Slashdot Mirror

Winner of Project Consored top 25 articles for 2009 - 2010 news stories: Pentagon's role in global catastrophe

By Sara Flounders

In evaluating the U.N. Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen -- with more
than 15,000 participants from 192 countries, including more than 100 heads of
state, as well as 100,000 demonstrators in the streets -- it is important to
ask: How is it possible that the worst polluter of carbon dioxide and other
toxic emissions on the planet is not a focus of any conference discussion or
proposed restrictions?

By every measure, the Pentagon is the largest institutional user of
petroleum products and energy in general. Yet the Pentagon has a blanket
exemption in all international climate agreements.

The Pentagon wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; its secret operations in
Pakistan; its equipment on more than 1,000 U.S. bases around the world; its
6,000 facilities in the U.S.; all NATO operations; its aircraft carriers, jet
aircraft, weapons testing, training and sales will not be counted against U.S.
greenhouse gas limits or included in any count.

The Feb. 17, 2007, Energy Bulletin detailed the oil consumption just for the
Pentagon's aircraft, ships, ground vehicles and facilities that made it the
single-largest oil consumer in the world. At the time, the U.S. Navy had 285
combat and support ships and around 4,000 operational aircraft. The U.S. Army
had 28,000 armored vehicles, 140,000 High-Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled
Vehicles, more than 4,000 combat helicopters, several hundred fixed-wing
aircraft and 187,493 fleet vehicles. Except for 80 nuclear submarines and
aircraft carriers, which spread radioactive pollution, all their other vehicles
run on oil.

Even according to rankings in the 2006 CIA World Factbook, only 35 countries
(out of 210 in the world) consume more oil per day than the Pentagon.

The U.S. military officially uses 320,000 barrels of oil a day. However,
this total does not include fuel consumed by contractors or fuel consumed in
leased and privatized facilities. Nor does it include the enormous energy and
resources used to produce and maintain their death-dealing equipment or the
bombs, grenades or missiles they fire.

Steve Kretzmann, director of Oil Change International, reports: "The
Iraq war was responsible for at least 141 million metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (MMTCO2e) from March 2003 through December 2007. ... The war emits
more than 60 percent of all countries. ... This information is not readily
available ... because military emissions abroad are exempt from national
reporting requirements under U.S. law and the U.N. Framework Convention on
Climate Change." (www.naomiklein.org, Dec. 10) Most scientists blame carbon dioxide
emissions for greenhouse gases and climate change.

Barry Sanders in his new book, "The Green Zone: The Environmental Costs
of Militarism," says that "the greatest single assault on the
environment, on all of us around the globe, comes from one agency ... the Armed
Forces of the United States."

Just how did the Pentagon come to be exempt from climate agreements? At the
time of the Kyoto Accords negotiations, the U.S. demanded as a provision of
signing that all of its military operations worldwide and all operations it
participates in with the U.N. and/or NATO be completely exempted from
measurement or reductions.

After securing this gigantic concession, the Bush administration then
refused to sign the accords.

In a May 18, 1998, article entitled "National security and military
policy issues involved in the Kyoto treaty," Dr. Jeffrey Salmon d

Oh yes, I keep on forgetting that there's no such thing as self defense against a brutal cop.

Venezuela seems to be losing its democracy right in front of our eyes, and nobody seems to want to do anything.

No, Venezuyela isn't loosing it's democracy, what it's loosing is what small amount of capitalism it has as well as freedom of the press. I used to support Chavez especially after the coup but he's going too far now in closing down the opposition press or radio and tv. Then again the US under Bush is supporting those outlets which is no different than the if the Chinese were to support the US opposition press.

you guys are so brain wash by american media.. please go find your sources of the truth on independent media inside the US or in another country... everyone knows that US mass media twisted information and show us mexican images not from Venezuela.. also that the mayority of the people supports this decision and they are not shutting it down only not renewing is public license, since they are not unbiased, so they have to move to cable or satellite totally understandable.. LOL I can't believe people is falling for this one.. http://www.iacenter.org/Venezuela/venez_media0607. html read the facts!

If we can drop this all over the place, whats the big deal with some extra radiation for explorers?

