Picture of the Day - "Progress" in Iraq / Update

[mabadesc]

Inahurry said,

QUOTE

3500 battle tanks is \"slightly\" distorted ? I wonder how is moderately distorted then. Mybe the countless fakes are included there

It's funny that you brush aside statistical data and replace it with your own "instinct" just because that would mean the Irakis got their butts kicked and you don't like that.
This is cnn/dod data. Prove it wrong. I used the terms "slightly distorted", meaning that perhaps the 3500 destroyed tanks figure includes units that were abandoned on the battlefield and destroyed, not only "battle kills".

I know it's hard to swallow the defeat, but why is your first reaction "lies!" instead of being impressed?
Do you have any hard backing data to contest these numbers or are you just going by your "instinct"? And please don't quote some bitter socialist/anarchist reporter who's pulling numbers out of his....bottom. Give us some statistical studies.

QUOTE

Add around 7% of the American troops involved there who suffer to this day from serious chemical and radioactive poisoning.

Are you talking about the Gulf War Syndrome, or about the so-called "radioactive poisoning" caused by american depleted uranium shells?
The first one was never proved. If it had been, however, it means Irak used chemical warfare, which is illegal, as you well know.
In the second case, it's been proven conclusively, time and time again, that depleted uranium shells are just what their name implies....."depleted". Radiation levels around DU shells are within normal range and do not endanger the health of US soldiers who handle them. I also have hard data about this as well, including the type and amounts of rays depleted uranium emits.

[Chandernagore]

QUOTE

In the second case, it's been proven conclusively, time and time again, that depleted uranium shells are just what their name implies.....\"depleted\".  Radiation levels around DU shells are within normal range and do not endanger the health of US soldiers who handle them.  I also have hard data about this as well, including the type and amounts of rays depleted uranium emits.

Uhh, not so fast. I would object that precisely it has never been proven that DU shells are harmless. The health danger does not come from storing or handling the shells, it arise when the shell explodes at high temperature and produce alpha particle emitter uranium oxides which can be toxic several kilometers away from the impact point. So the problem is not so much the military using it but everyone, civilians included, living near the targeted zones. It is the level of this "post-impact" generated toxicity which is questioned and should be the object of additional research. That it generates risks is about certain, the level of that risk remains unclear.

[dead-cat]

an alpha particle is basically a helium nucleus and is emitted during the process of radioactive decay.

from epa.gov

QUOTE

Alpha particles don't get very far in the environment. Once emitted, they travel relatively slowly (at approximately one-twentieth the speed of light) due to their electric charge and large mass. They lose energy rapidly in air, usually expending it within a few centimeters. Because alpha particles are not radioactive, once they have lost their energy, they pick up free electrons and become helium. Alpha particles also cannot penetrate most matter they encounter. Even a piece of paper, or the dead outer layers of human skin is sufficient to stop alpha particles.   ... The health effects of alpha particles depend heavily upon how exposure takes place. External exposure (external to the body) is of far less concern than internal exposure, because alpha particles lack the energy to penetrate the outer dead layer of skin.   However, if alpha emitters have been inhaled, ingested (swallowed) or absorbed into the blood stream, sensitive living tissue can be exposed to alpha radiation. The resulting biological damage increases the risk of cancer; in particular, alpha radiation is known to cause lung cancer in humans when alpha emitters are inhaled.   The greatest exposures to alpha radiation for average citizens comes from the inhalation of radon and its decay products, several of which also emit potent alpha radiation. ... Protecting yourself from external exposure to alpha radiation is easy, since alpha particles are unable to penetrate the outer dead layers of skin or clothing. However, tissue that is not protected by the outer layer of dead cells, such as eyes or open wounds, must be carefully protected. The exposure pathways of concern are inhalation or ingestion of alpha emitters, which continue to emit alpha particles. Alpha emitting radionuclides taken into the body release alpha particles to sensitive tissues. Their high energy transfers directly to tissue, causing damage that may lead to cancer.   The most significant way people come in contact with alpha emitters is in their home, school, or place of business. Radon, is a heavy gas and tends to collect in low-lying areas such as basements. Testing for radon in your home and taking any corrective action necessary is the most effective way to protect you and your family from alpha emitters.

[Chandernagore]

Good article.

QUOTE

However, if alpha emitters have been inhaled,

This is precisely the problem with uranium oxides wich "floats" for a time into the air, can be carried away by winds and inhaled.

