Here is a photo of a real, live, U.S. Army tank in Iraq. Several of my ardent critics have clearly shown that my earlier photo of a tank was not in Iraq but Israel. (Though I'd strongly claim it was made in the USA - one of the few things that are these days.) So it is actually true that the U.S. has tanks in Iraq and is daily using them to destroy people, fire depleted uranium shells that will leave radioactive toxic contamination for thousands of years to come, and kill many innocent Iraqi people. Let the critics have at it now!
Several of my ardent critics
ReplyDeleteYou can certainly think that if you'd like, but ardent is hardly descriptive of the emotion I feel reading your blog. Amused fits.
Though I'd strongly claim it was made in the USA - one of the few things that are these days
The tank you pictured was heavily modified by the IDF to suit their notions of how to fight a war. So, sure, made in the USA, heavily modified into a new machine in Israel.
Now your going to talk about Depleted Uranium?
ReplyDeleteWhat part of ***DEPLETED*** Do people have trouble understanding??!?!
Please see these links for more detail:
http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/faq_17apr.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_Uranium
DU's radioactive properties are negligible at BEST. Its used for its density, not its radioactivity. Its used to cut through the toughest tank armour like a hot knife going through butter, shatter into thousands of white-hot fragments that ignite everything else in the tank, including unspend munitions. This sudden increase in pressure due to all these explosions causes the turret of the tank to blast off, 50 feet into the air. Presto: Enemy Tank Problem Solved.
About its toxicity: Anything short of eating large chunks with a knife and fork does not do much damage. Gulf War 1 veterans don't have to worry about their grand kids glowing in the dark. Like all poisons, the poison is in the ammount, not the chemical itself. For example: too much water will kill you.
On a side note: I still think the first tank picture was much cooler than this picture.
I still think the first tank picture was much cooler than this picture.
ReplyDeleteThe Israeli tank might look cooler but the M1A1 will eat it for breakfast and ask for seconds. I'll take efficient over looks any day.
Damn that beast of war just trampling that poor helpless road.
ReplyDeleteOn a sidenote, why would a tank gunner fire depleted uranium shells in iraq? Is he engaging an armored target?
Or do you really think we would waste all those expensive shells to blow away iraqi orphans who seek refuge in mosques from evil opressors?
That is what flechette shells are for. Leaves more of em to grease the treads. Then we suck the crude oil out of their spinal fluids.
But those shells are so... expensive. I prefer to load kittens into the barrel and lob them toward the heroic freedom fighters.
ReplyDeleteOn a serious note:
Worrying about depleted uranium shells in Iraq is kind of like disinfecting the skin before a lethal injection.
On one hand you have a possible hazard in the uranium shells, with no documented cases of death or disease. It is a very specific weapon, designed to penetrate armor. It is not an effective munition for anything else. As such, we simply do not use it.
On the other hand, you have several MILLION land mines scattered haphazardly in the country side, often within yards of settlements. (which we are diligently removing) These mines are both anti vehicle and anti personnel. But just in case the land-mines aren't taking enough lives, there are highly motivated "freedom fighters" who are more than willing to remove the exposives and redistribute them in the middle of crowded markets.
Which is worse, in the grand scheme of things? People dying, or a bullet with a scary name?
Which is worse, in the grand scheme of things? People dying, or a bullet with a scary name?
ReplyDeleteDepends on their willingness to integrate new ideas.
Some people find it hard (or impossible) to integrate new thought patterns into their mindset. The former choice is a known reality, the latter an unknown, which they might lack the skills to integrate and think about. So they do not, and the unknown is always a bigger fear than the known.
Pity is in order. The world is ever changing and they can't change with it.
Now, if you've taken into account the reality of the latter choice and you still worry about it, that's fine. But knee jerk reflexes can kill you in a new environment.