The Biden administration will for the first time send controversial armor-piercing munitions containing depleted uranium to Ukraine, according to a document seen by Reuters and separately confirmed by two U.S. officials.

The use of depleted uranium munitions has been fiercely debated, with opponents like the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons saying there are dangerous health risks from ingesting or inhaling depleted uranium dust, including cancers and birth defects.

      • letsgocrazy@lemm.ee
        5116·
        10 months ago

        Being invaded is worse.

        The quickest way to save the most amount of lives is whatever gets rid rid of Russia the quickest.

        No question.

        Depleted Uranium is hardly dangerous.

        Another booby trapped mine with a grenade underneath gets placed by Russians every 4 minutes.

        Another Ukrainian citizen is tortured.

        And now there are reports of Ukrainian children being tortured.

        Bring on the napalm.

        • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
          139·
          10 months ago

          Depleted Uranium is dangerous for anyone exposed to it. It will be a persistant environmental pollutant that could render large areas unsuitable for agriculture. Downplaying the effects is stupid and dangerous.

          We need to talk about the effects and weigh the military benefit vs. the long term problems. Also for the military benefit you cannot take the shortcut of assuming no AP munitions to be used otherwise. Also the question is whether stronger AP abilities are needed, as Abrams should make quick work of T64s and probably T72s with normal AP rounds too.

          So we have to weigh a potentially marginal benefit with a significant long term health effect. I trust the Ukranian army and government to make that decision, but again the issues shouldn’t be downplayed. Because of downplaying and ignoring the issues with it there is thousands of American and British vets that suffer from diseases and birth defects in their children, struggling to get it recognised and properly compensated.

          • Gladaed@feddit.de
            95·
            10 months ago

            Depleted uranium is not much different from lead. Heavy metals are unhealthy. It is barely radioactive as it is made from the rather stable uranium isotopes. (Hence depleted)

            • Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz
              51·
              10 months ago

              Uranium is pretty toxic compared to lead. LD50 is roughly 114 mg/kg vs. 4665 mg/kg depending on source. If you happen to get that dust inside your body, the radiation isn’t going to help you stay healthy either.

        • mycorrhiza they/them@lemmy.ml
          36·
          10 months ago

          the “quickest way to save the most amount of lives” is peace talks. Both armies are locked in a stalemate and the war is going nowhere.

          • okamiueru@lemmy.world
            22·
            10 months ago

            What is the point of peace talks with Russia? Promises and assurances by Russia have had no weight or effect. Which is why the war even happened. Also, Russia can end the war any day they want.

            • mycorrhiza they/them@lemmy.ml
              21·
              10 months ago

              Russia started the war in the first place because — whether you think the fear is reasonable or not — Russia has loudly proclaimed for decades that they view NATO encirclement as an existential threat, and Ukraine joining NATO would massively expand NATO presence on the Russian border, leaving basically only Belarus as a buffer. And if Ukraine took Crimea with them while joining NATO, Russia would lose access to their only deep warm-water port on the black sea, Sevastapol, a port that is economically significant to them.

              • Bluetreefrog@lemmy.worldEnglish
                32·
                10 months ago

                Maybe if Russia stopped invading their neighbors, then other neighbors wouldn’t feel the need to join NATO as protection from Russia.

  • MonkCanatella@sh.itjust.works
    8633·
    10 months ago

    OP is known tankie just fyi. Doesn’t justify US or Ukrainian actions but make sure you understand that the reason for posting this isn’t out of any actual concern for human beings. They’re also peddling covid conspiracies

  • bonus_crab@lemmy.world
    404·
    10 months ago

    Using depleted uranium rounds on your own territory seems bad. Especially since ukraine is a major exporter of grain.

    Then again , shooting a gun inside is stupid, until someone is breaking in and trying to kill you.

    • SmoothOperator@lemmy.world
      113·
      10 months ago

      According to the article, studies in places where the ammunition has been used “indicated that the existence of depleted uranium residues dispersed in the environment does not pose a radiological hazard to the population of the affected regions.”

      What effect does it have on the grain?

        • Womble@lemmy.worldEnglish
          41·
          10 months ago

          Ok, but the alternative is lead or tungsten, both of which are similarly toxic. So unless you are suggesting Ukraine only fights with artisanaly grown wooden weapons I’m not sure what point you’re making.

          • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
            11·
            10 months ago

            As well as being very mildly radioactive, depleted uranium is still a heavy metal, so can poison you in a similar way to lead. IIRC, that’s the most dangerous aspect of the material, and isn’t mentioned by the article.

    • pizzazz@lemmy.world
      137·
      10 months ago

      Does not compute. Why should depleted uranium have any effect on grain production. Its strong radioactive components are, as the name says, depleted. The only worry is inhalation immediately following impact.

      I think there’s way too much misinformation about this and way too many people talking without a clue

    • MonkderZweite@feddit.ch
      53·
      10 months ago

      Then again, shooting a gun inside is stupid, until someone is breaking in and trying to kill you.

      Killing the opponent is the last resort in most developed countries.

    • barsoap@lemm.ee
      98·
      10 months ago

      If there’s one country to trust with nuclear safety it’s actually Ukraine. Capable engineers and scientists, understanding of institutional failure, and certainly not least memory of Chernobyl.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    4612·
    10 months ago

    I’m sure Ukrainian soldiers on the front line are worried about cancer and birth defects.

    • flipht@kbin.social
      4821·
      10 months ago

      It’s not about them. It’s the children who find the spent ammo later.

      This crap is the reason that there are birth defects spikes anywhere the US military operates.

      • kitonthenet@kbin.social
        302·
        10 months ago

        Ok but the alternatives are not environmentally conscious either, finally the people who’s land it is should be the ones making choices about the conditions of that land

        • CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world
          116·
          10 months ago

          The alternative bring tungsten? It’s very stable so anything besides eating a spent rod isn’t going to have effects. If it’s in the air it’ll just be inert. Even if it gets in your lungs it’ll be like any other dust. DU on the other hand would keep emitting radiation internally.

        • Square Singer@feddit.de
          73·
          10 months ago

          But which people? Government or the people who actually own the land?

          And I guess, their favourite choice of “Don’t use any weapons on my land and just clear off voluntairily” is not an option.

          I don’t get why people hate on the Ukraine for using weapons to defend themselves. Not like they chose to be attacked.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
              89·
              10 months ago

              That’s a really convenient narrative based on the fallacy of homogenizing Ukraine. Let’s take a look at a few slides from this lecture that Mearsheimer gave back in 2015 to get a bit of background on the subject. Mearsheimer is certainly not pro Russian in any sense, and a proponent of US global hegemony. First, here’s the demographic breakdown of Ukraine:

              here’s how the election in 2004 went:

              this is the 2010 election:

              As we can clearly see from the voting patterns in both elections, the country is divided exactly across the current line of conflict. Furthermore, a survey conducted in 2015 further shows that there is a sharp division between people of eastern and western Ukraine on which economic bloc they would rather belong to:

              Maybe learn a bit about the subject first.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
              89·
              10 months ago

              Russia is obviously not going to withdraw, and you or me asking Russia to withdraw isn’t going to make it happen. However, people living in western countries do have at least some influence on their own regimes. Of course, the reason western regimes can keep the proxy war going is precisely because a lot of scumbags are cheering it on right now.

                • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                  410·
                  10 months ago

                  People of Donbas whom the Ukrainian regime was abusing for the past eight years asked Russia for help to defend their lives and home. The atrocities the Ukrainian regime was committing were even covered by CNN in 2014 https://twitter.com/paulius60/status/1611148483859255296

                  Meanwhile, the west is not helping Ukraine, it’s prolonging the war which results in more people dying without changing the outcome. This war could’ve been over last March when Russia and Ukraine almost signed a deal, but UK and US decided to torpedo it. If that’s your idea of helping Ukraine then you need to get your head checked.

          • FireMyth@lemmy.one
            57·
            10 months ago

            Lol the people of ukraine are fighting against a war of aggression from Russia. That’s it.

      • yetAnotherUser@feddit.de
        221·
        10 months ago

        Is ammo made from lead that much better? I honestly don’t know. Sure the radiation sucks but Uranium, at least the isotope they’re sending is “barely” radioactive. It’s the same Uranium people had in their plates etc. The toxicity is probably the far more relevant factor but I don’t know how Uranium compares to lead.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
          222·
          10 months ago

          Depleted uranium is not really that radioactive. Everything is technically radioactive eventually though. Depleted uranium is what’s left behind when you seperate the radioactive stuff out. It’s a heavy metal still, so isn’t good for you, but heavy metals will always be involved. Trying to have a war using only healthy, organic, ethically sourced munitions isn’t going to happen.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        211·
        10 months ago

        This makes sense.

