Quote:
|
Originally Posted by pan6467
So we are again at "it's ok to make areas highly toxic to live, for the good of OUR nation"?
It's ok to use weapons that kill our own men, because that is part of war.
Dumping stuff that leaves the ground irradiated and causes cancer when we do not in any way shape or form need to is ok?
So it was ok for us to use use Agent Orange, just the trappings of war? So it's ok to keep using weapons that not only kill now but kill for future generations?
I'll remember that when the US is attacked and you are crying about how "unfair" these people we abuse now abuse us in the future.
|
You might want to look at my location. I am not an American, so it's got nothing to do with the good of "our nation". Furthermore, you present possibilities (toxic, causes cancer) as fact, which is simply bad logic. And finally, you put up a number of so-called "straw man" arguments, which does not improve upon this discussion.
Now, having said that... there are some valid arguments against DU, but there are also a lot of valid arguments *for* the use of DU. As long as there isn't any conclusive *independent* evidence showing that DU does indeed cause cancer, and that it does indeed do what some people claim, I don't see why the US should stop using it. As I see it, we only have evidence that there are health problems in some previously polluted areas; we have no evidence that proofs that DU is the only, or even main, cause of those problems.
Personally, with all the potential problems, I'd prefer countries using alternative materials for their AP rounds. But I also know that we would be seeing reports about bad effects from those materials too.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Pacifier
not correct, as far as i know it is illegal to contamine enemy terretory and resources (water). So if the US knowsthat those are the effects of DU it would be illegal for them to use them.
That is perhaps one of the main reasons for the US to simply ignore multiple studies.
|
And how does that make my statement incorrect? I said that DU wasn't a chemical weapon, but now you say it's illegal to contaminate territory and resources. That hardly proves me wrong, now does it?