[inahurry]

mabadesc,

I’m sorry but you’re way out of reality.

My bad : you wrote 3847 tanks (I wrongly ‘rounded’ to 3500). You said those were Iraqi losses in 1991, including all kind of destruction imaginable. There never were 3000 or even close tanks in Kuwait so the abandoned or destroyed by Iraqis tanks there can’t change the picture so much. There was only a major tank clash north of the Kuwait border and it is never talked about to my knowledge apparently because coalition (it was a coalition then too, the ‘coward’ French and the British were fairly represented) losses were significant. 4000 tanks is 10 armored divisions. There were tons of cheap imitations that were destroyed by aviation, it’s the only reasonable explanation I can offer for the origin of such an absurd figure, but that is an excuse only for journalists not for the military, especially 12 years after. Maybe you post the source of your data, a link or something, if you want. (cnn/dod is an ironic association, don’t you think, or should be, maybe cnn is just a covert disinformation DoD department ). Even better, let’s skip over, is impossible to reach some logical estimate with such a ludicrous figure as a starting hypothesis. Anyway, if you like to believe Iraq lost 3847 tanks in 1991 it is your choice.

The 7% refers to the ‘syndrome’ if you like but that was a word coined to scorn at the reality, very much like the ‘conspiracy theory’ accusation whenever the official positions come under heavy flak. These are documented cases of physical disease, though there are also psychical disturbances. I probably could find the sources where the 7% was mentioned and from there do a little research of my own but it is too time consuming. As you take this too personally it is wiser not to pursue a path that leads nowhere.

[mabadesc]

Dead-cat, Chandy,

Yes, good article. I read something similar, to the effect that DU does not affect its military handlers or even the population, but may be somewhat dangerous to children who play with exploded fragments or on top of vehicles that were destroyed with DU rounds.

Anyway, very relevant article to the discussion. Thanks for posting it.

[mabadesc]

C'mon, Maresal, you're the one taking these too personally. You're the one who were saying that you live in the West and have more access to info than others.

About Gulf War Syndrome, how did it come about? I don't know if it exists or not. It's possible that it does. But if it does, would you agree then that it was caused by some sort of chemical weapon used by Hussein?

Regards.

[inahurry]

mabadesc,

It's inahurry not Der Maresal, I live in Romania not in a western country. If there was any other argument needed to support my previous decision you offered it right now. I do hope you read the data you post here more accurately than the names of those who post.


Regarding radioactive poisoning. The Chernobyl disaster affected Romania - the incidence of cancer increased, it was documented by studies carried both by physicians and physicists. Chernobyl is farther away from Romania than the areas where DU was used from the populated centers there. And DU rounds are shot in open atmosphere not contained under a shield (breached though) as was the Ukrainian case. It is not only the inhaling that is danerous but the infestation of underground water, used for drinking, is very dangerous too and also the soil infestation.

I don't think US officially accused Iraq of using poisonous gas against US troops. Many veterans from 1991 accuse instead the US of using them and causing, indirectly, their own troops suffering.

[dead-cat]

QUOTE

Regarding radioactive poisoning. The Chernobyl disaster affected Romania - the incidence of cancer increased, it was documented by studies carried both by physicians and physicists. Chernobyl is farther away from Romania than the areas where DU was used from the populated centers there. And DU rounds are shot in open atmosphere not contained under a shield (breached though) as was the Ukrainian case. It is not only the inhaling that is danerous but the infestation of underground water, used for drinking, is very dangerous too and also the soil infestation.

remeber the nuclear physics classen from the uni?

the source of danger is the radiation with alpha particles (which are high energy, high mass ions) if the radiation source is beneath the protective layer of skin. in the open, the alpha particle, being a ion with 2 protons and 2 neutrons will tend to capture free electrons very quickly, thus becoming helium.

in the chernobyl case iodine and caesium were released into the atmosphere, which is a diffrent thing than shooting a DU round into the sky.