        I imagine there’s a lot more reasons for birth defect spikes post US mil ops in addition to this. The military isn’t exactly an environmentally conscious operation. ☠️

        • flipht@kbin.social
          1210·
          10 months ago

          Sure, burn pits and other crap will help.

          But this kind of ammo, kids will find and hang on to. They bring it home, add it to their collection of other cool shit they’ve scavenged…and then their brothers and sisters are born with malformed limbs, mishaped heads, etc.

          There have been a lot of stories written about it over the years. The one I read was specifically about Iraq I believe, but it was a while ago.

      • cooljacob204@kbin.social
        299·
        10 months ago

        The amount of Ukrainians dying right now will pale in comparison to those effected by the munitions.

        The controversy around depleted uranium rounds is way overblown.

        Even in Iraq the evidence is super inconclusive. And yes birth defects rose however the entire country basically collapsed for years and nothing clearly indicates it was the DU used.

        Don’t get me wrong, it’s nasty stuff. But this is war, more people are getting killed by bombs then any DU related cancer can cause.

          • letsgocrazy@lemm.ee
            52·
            10 months ago

            How do you you it’s not linked to any of the other hundreds of dangerous chemicals?

            • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
              52·
              10 months ago

              Because the issue is specific to the region and started specifically after the tank battle where DU ammunition was used. If it would be a general issue with some dangerous chemical being used, we’d expect to see similiar issues in other regions. Of course it is hypotheticakky possible that at the same time some dangerous and persistant chemical exposure happened in the region, but that is not plausible and also the US would have a strong interest in finding such an alternative explanation. But there isn’t any research published, that provided an alternative.

              Also look into the wording of the US when sending the ammunition to Ukraine. They state that no radiation hazard is to be expected for the Ukrainians. They do not talk about a toxicological hazard.

          • mashbooq@infosec.pub
            97·
            10 months ago
            1. correlation ≠ causation. 2) if the disease is caused by DU, is it due to the radioactivity or the fact that DU is a heavy metal?
            • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
              52·
              10 months ago

              i never said it had to be because of radiation. Even just in its effect as a heavy metal it seems to be much worse. Also it could be that it becomes airborn more easily than other metals such as lead, so the wreckage of tanks shot with DU are more dangerous to the people cleaning them up.

              • mashbooq@infosec.pub
                35·
                10 months ago

                Why are you so worried about speculated harms when Ukrainians are actually being raped, tortured, and murdered by russians? Your lack of humanity is showing

      • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
        67·
        10 months ago

        We have to remember that Russia caused this war, however. So they also caused the depleted uranium being a possible health risk for future ukrainian children.

    • pelikan@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      6·
      10 months ago

      Yes, Ukrainian soldiers on front line are worried about cancer and birth defects. They are rational human beings who hope to return to their homes and live long lives and grow healthy children, not some subhumans with only intent to kill, kill, kill, as you wish to think.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        14·
        10 months ago

        I don’t know how rational this is. Given how many soldiers have died so far, if I were a Ukrainian sent to fight on the front line, I wouldn’t expect to be coming back. Rather I’d hope that I contribute to the defeat of the enemy, so that my children or my comrades children don’t grow up under Russian rule. I’m not in their shoes of course. There’s no universal motivation so maybe what you say is more prevalent. That said, this war might not end without soldiers doing a lot more killing so “kill, kill, kill” might be an appropriate viewpoint.

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      83·
      10 months ago

      You will get cancer sooner by staying in the sun on a beach or anywhere.

    • teddy_m@lemmy.ml
      1721·
      10 months ago

      Everyone should worry. Depleted uranium will contaminate large crop production areas and later these grains will be sold all around the world. Everybody will eat some.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          5·
          10 months ago

          There are multiple different isotopes of uranium, depleted has less of the kinds good for bombs or fuel.

        • teddy_m@lemmy.ml
          62·
          10 months ago

          Depleted means that the radioactive isotope is lower in concentration. It still is somehow radioactive (it’s almost fine if not ingested) and still remains a heavy and toxic metal.

