[quote]Headhunter wrote:
NinjaTreeFrog wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
�?�¢??The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.�?�¢??�?�¢??George Soros
Now do you gents begin to understand WHY Soros picked Obama?
You’re aware that the Canadian Free Press is not even remotely considered an unbiased news source. This article is nothing more than a smear job - it makes no mention of the good work that Soros has done through his humanitarian efforts.
Did they make up the quotes?
[/quote]
A quote taken out of context can be very misleading. George Soros is a bit delusional and very eccentric, but to call him evil because he donated money to a particular political goal is a editorial smear-job.
Abstract. What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties – 3,000 - 3,400 civilian deaths – in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan? The explanation is the apparent willingness of U.S. military strategists to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated areas of Afghanistan.
George Soros should put an end to this war immediately! He could if he wanted to, you know.
[/quote]
Do you really think so? With all his money and influence he was unable to persude voters not to re-elect Bush in 2004. I think you give him too much credit.
Abstract. What causes the documented high level of civilian casualties – 3,000 - 3,400 civilian deaths – in the U.S. air war upon Afghanistan? The explanation is the apparent willingness of U.S. military strategists to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated areas of Afghanistan.
George Soros should put an end to this war immediately! He could if he wanted to, you know.
Do you really think so? With all his money and influence he was unable to persude voters not to re-elect Bush in 2004. I think you give him too much credit. [/quote]
He was driving the moderate elements from the Dem party and infesting it with tools like Obama and Nancy.
You still haven’t answered the stuff about the quotes. If someone says America is evil, then context is just a load of crap.
He should be tarred, feathered, and put on a slow freighter to Israel, with Rahm Emmanuel.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
He was driving the moderate elements from the Dem party and infesting it with tools like Obama and Nancy.
You still haven’t answered the stuff about the quotes. If someone says America is evil, then context is just a load of crap.
He should be tarred, feathered, and put on a slow freighter to Israel, with Rahm Emmanuel.
[/quote]
â??The main obstacle to a stable and just world order is the United States.â??â??George Soros
He doesn’t say that the United States is evil, just an obstacle to a stable and just world order. It may surprise you to hear this, but there are a great many of people in this world that would agree with him. The primary reason why is that the United States preaches about a Global Free Market yet at the same time enact protectionist measures against any other nation that wants to participate. US foreign relations has a pretty abysmal record as well, IMO. Going against the UN on Iraq, for example.
I do not know what the first photo shows.
I am not fetologist, but the other photos show meningoencephalocole and other neural tube defects, and fetal hydrops and cretinism. It is far more likely that the causes are perinatal deficiencies of B vitamins and folic acid, and iodine, respectively; both conditions are unfortunately very common in rural Afghanistan.
I do know a bit about radiation exposure; I believe it is called depleted uranium for a reason. Someone else may know if there is a risk of gamma emission, but I would doubt it–too risky to store and handle. Alpha and beta irradiation is not penetrant to the fetus, and single or multiple episodes of radiation do not cause the fetal monsters demonstrated here.
So, orion, if you were taken in by this Jihadist propaganda, you are a willing believer in nonsense, because it is a lie that serves your chronic refractory Anti-Americansism; or, like some of the tikes here, cretinism is also common in semi-rural Austria.
I do not know what the first photo shows.
I am not fetologist, but the other photos show meningoencephalocole and other neural tube defects, and fetal hydrops and cretinism. It is far more likely that the causes are perinatal deficiencies of B vitamins and folic acid, and iodine, respectively; both conditions are unfortunately very common in rural Afghanistan.
I do know a bit about radiation exposure; I believe it is called depleted uranium for a reason. Someone else may know if there is a risk of gamma emission, but I would doubt it–too risky to store and handle. Alpha and beta irradiation is not penetrant to the fetus, and single or multiple episodes of radiation do not cause the fetal monsters demonstrated here.
So, orion, if you were taken in by this Jihadist propaganda, you are a willing believer in nonsense, because it is a lie that serves your chronic refractory Anti-Americansism; or, like some of the tikes here, cretinism is also common in semi-rural Austria.
[/quote]
So you do not know really and those kids just happen to be born there and depleted ammunition could never pose a threat when it disintegrates after hitting a target.
So you are talking out of your ass really?
Human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in the offspring of persons exposed to DU.[11] A 2001 study of 15,000 February 1991 U.S. Gulf War combat veterans and 15,000 control veterans found that the Gulf War veterans were 1.8 (fathers) to 2.8 (mothers) times more likely to have children with birth defects.[83] After examination of children’s medical records two years later, the birth defect rate increased by more than 20%:
"Dr. Kang found that male Gulf War veterans reported having infants with likely birth defects at twice the rate of non-veterans. Furthermore, female Gulf War veterans were almost three times more likely to report children with birth defects than their non-Gulf counterparts. The numbers changed somewhat with medical records verification. However, Dr. Kang and his colleagues concluded that the risk of birth defects in children of deployed male veterans still was about 2.2 times that of non-deployed veterans."[84]
In early 2004, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service attributed birth defect claims from a February 1991 Gulf War combat veteran to depleted uranium poisoning.[85][86] Children of British soldiers who fought in wars in which depleted uranium ammunition was used are at greater risk of suffering genetic diseases such as congenital malformations, commonly called “birth defects,” passed on by their fathers. In a study of U.K. troops, “Overall, the risk of any malformation among pregnancies reported by men was 50% higher in Gulf War Veterans (GWV) compared with Non-GWVs.”[87]
[quote]Chushin wrote:
pushharder wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
orion wrote:
Just in case these pictures do not make it as long as your more patriotic ones you can find them here :
I do not know what the first photo shows.
I am not fetologist, but the other photos show meningoencephalocole and other neural tube defects, and fetal hydrops and cretinism. It is far more likely that the causes are perinatal deficiencies of B vitamins and folic acid, and iodine, respectively; both conditions are unfortunately very common in rural Afghanistan.
I do know a bit about radiation exposure; I believe it is called depleted uranium for a reason. Someone else may know if there is a risk of gamma emission, but I would doubt it–too risky to store and handle. Alpha and beta irradiation is not penetrant to the fetus, and single or multiple episodes of radiation do not cause the fetal monsters demonstrated here.
So, orion, if you were taken in by this Jihadist propaganda, you are a willing believer in nonsense, because it is a lie that serves your chronic refractory Anti-Americansism; or, like some of the tikes here, cretinism is also common in semi-rural Austria.
So what you’re saying is…he “went Navajo” on us…again?
AKA “Off the reservation?”[/quote]
Did you two sycophants even google depleted uranium?
I do know a bit about radiation exposure; I believe it is called depleted uranium for a reason. Someone else may know if there is a risk of gamma emission, but I would doubt it–too risky to store and handle. Alpha and beta irradiation is not penetrant to the fetus, and single or multiple episodes of radiation do not cause the fetal monsters demonstrated here.
[/quote]
DoD says DP uranium still has 60% the radioactivity of natural uranium.
Wouldn’t the alpha radiation pose a potential danger if ingested?
I would assume that it would take alot of DU to be harmful.
DU rounds are used to defeat armored vehicles. It’s a dense metal that punches through armor. Once it penetrates it bounces around inside the armored vehicle and kills the operators. They were used extensively in GW1, against Iraqi armor, out in the desert.
No reason to use in an urban environment unless the enemy has armored vehicles. The DU issue is political and is used as a talking point to throw against the wall and see if it sticks with the uninformed. Not a legitimate issue.
Jihadists are far harder on civilians then the US military. They have also been known to kill civilians for photo ops and claim it was the US. If they really cared they would stop using them as shields.
[quote]Chushin wrote:
orion wrote:
Did you two sycophants even google depleted uranium?
No?
Thought so.
See link above.
Not necessary. I’m quite familiar with the arguments on both sides.
You?
Thought not.
See hedo’s post above.[/quote]
You mean the post that perpetuates the propaganda that they used them as shields?
I posted a whole study that they had their military facilities in the cities because the Sowjets put them there, but nice try.
You do not even know to what extent your ignorance is exposed by just having knee jerking reactions to what I might have said, but maybe that is why you have them?
[quote]hedo wrote:
Professor Marc W. Herold
Ph.D., M.B.A., B.Sc.
Departments of Economics and Women’s Studies
McConnell Hall
Whittemore School of Business & Economics
University of New Hampshire
Department of Economics and Women’s Studies…WTF??? That has to be a joke right?
I looked at his 80 + footnotes. Most look like they are blogs and opinion sources. The pictures are stock photo’s of anything he could find.
Not really much factual digging or insightful conclusions. Mostly biased opinion.[/quote]
Yup, the idea that the Sowjets would base military facilities into cities were they would be safer from attacks from rural guerrillas is waaayy out there.
I do hope that he is part of the “economists” though.
[quote]orion wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
orion wrote:
Just in case these pictures do not make it as long as your more patriotic ones you can find them here :
I do not know what the first photo shows.
I am not fetologist, but the other photos show meningoencephalocole and other neural tube defects, and fetal hydrops and cretinism. It is far more likely that the causes are perinatal deficiencies of B vitamins and folic acid, and iodine, respectively; both conditions are unfortunately very common in rural Afghanistan.
I do know a bit about radiation exposure; I believe it is called depleted uranium for a reason. Someone else may know if there is a risk of gamma emission, but I would doubt it–too risky to store and handle. Alpha and beta irradiation is not penetrant to the fetus, and single or multiple episodes of radiation do not cause the fetal monsters demonstrated here.
So, orion, if you were taken in by this Jihadist propaganda, you are a willing believer in nonsense, because it is a lie that serves your chronic refractory Anti-Americansism; or, like some of the tikes here, cretinism is also common in semi-rural Austria.
So you do not know really and those kids just happen to be born there and depleted ammunition could never pose a threat when it disintegrates after hitting a target.
So you are talking out of your ass really?
Human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in the offspring of persons exposed to DU.[11] A 2001 study of 15,000 February 1991 U.S. Gulf War combat veterans and 15,000 control veterans found that the Gulf War veterans were 1.8 (fathers) to 2.8 (mothers) times more likely to have children with birth defects.[83] After examination of children’s medical records two years later, the birth defect rate increased by more than 20%:
"Dr. Kang found that male Gulf War veterans reported having infants with likely birth defects at twice the rate of non-veterans. Furthermore, female Gulf War veterans were almost three times more likely to report children with birth defects than their non-Gulf counterparts. The numbers changed somewhat with medical records verification. However, Dr. Kang and his colleagues concluded that the risk of birth defects in children of deployed male veterans still was about 2.2 times that of non-deployed veterans."[84]
In early 2004, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service attributed birth defect claims from a February 1991 Gulf War combat veteran to depleted uranium poisoning.[85][86] Children of British soldiers who fought in wars in which depleted uranium ammunition was used are at greater risk of suffering genetic diseases such as congenital malformations, commonly called “birth defects,” passed on by their fathers. In a study of U.K. troops, “Overall, the risk of any malformation among pregnancies reported by men was 50% higher in Gulf War Veterans (GWV) compared with Non-GWVs.”[87]
Your soldiers beg to differ.
[/quote]
Because the ONLY reason birth defects are higher is because of depleted uranium… not other chemicals used on them by the enemy??? please, are you really this ignorant??
[quote]Ratchet wrote:
orion wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
orion wrote:
Just in case these pictures do not make it as long as your more patriotic ones you can find them here :
I do not know what the first photo shows.
I am not fetologist, but the other photos show meningoencephalocole and other neural tube defects, and fetal hydrops and cretinism. It is far more likely that the causes are perinatal deficiencies of B vitamins and folic acid, and iodine, respectively; both conditions are unfortunately very common in rural Afghanistan.
I do know a bit about radiation exposure; I believe it is called depleted uranium for a reason. Someone else may know if there is a risk of gamma emission, but I would doubt it–too risky to store and handle. Alpha and beta irradiation is not penetrant to the fetus, and single or multiple episodes of radiation do not cause the fetal monsters demonstrated here.
So, orion, if you were taken in by this Jihadist propaganda, you are a willing believer in nonsense, because it is a lie that serves your chronic refractory Anti-Americansism; or, like some of the tikes here, cretinism is also common in semi-rural Austria.
So you do not know really and those kids just happen to be born there and depleted ammunition could never pose a threat when it disintegrates after hitting a target.
So you are talking out of your ass really?
Human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in the offspring of persons exposed to DU.[11] A 2001 study of 15,000 February 1991 U.S. Gulf War combat veterans and 15,000 control veterans found that the Gulf War veterans were 1.8 (fathers) to 2.8 (mothers) times more likely to have children with birth defects.[83] After examination of children’s medical records two years later, the birth defect rate increased by more than 20%:
"Dr. Kang found that male Gulf War veterans reported having infants with likely birth defects at twice the rate of non-veterans. Furthermore, female Gulf War veterans were almost three times more likely to report children with birth defects than their non-Gulf counterparts. The numbers changed somewhat with medical records verification. However, Dr. Kang and his colleagues concluded that the risk of birth defects in children of deployed male veterans still was about 2.2 times that of non-deployed veterans."[84]
In early 2004, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service attributed birth defect claims from a February 1991 Gulf War combat veteran to depleted uranium poisoning.[85][86] Children of British soldiers who fought in wars in which depleted uranium ammunition was used are at greater risk of suffering genetic diseases such as congenital malformations, commonly called “birth defects,” passed on by their fathers. In a study of U.K. troops, “Overall, the risk of any malformation among pregnancies reported by men was 50% higher in Gulf War Veterans (GWV) compared with Non-GWVs.”[87]
Your soldiers beg to differ.
Because the ONLY reason birth defects are higher is because of depleted uranium… not other chemicals used on them by the enemy??? please, are you really this ignorant??
[/quote]
Correlation does not equal causation, yes.
However, all sides that came in contact with that shit have higher chances of giving birth to interestingly shaped babies than normal. And 50-100% higher is statistically significant.
If your argument is that other shit might have been involved, well maybe. If most of that shit has been brought there by the American army it hardly takes much away from my argument.
This would not be new either, see Hiroshima and Agent Orange.
[quote]orion wrote:
hedo wrote:
Professor Marc W. Herold
Ph.D., M.B.A., B.Sc.
Departments of Economics and Women’s Studies
McConnell Hall
Whittemore School of Business & Economics
University of New Hampshire
Department of Economics and Women’s Studies…WTF??? That has to be a joke right?
I looked at his 80 + footnotes. Most look like they are blogs and opinion sources. The pictures are stock photo’s of anything he could find.
Not really much factual digging or insightful conclusions. Mostly biased opinion.
Yup, the idea that the Sowjets would base military facilities into cities were they would be safer from attacks from rural guerrillas is waaayy out there.
I do hope that he is part of the “economists” though.
[/quote]
He certainly is entitled to his opinion. I’m under no obligation to take it seriously however. I did read the paper and looked at his footnotes, as you requested those who comment do, before posting.
First off I don’t see how a professor in the department of economics AND women’s studies would have the professional qualifications or urgent scholarly need to examine this topic in serious manner. Perhaps it is a burning political passion for him, if so it does render his “scholarly work” tainted. I’m sure the Univ. of New Hampshire may have a different standard for politically biased work submitted as part of a womens’s studies effort compared to papers dealing with science or other subjects.
You can’t help but notice some of his sources however:
the guardian
zmag
new york times
los angeles times
These sources are all extremely biased, anti-war and partisan against US interests. Hardly independent sources of information or news. The excerpts he does lift from reputable sources are used to reinforce stereotypes rather them to offer insight.
I will agree I hope he is part of the Economics program. Seems to me that women’s studies is best left to women to sort out on their own.
[quote]orion wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
orion wrote:
Just in case these pictures do not make it as long as your more patriotic ones you can find them here :
I do not know what the first photo shows.
I am not fetologist, but the other photos show meningoencephalocole and other neural tube defects, and fetal hydrops and cretinism. It is far more likely that the causes are perinatal deficiencies of B vitamins and folic acid, and iodine, respectively; both conditions are unfortunately very common in rural Afghanistan.
I do know a bit about radiation exposure; I believe it is called depleted uranium for a reason. Someone else may know if there is a risk of gamma emission, but I would doubt it–too risky to store and handle. Alpha and beta irradiation is not penetrant to the fetus, and single or multiple episodes of radiation do not cause the fetal monsters demonstrated here.
So, orion, if you were taken in by this Jihadist propaganda, you are a willing believer in nonsense, because it is a lie that serves your chronic refractory Anti-Americansism; or, like some of the tikes here, cretinism is also common in semi-rural Austria.
So you do not know really and those kids just happen to be born there and depleted ammunition could never pose a threat when it disintegrates after hitting a target.
So you are talking out of your ass really?
Human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in the offspring of persons exposed to DU.[11] A 2001 study of 15,000 February 1991 U.S. Gulf War combat veterans and 15,000 control veterans found that the Gulf War veterans were 1.8 (fathers) to 2.8 (mothers) times more likely to have children with birth defects.[83] After examination of children’s medical records two years later, the birth defect rate increased by more than 20%:
"Dr. Kang found that male Gulf War veterans reported having infants with likely birth defects at twice the rate of non-veterans. Furthermore, female Gulf War veterans were almost three times more likely to report children with birth defects than their non-Gulf counterparts. The numbers changed somewhat with medical records verification. However, Dr. Kang and his colleagues concluded that the risk of birth defects in children of deployed male veterans still was about 2.2 times that of non-deployed veterans."[84]
In early 2004, the UK Pensions Appeal Tribunal Service attributed birth defect claims from a February 1991 Gulf War combat veteran to depleted uranium poisoning.[85][86] Children of British soldiers who fought in wars in which depleted uranium ammunition was used are at greater risk of suffering genetic diseases such as congenital malformations, commonly called “birth defects,” passed on by their fathers. In a study of U.K. troops, “Overall, the risk of any malformation among pregnancies reported by men was 50% higher in Gulf War Veterans (GWV) compared with Non-GWVs.”[87]
Your soldiers beg to differ.
[/quote]
I would bet I am a damn sight better acquainted with obstetrics and embryology than you will ever be.
If there is someone talking out his ass, it is you; so much so that it is hoarse from the operatic presentation to which it is constantly subjected.
These photos shows absolutely nothing that is directly connected to depleted uranium; exccept for the first photo, all the others represent fairly common fetal abnormalities with ready explanations.
“…a veteran.” This is it? That is your cited evidence One pension board–perhaps for political reaasons, and with no science–allowed the guy a break? Sad and ridiculous.
Everything else you have cited is simply unverifiable nonsense. The sources you have sited–with which I am familiar–cannot in any fashion connect, for example, Gulf War syndrome to U238. Period. So many things have implicated, it is hard to figure out anything.
So you have been taken in, eagerly so, by heart-breaking photos. That you persist in your ignorance is a stunning testament to your small-mindedness.
