countries say is the way to save the planet.
OK one by one - your articles are mainly talking about soldiers who had dealt with this weaponry dying of the radiation. I do not quite understand how he is getting to several 100.000s but that doesn't really matter.
Actually it does matter. Did you see Luke's postings about the local population in the Middle East ? They are millions who suffer or will suffer cancers etc. Or don't they count ?
That is purely speculative. As I said I have not seen any medical data showing the death of 100.000s of US soldiers by radiation poisoning.
So why not get the government of the US, the main contributor of global warming, to pay for free or subsidised energy to the rest of the developing world, rather than trying to get the developing world to "slow down" development .. which is what the developed countries say is the way to save the planet.
They do not need to slow down developing, they just should use regulations instead of using coal burning power stations which just blow out the fumes into the environment. And by the way this is causing real deaths in many parts of China.
The only way to prevent further damage to the planet is by taking individual responsibility for your actions and by not taking part in actions (purchases from certain companies etc) that have no respect for the planet.
All this pish about getting governments to do anything is nonsense - if the people change their attitude then the governments will follow. Not the other way round.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