            • krolden@lemmy.ml
              74·
              10 months ago

              When they explode, they spread radioactive dust into the surrounding area. If that area is ever farmed it can contaminate the crops and cause cancer to anyone breathing in the dust

          • bouh@lemmy.world
            45·
            10 months ago

            Banana is somehow radioactive too you know. Or granit. Anciant Greece monument often are above the radiation levels allowed in a nuclear power plant.

            Also, while you talk about it, lead is far far more toxic than depleted uranium. Many metals are toxic actually, that’s why your government monitor water meant for consumption.

        • slice1@lemmy.ml
          14·
          10 months ago

          Are you denser then Uranium? Why do you think there is an issue with waste from nuclear power plants? Hint: it is radioactive!

  • UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeEnglish
    4013·
    10 months ago

    Oh well… The amount of health risks that these rounds would cause would pale in comparison to the mines that the Orcs have planted everywhere. Anything to drive out the invaders!

  • sewerkat@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    3817·
    10 months ago

    The amount of ruscist sympathisers in this thread is depressing. Are depleted uranium munitions fucked up? Yeah and they shouldn’t be used. But that isn’t an excuse to bootlick a fascist invader that is already performing ethnic cleansing on territories they took last year

    • Dee@lemmings.world
      116·
      10 months ago

      Yeah, I use threads like these to block users. Can’t wait for lemmy to implement user level instance blocking like mastodon has.

      Edit: don’t downvote me, tell me what issue you have with this.

      • pelikan@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        31·
        10 months ago

        I have no issue with your blocklist (and not gonna downvote your comment), but i still have to say that your position is pretty strange. Why at all join lemmy.ml which is known as real Babel tower with wide range of different opinions without any of them being dominant or enforced (and that differs .ml from .world, beehaw, hexbear, lemmygrad and so on)? If you need echo chamber, you can join other instance or get back to reddit, no reason to wait someone to code some functions.

  • zaphod@feddit.de
    171·
    10 months ago

    Seems a little strange considering their refusal to provide M1 Abrams tanks from their stockpile as these have depleted uranium armor.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldBEnglish
    171·
    10 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    The rounds, which could help destroy Russian tanks, are part of a new military aid package for Ukraine set to be unveiled in the next week.

    The munitions can be fired from U.S. Abrams tanks that, according to a person familiar with the matter, are expected be delivered to Ukraine in the coming weeks.

    It follows an earlier decision by the Biden administration to provide cluster munitions to Ukraine, despite concerns over the dangers such weapons pose to civilians.

    The United States used depleted uranium munitions in massive quantities in the 1990 and 2003 Gulf Wars and the NATO bombing of former Yugoslavia in 1999.

    The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, says that studies in former Yugoslavia, Kuwait, Iraq and Lebanon “indicated that the existence of depleted uranium residues dispersed in the environment does not pose a radiological hazard to the population of the affected regions.”

    Parts of the country are already strewn with unexploded ordnance from cluster bombs and other munitions and hundreds of thousands of anti-personnel mines.

    The original article contains 499 words, the summary contains 172 words. Saved 66%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • Big Miku@lemm.eeEnglish
    2816·
    10 months ago

    From what I’ve read depleted uranium is not proven to cause cancer, nor is it not proven (With the exception that you inhale it or eat it).

    In Iraq it’s still up to debate if it causes cancer or birth defects, since burning buildings and other burning stuff also causes a lot of nasty things to humans.

    From what I’ve read they were also used in Bosnia, and they haven’t had similiar effects to Iraq.

    So let the Ukrainians have their depleted uranium.

    • Meuzzin@lemmy.world
      111·
      10 months ago

      I was just gonna say, you’re correct, and I’m pretty sure there are WAY more toxic chemicals and debris on a battlefield. Think of all the older structures built with asbestos products being destroyed, for example…

      Last I read, alot of the effects Vets ended up with from Iraq, were from the immense open pits they burnt their trash in.

  • Stuka@lemmy.ml
    2917·
    10 months ago

    Tankies shaking in their boots over that Abrams 120mm DU APFSDS slicing though Russian steel like butter.

    It’s so easy to trigger tankie bridgades. How many posts yall got about me now? Tagged me in a few!

    • remotelove@lemmy.ca
      4·
      10 months ago

      It’s only a hazard if you are handling it all the time, or you hang out around old targets where there is a fuck ton of uranium dust just waiting to get stirred up. If it gets in your lungs, you are not going to be a happy camper after a few years. Even so, depleted uranium emits alpha particles which is the weakest form of radiation.

      I don’t deny the fact that uranium dust is bad. The reasons why it is bad are usually left out of the all the articles that hate on it for the wrong reasons.

      Hell, here in Colorado we have more issues with radon. As far as uranium is concerned, there are problems with rainwater runoff concentrating it from the old mines that we have, but that is about it. Of course that isn’t good, but it takes massive tailings piles from old mines to cause issues for groundwater and such.

  • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
    2117·
    10 months ago

    Why though? Can’t imagine that these rounds are going to change the course of the war, so why? Are they out of non-Uranium ones?

    • Clarke @lemmy.world
      367·
      10 months ago

      Because of the uranium bullets are denser and heavier than the lead bullets and you can use the uranium bullets on certain types of aircraft and other weapons systems to shred through medium to heavy armor that could not be penetrated with a lead bullet. TLDR this will be used as a force multiplier.

    • letsgocrazy@lemm.ee
      326·
      10 months ago

      They are harder and penetrate armour better. So yes they will provide an advantage.

      The sooner Russian occupiers are no longer murdering Ukrainians and dropping mines over every square meter of land, the less harm comes to Ukrainians.

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.worldEnglish
      125·
      10 months ago

      Russian forced are mechanized and entrenched, depleted uranium self sharpens on impact, yielding far better armor penetration than previous technologies.

    • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
      117·
      10 months ago

      No individual measure aside from troops on the ground or nukes is going to change the course of the war by itself.

      The ammunition is very effective at punching through the armor. But the Ukrainians will be fucked when in 5 years Leukemia in children is skyrocketing

  • runiq@feddit.de
    58·
    10 months ago

    As a German, thank you. Meanwhile we’re still dragging our feet with the TAURUS, sigh.

    • realharo@lemm.ee
      13·
      10 months ago

      And you know how the Vietnam war ended, right?

      There was a peace agreement between the north and the south, and then a few years later North Vietnam broke it and invaded again, taking over all of the country.

        • realharo@lemm.ee
          11·
          10 months ago

          So basically admitting you don’t know the actual history? Maybe start with reading a Wikipedia page or something.

          None of that excuses US war crimes in Vietnam, but it does show how a potential future with a hypothetical peace treaty could look like.

    • flying_monkies@kbin.social
      187·
      10 months ago

      Depleted utanium is a war crime

      Actually, it’s not. Quoted from the British article about the DU rounds they’re shipping for the Challenger 2s:

      The UK MoD insists that the depleted uranium shells it is sending to Ukraine are not prohibited by any international agreement.

      It says that under Article 36 of the First Protocol of 1977 Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, the UK’s depleted uranium shells are “capable of being used lawfully in international armed conflict”.

      President Vladimir Putin has warned that if the UK does send depleted uranium shells to Ukraine, “Russia will have to respond accordingly, given that the West collectively is already beginning to use weapons with a nuclear component”.

      The MoD replied in a statement: “The British Army has used depleted uranium in its armour-piercing shells for decades. Russia knows this, but is deliberately trying to disinform.”

      Stating the use of DU is a war crime is just Russian mouthpieces repeating Kremlin lies.

      • slice1@lemmy.ml
        35·
        10 months ago

        Ah yes, the British… They know a thing or two about warcrimes.

        • flying_monkies@kbin.social
          32·
          10 months ago

          While the British don’t know as much about war crimes as the Russians, this time they’re technically correct. Technically correct is the best correct.

          • slice1@lemmy.ml
            35·
            10 months ago

            tEChniCaLlY cORrECt IS thE BEsT CoRreCt - a true functionary

            • flying_monkies@kbin.social
              22·
              10 months ago

              A tRuE fUnCtIoNaRy - the best a tankie can come up with when a tankie gets called out for their bullshit

              • slice1@lemmy.ml
                23·
                10 months ago

                Yes, nothing wrong with hiding behind some self percieved “correctness” (actshually…) to justify pollution that causes helth issues for generations. But I am so glad you are “technically correct” - how would you sleep otherwise?

    • Stuka@lemmy.ml
      95·
      10 months ago

      Saying things are war crimes doesn’t make it so! Also Anti-Flag sucks.