Why do people think that liberals are against our troops? Who's suporting our troops?

Question

I've got two words...Depleted Uranium. We used over 2400 tons of it in Iraq this time. Look it up. It's nasty, and it is a WMD. Massive residual radiation lasting forever! The half-life on the stuff is 4.5 Billion years! Half life means that there will be half as much of the stuff in 4.5 billion years!!!! Meanwhile, anyone living anywhere in the middle east or to the western borders of India, down to Egypt....will die off over the course of the next few generations, and as these people get exposed to the airborne radioactive particles, they now have a cancer rate 160 TIMES normal. Birth defects are skyrocketing...and I'm not talking cleft palate...these children are being born without mouths to eat or scream, enlarged heads, no heads, no brains, cyclops eye...really weird stuff. Uranium does not leave your body or your DNA ever! As they get re-exposed to greater and greater amounts, the entire poputlation of the area will die off.

It's just going to happen. It's already done, and we can't undo it.

We, as a country, need to think about what we have just done. We need to think about it really freaking hard. We have just virtually ended an entire race of people. How many Jews did Hitler kill? 6 million? There are hundreds of millions of people in the affected area. They will all die. The radiation will effect all of them until they are generationally unable to give birth to a viable baby. And they will all be dead. HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, DAMN IT!!! All for what? A few military bases and some oil...some oil that we don't have to need if use of the technology that is already out there makes oil obsolete. But the almighty Profit is appeased. And hundreds of millions will die for it.

The troops are getting it to, and passing it on to their families. And that really, really sucks! We think you military guys are awesome! It's the "leaders" that are in charge that I'm talking about. You guys rock!

Boardrunner...it was mentioned on just about every news station. Look anywhere you like, you will not find one person (in any position to have any idea) that denies that we were using DU munitions. Even Fox did a little segment talking about how great it was for anti-tank and anti-bunker uses.

proud_2b...here you go again with your disinformation based on unscientific publications. Every scientific, peer reviewed study has shown that DU has these effects, and you can see the effects all day long in Iraq. It is also specifically illegal according to both the UN and the International Court. The reason it is illegal is because it is indescriminate, untargeted, and causes a mojority of harm done to civilian populations. The radiation levels in Baghdad (according to a Pentagon report issued in 2005) are between 160 and 200 TIMES the normal background radiation levels.

How could you work so hard to mislead people like this when the act of using these munitions is so horrible...so atrocious? You mentioned in a previous post that I shouldn't tell the public about this...that it's irresponsibe because if people find out, they will revolt. Is that where you stand? That American's shouldn't be told how the administration is committing atrocities?

Answer 1

I without a doubt, 100%, solidly support our troops. I just don't agree with one of the locations our President has assigned them.

Answer 2

I support our troops. A common misconception is that radiation is depleted uranium's primary hazard. This is not the case under most battlefield exposure scenarios. Depleted uranium is approximately 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium. Depleted uranium emits alpha and beta particles, and gamma rays. Alpha particles, the primary radiation type produced by depleted uranium, are blocked by skin, while beta particles are blocked by the boots and battle dress utility uniform (BDUs) typically worn by service members. While gamma rays are a form of highly-penetrating energy , the amount of gamma radiation emitted by depleted uranium is very low. Thus, depleted uranium does not significantly add to the background radiation that we encounter every day.

When fired, or after "cooking off" in fires or explosions, the exposed depleted uranium rod poses an extremely low radiological threat as long as it remains outside the body. Taken into the body via metal fragments or dust-like particles, depleted uranium may pose a long-term health hazard to personnel if the amount is large. However, the amount which remains in the body depends on a number of factors, including the amount inhaled or ingested, the particle size and the ability of the particles to dissolve in body fluids.

Answer 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeHUxgxzx2s
Your did not sign a blank check for your life when you entered the army. Let your superiors know that, and we will stand behind you. I fight for people's freedom and that of others, Iraq is not.

How DARE anyone accuse someone who wants the troops safely back home of not supporting them?! You;re supporting the troops by putting them in harm's way and giving up their lives for a war in a country that was never a threat?! Who's supporting the troops?

Answer 4

too many people say when I comment about being anti-bush that I don't support our troops I support the troops and feel it's sad they are dying for a lie. alot of this started as a political ploy by the repubs to make people feel guilty that if they were against Bush then they did not support our troops what a bunch of Bush Bull SH--

Answer 5

I'm a liberal, and I support our troops. I don't agree with the commander in chief (Bush), but that doesn't mean that I think the troops are at fault for faulty policy making.

Bring them home safely.

Answer 6

Where did you get all this depleted uranium theory? Boy, that's a new one on me. Are you saying that because we are in Iraq, that this depleted uranium (2400 tons of it) is there? Where in hell do I look it up? I hope you do not take offense but I THINK YOU HAVE A BLUE RIBBON IN THE FRUIT CAKE DEPARTMENT! Anyway, you seem to be saying that you support our troops but you do not want them to be in Iraq. Where would you rather for them to be so you could just say--"I support our troops" You see what I mean? Now, you are saying "I support our troops but I don't want them in Iraq" If they were no longer in Iraq but back home in the USA could you say,"I support our troops"? SEE---no BUT, just a blunt statement. What I want to ask you is if they were back home in the USA do you think they would NEED our support? You are on this damned depleted uranium guilt trip and apologetic about our troops being in Iraq as if to say-"I support our troops but not in Iraq" You commislamic radicals are talking out of both ends of your bodies. You either support our troops or not. You can not have it both ways.

Answer 7

I support our troops, I just don't agree with the politics of our government that put them there.

Answer 8

Anyone interested and not to lazy to do a bit of reading will find the answers in regards to the depleted uranium here in these two links.

Corny was given these two links yesterday and I guess thought it was more important to try and scare you with her/his exagerated facts than it is to give you the truth.



http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/faq_17apr.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium

Answer 9

I support our troops.

Answer 10

Free the troops! -- a liberal