UN is merely an organization like any other. Not a divine entity. Its aims are noble (on paper) but its effectiveness is spotty. Sometimes they do a good thing, sometimes they get pushed around. I know this is too difficult for you to grasp, in your black and white universe, where UN is universally evil, but your delusions have no impact on reality.

Until the inspectors report, I think we pretty much can't make any judgment - Kofi Annan, 12/31/2002. Obviously he felt that the continued inspections were necessary.

No, he is merely covering his ass as any politician does, reserving his "judgment" till the "report" comes out. It could as well have been a report on the cafeteria expenses or the cost of washing windows at the UN HQ.

Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix has said Iraq had failed to provide evidence in its declaration to prove that it no longer has weapons of mass destruction - CNN, 12/31/200

This is actually Colin Powell speaking in one of his misinformation sessions. I know, it must be really hard to keep track of your useless props.

The UN Security Council and Secretary General Kofi Annan declared August 6 that Iraq has violated the Gulf War cease-fire agreement by unilaterally suspending cooperation with UN weapons inspectors - USIS

This is Annan merely informing on the legal status of the inspections, as pertaining to the US sponsored inspection regime. Yes, after discovering that UNSCOM was a prop for regime change and an extension of the CIA, as Ritter explained in detail, Iraq threw them out. Which violated the "agreement". Which prompted Annan to make that announcement. It says nothing about Annan's "opinion" on the usefulness or need for the inspection regime in the first place.

None of these quotes (the ones actually belonging to Annan) say anything about that.

Any more attempts at misinformation in that vast vault of yours?

Nobody takes action against sanctions.

Right.

Nobody takes action against suffering inside a country

Uh huh.

However in both cases, entire sections of humanity would be the victims of your 'let 'em all die, as long as I don't have to lift a finger' mentality.

It didn't register. Again. WWII was not fought to "stop em from dying". It was fought for self-preservation by all participants. The saving of persecuted minorities came as a bonus. But do not let this rather major difference between this and your alternate reality universes bother you.

And now another facet of your delusional mentality emerges: your anti-Semitism.

Woohoo! I did it! I actually managed to get you to call me an anti-semite for refusing to grant Jews the central role in the universe! So I take it, in order to not be an "anti-semite" one has to accept that central role and bow before the superior ones? As opposed to just demanding that we are all equal. In which case one is "anti-semite".

Brilliant! This explains everything. Whatever Israel does is by definition superior, because it is a country controlled by Jews, and they are, according to you, central and superior in the universe. Them nasty Arabs need to be pacified for the greater cause. US yearly tithe to Israel is just a normal course of events, and every nation should be paying it. Crystal clear. I got it.

And it also explains your attitude, because I am beginning to suspect that you are a proud holder of an Israeli passport and a card carrying member of Likud.

You're part of the group that backs the Arab-controlled security council, which routinely passes laws in favor of Palestine and then refuses to pass the same laws for Israel.

Whoa! Wow! I never knew I was so powerful! Lemme see, who did we plant

Just sell it to the military and let them spread it in fine oxydized particles around the world.

Safe as in depleted uranium ammo?

Let me repost a comment I made from the Hafnium story. Depleted nuclear materials are still DEFINITELY dangerous. Heightened security stateside sounds like a case of closing the barn door after the horse got out...
Hey, kiddies. We're worried about the evilbadnasty terrorists getting their hands on rogue nukes from the former USSR that might be floating around out there, or worse, constructing their own 'dirty bomb' with internet-fueled recipies, sneak it into the land of the Great Satan and start nuke-nuke-nukin' on heaven's door in the name of Allah. Bush & Co. are shrieking 'For God's sake, don't let those crazy Muslim fundamentalists get hold of nuclear materials!'
Problem is we've already given them all the material anyone could ever want or need to make a 'dirty bomb', delivered right to their sandy li'l front doors courtesy of the United States Armed Services. That's right, kiddies, we're talking about DEPLETED URANIUM, that nuclear fairy dust that's now littering Iraq and Afghanistan by the megaton! Thanks to the fabled generosity of the good ol' USA, it's possible to drive around and pick up this stuff with nothing more than a shovel and a dedication to a deity stronger than your fear of radiation poisoning.
A dedicated Boy Scout could easily make either a low-yield nuclear bomb using enough 'spent' uranium to make a subcritical mass (remember, Mouseketeers, that 'spent' fuel rods are still highly radioactive and it just takes a lot more to reach subcritical mass than ordinary uranium) OR even more easily, mix the DU with conventional explosives to make a bomb with a radioactive plume capable of poisoning an entire city for decades!
Fun Fact for th' Day: The most recent draft of the Geneva Convention considers depleted uranium to be a 'weapon of mass destruction', as its effects linger for decades to centuries after a war has ended, causing such amazing things as severe birth defects, mental retardation, cancer and other ailments endemic to a high degree of radioactive contamination. Any nation employing DU in its weapons will be considered to be in serious breach of the Geneva accord. (Ho ho ho! Not that the US actually gives a damn about those silly Swiss! There's profits to be had, and it's a convenient way to dispose of all that nuclear waste that would otherwise require safe disposal!)
Check HERE and HERE for more info.

Hey, kiddies. We're worried about the evilbadnasty terrorists getting their hands on rogue nukes from the former USSR that might be floating around out there, or worse, constructing their own 'dirty bomb' with internet-fueled recipies, sneak it into the land of the Great Satan and start nuke-nuke-nukin' on heaven's door in the name of Allah. Bush & Co. are shrieking 'For God's sake, don't let those crazy Muslim fundamentalists get hold of nuclear materials!'
Problem is we've already given them all the material anyone could ever want or need to make a 'dirty bomb', delivered right to their sandy li'l front doors courtesy of the United States Armed Services. That's right, kiddies, we're talking about DEPLETED URANIUM, that nuclear fairy dust that's now littering Iraq and Afghanistan by the megaton! Thanks to the fabled generosity of the good ol' USA, it's possible to drive around and pick up this stuff with nothing more than a shovel and a dedication to a deity stronger than your fear of radiation poisoning.
A dedicated Boy Scout could easily make either a low-yield nuclear bomb using enough 'spent' uranium to make a subcritical mass (remember, Mouseketeers, that 'spent' fuel rods are still highly radioactive and it just takes a lot more to reach subcritical mass than ordinary uranium) OR even more easily, mix the DU with conventional explosives to make a bomb with a radioactive plume capable of poisoning an entire city for decades!
Fun Fact for th' Day: The most recent draft of the Geneva Convention considers depleted uranium to be a 'weapon of mass destruction', as its effects linger for decades to centuries after a war has ended, causing such amazing things as severe birth defects, mental retardation, cancer and other ailments endemic to a high degree of radioactive contamination. Any nation employing DU in its weapons will be considered to be in serious breach of the Geneva accord. (Ho ho ho! Not that the US actually gives a damn about those silly Swiss! There's profits to be had, and it's a convenient way to dispose of all that nuclear waste that would otherwise require safe disposal!)
Check HERE and HERE for more info.

Beyond that, the experiences of the US military in Kosovo and Iraq suggest pretty strongly that the whole attack helicopter concept is flawed. They are too slow, too low, and too vulnerable.

*BZZZRT* Oh I'm sorry. That's incorrect. Here have this loving parting gift of Rice-a-Roni "The San Francisco Treat".

In Kosovo, the army didn't use Apache helicopters. NATO only used fixed wing aircraft. That's it. Just attack jets. No men. No boats. Definatly no helicopters. Gen. Clark (SACEUR at the time) wanted to use helicopters since they were trying to taking out soviet era tanks and APCs, but the Clinton administration forbade him from ordering them into the theater, because Clinton wanted a casualtyless war (which he got). Instead the Apaches sat on the ground (so to speak) in Macedonia. I remember when this happened. You don't have to take my word for it though. Read Gen. Clark's book Waging Modern War.

As far as Iraq goes, we haven't lost that many (less than 20 I think). We've lost some attack helicopters almost everytime they've been used, but that's to be expected. They are low. They are slow compared to fixed wing aircraft. But to say that you don't need air support that can loiter is absurd. Attack helicopters tear through armored divisions. They do their job extremely well.

That said. 20 years and still having nothing is absurd.

You've made many reasonable and logical points.
Unfortunately, being reasonable and logical are now considered acts of terrorism, or at least unamerican.

We are at Orange Alert now. You know what that means? It means people are supposed to Panic. They are also supposed to continue shopping but they must Panic because that is what the government has declaired. Anyone not panicking and not shopping are terrorists!

You should just Shut Up, Be Happy, and let the government do all your thinking for you.

(mmmmmmmm Yummy!)

Short of WWII with Japan there has never been a nuclear attack on anyone from anyone in the world.

It is not exactly a nuclear attack, but many weapons containing Depleted Uranium were used in Iraq, both in 1991 and in the recent conflict. It is not only affecting Iraqis, but American Troops as well.

The US seems to have a pretty good plan for disposing of our nuclear waste. We take all these spent fuel rods, pull out the most radioactive bits, take the remaining depleted uranium and fasion armor piercing shells out of it. Then the next time we go to war, we spread our nuclear waste all over thier country. It works really well.

DU Education project.

DU is much more than heavy bullets, and yes the UN has labelled it a WMD, which suggests that the only WMD's in Iraq are in the hands of the occupiers and being used. How's that for orwellian? Please see this selection of internal documents for just a taste of how DU has been evaluated, and that evaluation suppressed. Or better yet try a simple websearch on a topic, aw heck, here.

BTW, regarding the Baath use of chemicals, I think that item #3 in the list, "US Illegally Removes Pages from Iraq UN Report" provides some interesting leads to follow.

Yeah, the reason is that it has been used to make power/weapons and has become denser than lead, making it an ideal substance for making anti-armor projectiles. They don't "deplete" it to make it non-radioactive:

DU is a waste product of the process that produces enriched uranium for use in atomic weapons and nuclear power plants. Much like natural uranium, it is both toxic and radioactive. Over a billion pounds of DU exists in the United States and must be safely stored or disposed of by the Department of Energy. With its half-life of 4.5 billion years, DU's radioactivity effectively lasts forever.

DU is so abundant the government gives it away to arms manufacturers. Because it is extremely dense--1.7 times as dense as lead--when turned into a metal DU can be used to make a shell that easily penetrates steel. In addition it is pyrophoric--that is, when it strikes steel, heat from the friction causes it to burn.

When DU burns, it spews tiny particles of poisonous and radioactive uranium oxide in aerosol form, which can then travel for miles in the wind. Humans can ingest or inhale the small particles. Even one particle, when lodged in a vital organ--which is most likely to happen from inhalation-- can cause illnesses from headaches to cancer.

The Pentagon tested DU shells at various sites around the U.S. and used it in combat for the first time against Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War. It was very effective in destroying Iraqi tanks, as well as their occupants and anyone in the area. At least 600,000 pounds of DU and uranium dust was left around Iraq, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia by U.S. and British forces during that war.

Although the U.S. government and military continue to minimize the environmental and health dangers from depleted- uranium weapons, even they have to admit these dangers exist.

DU is also considered at least a contributing cause to the 130,000 reported cases of "Gulf War Syndrome." The chronic symptoms of this ailment range from sharp increases in cancers to memory loss, chronic pain, fatigue and birth defects in veterans' children.

Dr. Mona Kammas is a professor of pathology at Baghdad University and director of a study of the environmental impact of U.S. aggression against Iraq. At the Gijon symposium, she reported on a paper that showed an almost five-fold increase in cancers, a more than three-fold increase in spontaneous abortions, and a nearly three-fold increase in congenital anomalies in a study group of those exposed to combat.

The paper also reported on environmental damage due to the Pentagon's destruction of the water-supply and sanitation systems and the destruction of oil refineries and factories that used toxic chemicals in the production process.

Iraqi researchers believe that the different relative frequency of various types of cancer now as compared with before 1990 in the Basra region was a significant indication of a major change, and that this pattern continuing long after the war indicated that DU's impact was long- lasting.

Besides the contents listed below, the second edition of Metal of Dishonor has chapters reporting on a study from Iraq and from Bosnia, and a new chapter by Dr. Asaf Durakovic, a physicist and medical doctor who examined U.S. troops hit by DU "friendly fire."

source

sure, that makes it safe, right?