[Der Maresal]

QUOTE

........It's funny that you brush aside statistical data and replace it with your own \"instinct\" just because that would mean the Irakis got their butts kicked and you don't like that. This is cnn /dod data.  Prove it wrong.  I used the terms \"slightly distorted\", meaning that perhaps the 3500 destroyed tanks figure includes units that were abandoned on the battlefield and destroyed, not only \"battle kills\". I know it's hard to swallow the defeat, but why is your first reaction \"lies!\" instead of being impressed?   Do you have any hard backing data to contest these numbers or are you just going by your \"instinct\"? ........ it's been proven conclusively, time and time again, that depleted uranium shells are just what their name implies.....\"depleted\".  Radiation levels around DU shells are within normal range and do not endanger the health of US soldiers who handle them.  I also have hard data about this as well, including the type and amounts of rays depleted uranium emits.

Perhaps you too have become mutated to the point where you no longer accept the truth and now live in the world of american propaganda.
Your over confidence in american might, and your underestimation of their crimes (be it Depleated Uranium or not) is your weakness.

Perhaps more pictures will convince you- because I noticed you get upset and cry like a kid everytime I show you Images of what you don't want to see. You are telling us that DU is not poisonous at all, and quite safe - despite the scandal around it. This is like telling us that a 3-Eyed Fish from a Nuclear Power plant lake, is not only delicious - but a Progress of Nature - an evolution! You can shove that fish (and..your depleated uranium story) down your throat- nobody belives it, and nobody will because I will shatter it compleatly.
=>http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/du-watch...ov_about_du.htm

Before we go further - I will show you that you were not right about the coalition losses in 1991, and the "0 Abrams lost" propaganda. The facts show an Abrams tank was destroyed and everyone inside killed when It was hit by ...another Abrams! The Americans themselves made a movie about the gulf war - in which they show their great exploit. Another one was knocked by the gun of a T-72 (which is rather powerfull, even tough the armor is weak). In any case, - since WW2 Americans prefer to pound tanks from the Air rather then face them on the ground on equal terms. They learned their lesson when they came up against German panzers and their shells could not even scrap the paint of the Panther tanks.
Shooting tanks from the air is fun and easy - my previous pictures show you the fun Americans get when they meet the "RPG". ... :!:

Back to DU-Radiation (and to mutants who don't believe it's a danger if they can't see it) :shock: ..
Radiation is safe for the us soldier - Just as safe as it was in the Nevada Desert back in 1945 when hundreads put on their sun-glasses and 'enjoyed' the view of a mushroom cloud and the wind and dust blowing through their hair. It turned out it was quite safe - they did not die immediately no - but got cancer and died a slow death years later.
The blindness in America has reached an all-time-high, and from peoples who get their news from CNN I don't expect much. Perhaps you also read the Jerusalem Post and the Wallstreet Journal. One could say you are "well informed" 8) )) .. .. .. not! :wink:

It's quite safe the Depleated Uranium, - especially that now Iraqi Children are being born with Huge heads and abnormal deformations -
Oh, you might argue, a big head is actually good! "It's an advantage" -
Well - not that you have one... Perhaps some DU will help your mind here.


The Article on Depleated Uranium can be found here:
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/du-watch...ov_about_du.htm
- along with it's pictures, pro-and-cons, DU in Aircraft, in Ammunition ,and in Tanks (like that radioactive junk called Abrams)

QUOTE

Depleted uranium is used in the shells fired by American M1 Abrams tanks in large quantities during the Persian Gulf war, contaminating territories of Kuwait, Iraq and Saudi Arabia with tons of this radioactive material. The M1 Abrams also uses DU in its armor.

===============================================

Enough about uranium - Let's piss off the subject in question here with more visual material. The more US hardware burning the better.

Is the blood flowing from this American Vehicle? :shock:

...no, I'm sure the driver just cut his lip!

The RPG hole on this vehicles and the blood next to it proves he did not bite his lip after all. Maybe worse...! :shock:

When Abrams meets RPG.

You will not see this on CNN - better to look for it in the Anarchist/Socialist News sources as you call it.

This won't be the last.

And not just americans are loosing - the better soldiers - the British are in troubble as well. .........


Friendly Fire? :shock: There will be more!


