What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
62 Comments
- kemp34, on 03/26/2009, -3/+36All those "support our troops" people better be freaking PISSED at the way the CRAP federal government monsters have treated our brave fighting men.
- freedomjoe, on 03/27/2009, -5/+29No, they don't care about this stuff. They think we're traitors for discussing it. I know, because I followed Vote Vets closely, and realized that Dems voted for protective gear and veterans rights much more than Republicans. That is why Obama got such a higher grade from them than McCain. These are the same people who thought we were horrible for caring that the showers were killing our troops because Blackwater (Cheney's company) wasn't doing its job. The GOP and their minions do not care about people. That's the big mistake we keep making. You can't appeal to their humanity.
They brainwash people into thinking support for the troops means supporting Hawkish attitudes. I am deeply appreciative of our men and women who serve this country, and proud of them, but that's no reason to go around attacking countries pre-emptively. Nationalism; the tool of the greedy NeoCons. Coupled with the bible, they maintain complete control over their minions. - shupy, on 03/27/2009, -3/+24This is a lot like what happened to Vietnam vets exposed to agent orange. The VA even refused to treat as combat related.
This country has not genuinely supported the troops for a long time. And it is not the average citizen, it is the government. - joand315, on 03/27/2009, -0/+10and women.
- ecko3r, on 03/27/2009, -3/+12If the soldier's shooting the depleted uranium are getting cancer because of it, imagine what will happen to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan who now live in a country full of depleted uranium bullets.
- inactive, on 03/27/2009, -1/+9They won't be though, they'll be in denial. I don't understand why anyone would think that signing up for the military is a good idea, the government treats you like *****.
- tdclark23, on 03/27/2009, -1/+8If you had RTFA you would see the soldier was a trained scientist who joined for patriotic reasons. However, it doesn't matter if he had been a NASCAR fan, beer guzzling loser. He died protecting you and neither of you deserved it.
- joand315, on 03/27/2009, -1/+7It was Cheney's company KBR, not Blackwater, you know, just to be clear.
- kemp34, on 03/27/2009, -0/+6Pardon me for the omission.
- inactive, on 03/27/2009, -1/+7While I agree that they did accept the risks while signing up, I don't agree that they deserve to be treated like crap afterwards. that's the key.
- KenSPT, on 03/27/2009, -1/+7Go to hell.
- tdclark23, on 03/27/2009, -0/+6They promise training that you can use when you get out, but it is seldom like that. I know a young man who was told he would be trained to use computers. He found himself in a class learning to figure artillery trajectories with pen and paper. After a week of that he asked when they would get computers. He was told he was the computer. Figuring the trajectory of artillery shells will be really useful in the civilian world. Be careful Jeremy.
- Kidddrunkadelic, on 03/27/2009, -2/+7Gulf war syndrome lives on, oh wait it doesn't exist says the government.
- CloakandSwagger, on 03/27/2009, -3/+8The aftershocks of war are felt for many generations.
Long after the bombs have fallen and the bullets have taken their course, people will remain affected by this war for a very long time.
Your children, your children's children, etc.
A lot of people don't seem to understand the true cost of war.
It is permanent.
You really have to ask yourself, who stands to benefit from all these wars?
It certainly doesn't appear to be any of us, not even the soldiers are cared for.
This is beyond disrespectful, it is beyond rationale, it's straight up evil *****. - GovernmentSp00k, on 03/27/2009, -3/+8Disgusting. Here's another look at how the "freedom fighting" administration "supports the troops" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chXjCtkymRQ
- jeremyosborne81, on 03/27/2009, -1/+5You're an idiot. And with a name like Marty Jannetty, you have little room to criticize one's entertainment preferences.
I am a well educated individual, with a bachelor's degree. When the company I was working for went out of business last year I spent a month looking for a job. The only thing available, which I am doing now, was an $8/hour retail job. Doesn't really pay the bills. I'm 27 and the military will not only pay BETTER than what I'm doing now, but give me training in a more lucrative field,like a pharmaceutical apprenticeship, rather than paying for it at a community college. Sounds like a good deal to me. - RungeKutta, on 03/27/2009, -1/+5Actually it is radioactive, although no where near as radioactive as natural uranium.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en ... - inactive, on 03/27/2009, -0/+4who benefits? corporations and stockholders usually.
- TigerFace, on 03/27/2009, -1/+5I am heartbroken after reading this. I wish more people were aware of what is going on. It really struck me when one of the soldiers talked about how the media would only visit amputees and not the people who were no left with a terminal cancer. They matter too. So very sad.
- inactive, on 03/27/2009, -1/+5DU is bad because when they fire it at something it vaporizes into tiny dust that gets inhaled then years later gives you cancer.
US army bad for using this. - yoderizer, on 03/27/2009, -0/+3Lots of good info at that link. Nothing to suggest DU is any more dangerous than lead.
- synapz, on 03/27/2009, -0/+3As a vet, all I can say is this: the money is not worth your freedom.
- synapz, on 03/27/2009, -1/+3As a vet of the army and the war in iraq, I don't find much to disagree with what Marty has said. Sure, it's rough, but most people do join the military as a job, not out of some sense of duty, as is romanticized.
Furthermore, we're used by an aggressive government to perform violent acts on many who are nonviolent (aka collateral damage) or nonaggressive (iraq's army), towards us, anyway.
All this left/right nonsense is *****, btw. Government is violence and the threat thereof, no matter who is in charge. Stop supporting it. I have. - kareemachan, on 03/27/2009, -0/+2I think I can say we all hope it is for you. Good luck - and stay healthy...
- SpudDuffer, on 03/28/2009, -0/+2I did a little Goggling on "depleted uranium", and it says that depleted uranium has the same radiation levels as the average granite counter top. If it's safe in our homes, how much dangerous levels of radio activity can there be? I think the average person does not know enough about this topic to have a factually based, informed opinion.
- EnderSaveUs, on 03/27/2009, -0/+2this isn't the first time and it won't be the last that troops are exposed to hazardous chemicals.
(unfortunately) - obliviousfool, on 03/27/2009, -0/+2Unfortunately you cannot avoid ingesting it.
The problem with DU is that when it is used in munitions it basically becomes an invisible vapor that spreads everywhere.
If you have some tips on avoiding ingesting something you can't see that sticks around forever, and spreads everywhere, and can't be cleaned up please feel free to share those tips with the crowd. - kd1s, on 03/27/2009, -0/+2I am. I come from a family of vets. My grandfather served in Europe in WW II, and then in Korea. My father served in Vietnam. I stayed as far away from the military as I could.
The treatment of these vets is abominable. - kareemachan, on 03/27/2009, -0/+2Cheney & co.
- jeremyosborne81, on 03/27/2009, -0/+2@synapz
I know that. My father spent 20 years in the Corps and retired as a Master Sergeant. He gets a pension from the military and supplements his income working as a TOW TRUCK driver and is just barely making ends meet.
He worked in communications when he was in. - geauxtig3rs, on 03/27/2009, -1/+2I tend to agree with you. The issues that are mentioned here in the article are not consistent with DU poisoning. Most of these cancers/diseases are caused by industrial toxins. Depleted Uranium was found to be of negligible impact by the WHO, and i believe that is a group that most people can get behind and trust their findings. Ingested DU is absorbed at a rate of 2% of soluble compounds in the digestive tract. The highest absorption rate is the lungs, which is 20%. Even so, the concentrations would have to be ridiculously high for them to have any discernible effect, as the kidneys are very very effective at filtering Uranium form the blood.
Industrial toxins expelled by the unregulated industries of the middle east did this. Much is made of the atomic boogeyman, but the most dangerous toxins are seemingly innocuous and require much less exposure for them to be deadly.
That all being said, bring the troops home from that ***** and give the Iraqis the tools to rebuild. - CosmicSurfer, on 03/28/2009, -1/+2Tell ya what - why don't we just let you prove how safe it is...You can become a one he-man mitigation team.
I have treated children EXPOSED to friable lead and after a short time they have either become psychotic or terminal....It kills your thyroid, your pituitary AND your brain...Depleted uranium cause cancer as well as brain death...So why not let YOU mitigate and suck it all up, it's so safe. I will provide the spoon
Depleted just means it is under a certain level of radioactivity - tdclark23, on 03/27/2009, -0/+1@synapz - That is the saddest thing I've read all day. I know the truth of what you say and wish it were otherwise. However, it saddens me that our government treats patriots like pawns and heroes like *****. Whether on the left, right or center, every American knows someone who is serving and is supportive of our troops. Since the government no longer serves the people, the extent of support goes little beyond yellow magnets on the back of gas-guzzlers. One more disgrace to be chalked up to the scum we elected to serve us.
- inactive, on 03/27/2009, -2/+3Cancer huh? I suppose you think the Government will coma along and help you and your family? Forget it, you are no use to them now. They would prefer it if you committed suicide, .45 cents is a great deal for them...
That's what you get from big Government. A hall full of asshats and fools saving the golden egg hurling healthy young lives at the firestorm while running the other way.. - kareemachan, on 03/27/2009, -2/+3At least you admit you are a troll, and by definition, an idiot.
- diggydougie, on 09/03/2009, -0/+1I have since learned that Uranium does not turn into lead (that would be alchemy) but is similar. When they say depleted they mean it is not radioactive any more. They use it instead of lead because it is a denser metal and so packs more punch in a given volume. I'm just guessing here but I suspect that the depleted uranium is what is left over after processing through centrifuges for bombs. They use the hot stuff for the bombs and the other 99% (just guessing) is non radioactive uranium used for bullets.
- GovernmentSp00k, on 03/27/2009, -0/+1http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5522575736 ...
- JohnnySoftware, on 09/02/2009, -0/+1In the 1950's uranium was found to cause cancer. Presumably the laws of physics have not changed.
DU is uranium mixed with lead. Right?
In the 1970's, experiments performed with dogs inhaling uranium dioxide dust showed resulted in tumors 50x to 100x more than in the control cases for 2-6 years after exposure.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11979& ...
"Review of Toxicologic and Radiologic Risks to Military Personnel to Depleted Uranium During and After Combat
Here is another resource:
http://www.ccnr.org/uranium_deadliest.html
"Uranium: the Deadliest Metal"
It reports uranium miners had high incidences of cancer and so did people exposed to tailings and crushed rock from the mines.
And here the US CDC weighs in, designating uranium a carcinogen:
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/uranium/u_pathogenic ...
There seems to be a lot of evidence that snorting up uranium in various forms is going to cause cancer. The scientific studies have already been done and the conclusions have already been done. - JohnnySoftware, on 09/02/2009, -0/+1Yes, I get the feeling most people get mislead by the adjective "depleted". The term "slightly used" would better describe them.
I wonder if there is an economic reason for using DU and agent orange in war time - overseas. Like maybe the nuclear energy/weapons and chemical industries are simply getting rid of waste material by selling it off to the military at a profit rather than disposing of it somewhere at a cost?
Nobody in this country seems to want radioactive and toxic chemical waste, I have noticed in the news over the past couple decades. - JohnnySoftware, on 09/02/2009, -0/+1Check the documents I linked above.
Also, read this OSHA that applies specifically to Gulf War veterans exposed to uranium in its DU form:
http://www.osha.gov/dts/chemicalsampling/data/CH_2 ...
Maybe you found somebody claiming it is safe (DU salesmen, perhaps) but that is not what US health/safety agencies are saying, nor Canadians.
Back in the 1960s, the American Tobacco Institute was claiming that cigarettes were safe. They were actually a tobacco industry group and they put out those ads while the tobacco companies sat on scientific research that proved cigarettes cause cancer. We all know how that turned out. Go back and check your sources for vested interests.
DU is not a new element, right? It's uranium partly on its way to being converted to other elements but only some of it has converted and some has not.
News flash: uranium causes cancer. The science is clear. - CosmicSurfer, on 03/28/2009, -0/+1Thanks - you saved me from having to call this idiot on his heartless, a-moral, cold idiocy
- JohnnySoftware, on 09/02/2009, -0/+1If you know that uranium decays into lead (and radon gas) over time, at a rate according to its half life, then you know it only half the uranium per period of its half life decays this way.
You have to wait a long, long, long, long, long, long time for uranium to completely decay down into lead.
Had they only wanted to use lead to make the shells don't you think they would have done so? - jeremyosborne81, on 03/27/2009, -0/+1"Since the government no longer serves the people ..."
This is a rising sentiment. I've been saying it for years. It begs the question, what would happen if there was a new Declaration of Independence.
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." - imarascal, on 03/28/2009, -0/+1Amen. I was just going to post the same agenda. These are volunteer soldiers and National Guard troops. Shame on a goverment who treats our FREEDOM fighters with such disrepect!!!!!!!!!!
- obliviousfool, on 03/28/2009, -0/+1http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0804-04.ht ...
I really, honestly, think you need to get a clue. - rsachs922, on 03/29/2009, -0/+0Someone isn't doing their research properly. Try Googling Iraq War Illnesses and/or Gulf War Syndrome.
- geauxtig3rs, on 03/29/2009, -0/+0Anyone attributing these horrible effects to any one cause is politicizing the issue for their own gain.
-
Show 51 - 66 of 66 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is