30 Comments
User's avatar
Cord The Seeker's avatar

Learn something new every day. I thought the Brits had ditched their DU penetrators out of environmental concerns and gone entirely to tungsten. Turns out they haven't.

This assumes a fact not in evidence, namely that the token number of Challengers promised ever arrives.

FWIW there are no environmentally safe APFSDS rounds. None. Heavy metals are toxic. All of them. Tungsten may be less toxic that uranium, I wouldn't know, but war is bad for the environment. It would be better for the environment if this one were shut down altogether.

Expand full comment
Sandy Daze's avatar

Depleted uranium ?

It seems that residents in Hiroshima and Nagasaki are doing okay, but that guess is not based on study, simply observation from a distance.

Then there is this:

"Physiological benefits from low levels of ionizing radiation

T D Luckey. Health Phys. 1982 Dec.

Abstract

Extensive literature indicates that minute doses of ionizing radiation benefit animal growth and development, fecundity, health and longevity. Specific improvements appear in neurologic function, growth rate and survival of young, wound healing, immune competence, and resistance to infection, radiation morbidity, and tumor induction and growth. Decreased mortality from these debilitating factors results in increased average life span following exposure to minute doses of ionizing radiation. "

and:

"The above phenomena suggest the possibility that ionizing radiation may be essential for life. Limited data with protozoa suggest that reproduction rates decrease when they are maintained in subambient radiation environments. This may be interpreted to be a radiation deficiency. Evidence must now be obtained to determine whether or not ionizing radiation is essential for growth, development, nutrient utilization, fecundity, health and longevity of higher animals. Whether or not ionizing radiation is found to be essential for these physiologic functions, the evidence reviewed indicates that the optimal amount of this ubiquitous agent is imperceptibly above ambient levels."

So, maybe using DU rounds is actually a good thing!

(How dare I? I denounce myself. And, yet...)

"

Source: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6759465/

Expand full comment
Michael Zorn's avatar

From the EPA: "Depleted uranium is used for tank armor, armor-piercing bullets, and as weights to help balance aircrafts."

From a EU public health site: " It has been used as counterbalance weight in aircraft, missiles, forklifts and sailboat keels. It was also used in medical radiotherapy as a radiation shield."

Expand full comment
Anne Sherman's avatar

Whether these shells are provided by us or our poodles, the Brits, this is foolhardy in the extreme. How far do they think they can push Putin and his new bestie, Xi, without them activating one or more of their EMP satellites to bring our entire country to a screeching halt? No nukes required.

Expand full comment
T. Paine Redux's avatar

Maybe I'm naive but I find it hard to believe Putin will launch a nuclear strike - tactical or otherwise - over DU rounds. I think he'll up the ante in other ways. Maybe an attack resembling the one that hit the NATO manned HQ or something similiar. He's winning in Ukraine, why openly engage in serious nuke brinkmanship? Those DU armed tanks, while powerful, aren't numerous enough to cause serious issues. I think most will be destroyed in relatively short order. A friend of mine recently asked me if I thought tanks were "old news" in warfare. I don't but they certainly are more of a death trap than they used to be. ATGMs, mine warfare, etc really have made it tough to use them and some of the stories Mark has linked too make it clear that using them in World War Two fashion may be a thing of the past.

Expand full comment
james (seenitbefore)'s avatar

When US Army Units fired DU (aka kinetic energy) rounds at Grafenwoehr live fire ranges, the ranges were policed (cleaned up) with geiger counters after the exercise to remove the radioactive material left on the range. This would suggest that DU is not harmless; certainly more dangerous than radon gas which is banned in most states in the US.

Expand full comment
Mark Wauck's avatar

And I'll bet they didn't pick them up with their hands.

Expand full comment
NFO's avatar

Where did all those goofy West German Greens from the early-'80s Pershing II days go now that there was an actual US MIC-caused environmental issue? Oh, that's right, they're WEF fanboys now.

Expand full comment
T. Paine Redux's avatar

I went to PLDC in Graf. Probably 1993-94. Cold and wet the entire time. Still healthy and got most of my hair though so probably didn't get near the tank ranges.

Expand full comment
Amanda R's avatar

To say I'm ashamed of my government is an understatement. I think it's long past time they got a taste of their own medicine.

Expand full comment
ML's avatar

For the military minded, Col. Macgregor describes in detail (at the 9:27 mark) what the “depleted uranium” anti-tank ammo is, having experience with it in the Gulf War. It is “used plutonium,” highly “ incendiary” and “ferocious.”

https://www.youtube.com/live/B2F0lrdyOhA?feature=share

Expand full comment
Antipodes's avatar

Well if the Ukies do use depleted uranium, then I imagine a few Kinzhal's will be used in return.

Expand full comment
LaMaisonGelat's avatar

I had assumed that the 'defensive' anti-tank weaponry sent with much fanfare at the beginning of the conflict were made using depleted uranium? Anyone know more?

Expand full comment
NFO's avatar

Back in January, when the US was debating sending Abrams tanks, there was a lot of talk about how the tanks would be sent without their usual DU armor. I believe the big issue then was more about the secret/proprietary nature of the tech than its radioactive properties, but the UK sending these shells over clear warning is a major escalation.

Expand full comment
Ray-SoCa's avatar

Another day

Another escalation.

Sounds like a potential war crime to use.

Expand full comment
Mike Zorn's avatar

"Dirty bomb"? Nonsense - that's why it's called "depleted". There's very little radioactivity left (it'd be great for making small paperweights).

But it is very dense.

Putin's worry is that they'll be able to take out more of his tanks.

Expand full comment
Fieldofthewood's avatar

According to Mark’s Wikipedia link, there’s more concern about damage from chemical effects than from radiological effects.

I did wonder about the use of the term “depleted.” What does that mean exactly? Is the uranium absolutely depleted, or just depleted for certain purposes? With such a long half-life, it doesn’t seem it could be totally or harmlessly depleted.

Expand full comment
Sarcastic Cynical Texan's avatar

Uranium is highly toxic, similar to lead, when a DU round strikes a hard target much of the penetrator becomes small particles that are easily inhaled. Furthermore, ingesting radioactive material is potentially deadly, alpha emissions are harmless outside the body, not so when within the body.

Expand full comment
Mike Zorn's avatar

The object of war is to destroy the tank. The crew being blown to bits by the explosion makes the alpha emissions irrelevant.

Expand full comment
Sarcastic Cynical Texan's avatar

The point I am making is that DU rounds cause long term contamination of any area where they are used, irrelevant to the dead, the living are rightfully concerned with the after effects.

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

Let’s ask the Iraqies.

Expand full comment
WayneRH's avatar

Spinning out of control?

Expand full comment
History Lass's avatar

Perhaps a trial balloon. See if they got any pushback from Nato?

Expand full comment
History Lass's avatar

At least,,Megan and Harry can quit worrying about their progeny being named Prince and Princess and all the attendant pomp and circumstance the self exiled couple crave.

Charles appears to fully WEFed and Woke and may go down in history as the Last King of England and the Sceptered Isle

If UK is reckless and Russia holds firm..well that may at least be the end of ancient Londinium

Idiots

Expand full comment
LaMaisonGelat's avatar

If that family didn't have a castle and titles they would be the 'problem family' on the council estate and the police would be constantly outside their house...

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Mar 22, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
ML's avatar

Could it be that, having failed in their ridiculous caper in the Hague, they are now turning to more vile means…out of desperation? What a loathsome bunch - Wallace, Sunak et al…

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

Climate too I’m sure. How dare you?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment removed
Mar 22, 2023
Comment removed
Expand full comment
SMH's avatar

Pete, at this stage of the game, and it gauls me to no end to admit this, I’m not worried nearly as much about what Putin might do as I am about our addle brained CIC and his equally useless advisers might do! I don’t believe that “circumspect” is a word that has any meaning to these folks, but then I suppose that measured, strategic, thoughtful, reflective and diplomatic could be added to the list as well.

The optics of sending depleted uranium into an already highly volatile situation are certainly not helpful. As I said, Putin’s not who I’m worried about.

Expand full comment
AmericanCardigan's avatar

My inner Don Surber response is “huzzah!”

Expand full comment