Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (4232)	1/31/2001 10:50:40 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

The Iraqi civilans that were killed directly by the war would have been killed by explosive blasts not nuclear radiation, or chemical weapon attacks. That is certainly wrong. The use of "depleted" uranium (a misnomer at best) has high biological toxicity and was certainly launched into the air as both dust and aerosol. We are seeing similar problems in the Balkans where we use it as well. This stuff is just plain nasty. If we had found that spraying molten slugs of mercury was effective (or wooden bullets, outlawed by the Geneva Convention) would we be justified in using them? When you come to someone's defense, you'd better be sure that they were actually in harm's way. You will be held to a higher standard shooting a burglar in your NEIGHBOR'S house than shooting one in your own. You have no reasonable fear of your person and your fear for them isn't going to fly very well, especially if it turns out they weren't home. After non-combatants return to areas where there was combat (and salvage parts from destroyed tanks, trucks and buildings where DU has been used) there will certainly be exposure to this really, really nasty stuff. It is far worse than an abortion, IMO. It is indiscriminate and involves fully formed people, who, as you pointed out, have considerable difficulties in their lives already.