If the pictures are not enough for you - open this pdf document with Coalition Tank losses from 21 March to 12 October 2003. 20 Tanks destroyed - 2 British, 18 American. Abrams, Bradley, Challenger II.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/iraq/arm...rmor_losses.pdf

QUOTE

(a summary of all coalition armor losses reported by coalition military and government officials and mainstream media sources)

More to come!
In addition there here are Coalition Casualties by rank-
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/iraq/cas...ies_by_rank.pdf

In addition I have coalition losses of Aircraft in Irak - for a total of 105. 26 UAV, 22 Helicopters destroyed, 45 damaged, 10 planes destryoed, 2 damaged.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/iraq/air...raft_losses.pdf
and also this graph is worh looking at.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/iraq/dynamics.pdf

Let's stop the pointless arguments and name calling here- I cannot convince you, (tough I can show you pictures to piss you off). The best way, - which usually solves all conflicts (like the one your american friend are attempting) is not to negotiate or bring facts forward, - no matter how convincing they are - you will hold your ground and not admit defeat. (Tough it's funny to see how you react to the knocked out tanks I show you daily ) - The best way is to knock the other guy with a club on it's head - the way it was done in the stone age. That settles all disputes.!
Argumets are pointless, for pussies and pacifists! But we are American arn't we?
There is no point in debating this any further - put on your American Uniform !- I'll see you in Iraq! 8)

[Der Maresal]

QUOTE

Be sure to read the Article on Depleated Uranium. A more complete document on this topic is hard to find on the web- quite convincing!   This one will never air on CNN.  :)   ============================================== http://www.aeronautics.ru/archive/du-watch...ov_about_du.htm ==============================================

[Chandernagore]

I wonder what the Americans have done to Der Maresal. I suspect they slowly gouged out his left eye with a rusted spoon. Otherwise I can hardly explain the paranormal level of hatred packed in his seemingly forever damned soul...

Der Maresal, I suggest you have a trip to the US, meet and talk with people there for a few weeks, with farmers, soldiers, teachers, do a bit of discovery, work together, have some fun and come back with a modicum of personal knowledge about the nemesis of your life.

I sincerely hope you will heal quickly.

Best regards

Chandernagore

[mabadesc]

Inahurry - my sincere apology. Yes, I confused you with Herr Maresal. My fault.
About the DU ammo, re-read my last posts. I thought the article posted was interesting, and it may be somewhat unhealthy esp. for kids who play around *exploded* shells and may ingest particles. But I'm not about to draw any conclusions without proof. There has been no study to prove they provide serious harm. Chernobyl - you can't even start to compare the two. Different types of radiation, different events. What's the next step? You'll compare a DU shell with a tactical nuclear weapon? Show me proof. And, you know, for every pro-american biaised piece of media, there are at least a couple media pieces that are anti-american biaised. So, please take both sides into account.

[mabadesc]

Maresal! - You're back. You were sorely missed, my Western, superior, Flight-Simulator-expert friend.

Keep posting the pics. They really are....well, interesting, inasmuch as you can consider war interesting.
Funny, Maresal, it looks like you're the one acting all offended and bitter, not me. Spending all that time to search for pics just to post them (right, Chander?) :wink:

Anyway, you said:

QUOTE

Before we go further - I will show you that you were not right about the coalition losses in 1991, and the \"0 Abrams lost\" propaganda. The facts show an Abrams tank was destroyed and everyone inside killed when It was hit by ...another Abrams!

Re-read the data I posted: 1991 - there were 4 M1A1 killed, all by friendly fire. Not just one, but four. In case you didn't know what friendly fire means, it's exactly the situation you described above.
See how nice I am to you? I even pointed out the mistake you made (about the 1 friendly fire kill) which was working in my favor. There were 4 kills, not 1, Maresal (a gift from me to you).

About the DU - please, you can do better than quote a Russian official site. What did you expect them to say? The real question is, why would you believe the Russian MoD over the US Mod? Won't even a doubt crawl into your mind? You'll just go with the Russian position, eyes closed? :wink:

P.S. Regarding numbers of casualties, still, no data to refute mine. You're just including different periods of time.....and of course, you speak nothing of Iraki losses :roll:

[mabadesc]

Chander, you said:

QUOTE

I wonder what the Americans have done to Der Maresal. I suspect they slowly gouged out his left eye with a rusted spoon. Otherwise I can hardly explain the paranormal level of hatred packed in his seemingly forever damned soul...   Der Maresal, I suggest you have a trip to the US...

Wouldn't it be funny if he lived in America? I don't know if he does or not, but I wouldn't be surprised...

Seriously, though, you're right, it's hard to imagine the amount of hatred he has...all jokes aside, it's pretty sad if you think about it.

QUOTE

...have some fun and come back with a modicum of personal knowledge about the nemesis of your life.

I told him to relax and have fun a few posts ago, but apparently he doesn't want to listen. :wink: