Posted on 03/22/2023 9:59:58 AM PDT by bitt
The EU is sending one million artillery shells to Ukraine at the eye-watering price of two billion Euros, meanwhile the United Kingdom has confirmed it would be sending depleted uranium anti-tank rounds along with the main battle tanks it is donating to the country.
A long-anticipated arms procurement deal by EU members-plus-Norway through the European Defence Agency to procure and send one million 155mm artillery rounds [pictured, above] to Ukraine has been agreed, ending months of discussion.
The €2 billion ($2.15 billion) price tag will be divided in two tranches, the EU said, with the first billion used to compensate European Union nations for releasing shells from their own military stocks, with an aim to send these within two months. The second round of funding will be paid to armaments factories in European nations to make new shells for shipment.
Russia Threatens Canada With ‘Most Serious Consequences’ After Trudeau Govt’s ‘Regime Change’ Commentshttps://t.co/SvPWUkclQ3
— Breitbart London (@BreitbartLondon) March 21, 2023
The EU’s ambition is to have this delivery completed within 12 months, but there are questions over whether Europe’s armaments factories can ramp up production quickly enough to meet that target. Extra shells could have been bought from outside the European Union, but France has insisted on a buy-European policy to protect European industry.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
p
What’s so objectionable about Depleted Uranium Rounds? The US has used them for many years, hasn’t it?
Here’s an article that somewhat explains it.
The article explains that depleted uranium is not particularly dangerous as a radioactive source. It is dangerous for its chemical properties, similar to lead.
Russia is going to get all stompy foot with us over sending ammo to Ukraine. I recommend making them go stand in a corner for a while.
Russia is going to get all stompy foot with us over sending ammo to Ukraine. I recommend making them go stand in a corner for a while.
Don’t want to be attacked with DU rounds, then go home. Problem solved.
Real nasty stuff.
I know a lot more about this that I can’t say here, but Canada is involved.
It seems like what radioactivity risks there are, will mostly be faced by the Ukrainians using the shells. And in DC or London, they certainly don't care about that.
I suspect the Russians are most upset because depleted uranium will be more lethal to their armor.
“The US has used them for many years, hasn’t it?”
The US is exceptional and only uses depleted uranium for humanitarian purposes, like it does with atomic bombs.
“It’s worth it.”
“DU is less radioactive, mainly emitting alpha particles”
So, I guess it’s ok if the Russians use their “VX-Lite”..
“It’s 1/3 fewer calories less less filling than the standard VX!”
Nothing really. The civilian use cases for depleted uranium are well known.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium#Civilian_applications
It’s used in dental porcelain for example. I have a mouth full of veneers and bridgework so I’ve probably got depleted uranium in my mouth all the time.
(Hey, I’m a Brit. I could’ve stuck with shocking Brit teeth and not bothered, but I chose the American Scary Bleach White Smile look. We call that “Hobson’s Choice.”)
And of course it was used in Boeing 747-100 construction.
Russia really is just trolling with this one - Depleted Uranium rounds on the battlefield (which lest we forget is a response to Russia creating a battlezone in east Ukraine - this wasn’t an issue before Feb 22) is less harmful to the environment and far less nasty than the magnesium alloy ML-5, and 9M22S rockets with thermite incendiary submunitions.
.....Russia Will ‘Respond Accordingly’, Threatens Putin, After UK Announces Depleted Uranium Rounds For Ukraine......
clinton’s NATO used depleted uranium against Serbia in 1999!!!!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia
This is really bizarre. Since the US and other nations started sending military aid to Ukraine, almost everything has been announced in advance, precisely what is being sent and how much.
Why don’t nations just say they support Ukraine and keep quiet about what aid they’re sending, when and how much?
interesting that Russia is now concerned about DU, but had no problems with shelling the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant last year ...
The proving grounds on American soil that were used to exercise with these weapons, are considered too toxic to be worth clean up.
The EPA even stopped testing some of them. Yet we dumped tons of these weapons on Iraq and poisoned soil, maybe water, permanently.
Cancer rates are high in Iraq and Serbia where these weapons were used.
But those are poor peasants in far away countries.
Actual health studies have been slow-rolled or half-assed
UN and International arms control agencies publish mealy mouth studies and promise to review the data, once in a while.
Because the US military finds these weapons to be effective.
If London thinks these weapons pose no health threat, how would they respond to them being used on British towns. Because that’s what the Ukes target. Towns and villages.
Now that is bull feces.
What is depleted uranium ammunition?
DU is used in weapons because it can penetrate tanks and armour more easily due to its density and other physical properties.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) says DU is used for both armour-piercing weapons and armour itself.
Shells containing DU become sharper and ignite as they come into contact with armour.
are there any radiation risks?
The IAEA says inhaled or ingested uranium can be harmful “in sufficient amounts” because of its “chemical toxicity”.
Its main risk is chemical, rather than radioactive. In high concentrations in the body, uranium can cause kidney failure because of its chemical toxicity, for example.
However, as with any radioactive material, there are cancer risks. But it could take years for any effects to show.
When it comes to DU, the risks are lower. Depleted uranium is considerably less radioactive than natural uranium.
But with shells containing DU, the main risk is of inhaling aerosols released on impact with an armoured target.
Longer-term risks are possible from DU left behind in the soil on battlefields, for example. There are some concerns DU could contaminate water or food supplies if it seeps into the soil in the wrong place over the years. The risk decreases as time goes on, though.
Therefore, the IAEA highlights the riskiest level of contact as handling a shell or other type of DU ammunition directly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.