DEPLETED URANIUM EDUCATION PROJECT

WHO studies depleted uranium in Iraq

These are lies. There have been no firings of depleted uranium in Iraq. We crushed the crusading infidels and forced them to eat their own DU munitions!

Ok, let's look at Somalia first.

As always, there's the corporate welfare angle. When the US spends money on a military campaign, guess where that money ends up? Other than that, you have the geographic strategic importance of the country (the former Soviet supported Ethiopia to the north, the Suez canal to the east). And then there is oil. Yes, Somalia got oil.

Even if you were to believe that the mission in Somalia was of a humanitarian nature, you can't disregard that the US were largely responsible for creating the situation in the first place. Their support of an extremely violent dictator (Siad Barre, maybe an even greater bastard than Saddam) in exchange for lucrative oil contracts, during the seventies and eighties, eventually brought on a bloody civil war.

The real world has nothing to do with the Jerry Bruckheimer fantasy Black Hawk Down.

That the genocide in Rwanda could reach such levels as it dit, has been partially attributed to how the US administration managed this case in the security council. From the beginnings of this disaster, they opposed most of the remaining members of the security council. First in supporting withdrawal of most of the UN controlled forces in the country. Then by stalling for unknown reasons, when then UN proposed a second plan for restoring order.

Regarding the former Yugoslavia and the NATO led intervention, the US has never tried to cover up that they had very real strategic goals with this campaign. Take a look at for example this report.

As I said earlier, the world is not a rosy place. I don't particularily care that the US did or did not intervene in these latest campaigns in Africa or Southern Europe. What's scary is that so many of you americans, firmly believe that your leaders only act out of a "pure" motive. I'm sure you're not so naive in other regards. The only explanation I've got, is that you must be blinded with "patriotism".

Starvation after war

Another one

Iraq's imports of food and medicine are not now and have never been affected by any of the various sanctions regimes imposed by the UN or the US.
You might want to update your knowledge here

And at the risk of starting a flamewar: an example, please, of "lies, propaganda, subterfuge, bribery and bullying threats". Let's think for a moment about the way George Bush has become 'president'. Here is something to get you started reading on that one.

Makes me wonder how you can install a democracy if you aren't a democratic leader yourself.

A quick Google search produced these links:

http://www.iacenter.org/maj_1201balt.htm
http://www.sptimes.com/News/061501/Hillsborough/2_ GOP_workers_trigger.shtml
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/GOPCV_ protests000804.html
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/ news/special_packages/school_of_the_americas/21663 30.htm
http://www.appalachianfocus.org/global/600_world_b ank_protesters_arrest.htm

Many of those links refer to something recent when the IMF/WorldBank conviened in Washington, D.C.
Just because it's legal to do it doesn't mean someone's not going to illegally detain you all the same. Happens all the time.

Genuinely I think you can say that the FARC is a terrorist organization because they have been responsible for military attacks on civilian targets. ... And you might even imply, by extension, that the US government is a terrorist organization since they back the columbian government.

"By extension", heck. The US Government
has
repeatedly
bombed
civilian
targets.

I'm not arguing whether or not the attacks linked above were justified, simply that they were in fact civilian targets. If that's your only criterion, your analysis applies to the US government as much as anyone. No need to split hairs after all.

BTW, I've been to some peaceful demonstrations, in our nation's capital and other places, and no tanks and soldiers have ever shown up, shot large numbers of peaceful demonstrators, and covered the numbers up. That kind of thing just can't happen here

Can you say Seattle 1999 World Trade Organization meeting?

This is called lying. If anything people would have laughed their asses off, we have invented this little thing called the PC since vietnam and it can do wonderious things, like enable missiles to blow shit up with some level of accuracy, or predict the best way to f*ck someones day over without needing to strip an entire region clear of any landscape.

During the 78-day war, NATO crews flew 33,000 combat missions over Yugoslavia, dropped more than 20,000 laser or satellite-guided weapons and concluded that 99.6% found their targets.1 Of the more than one thousand planes used in the operation, 725 were American. Four hundred and fifty precision Tomahawk and 90 air-launched Cruise missiles were used.2 All told, 79,000 tons of explosives were dropped, including 152 containers with 35,450 cluster bombs, thermo-visual and graphite bombs.3 Despite this tremendous firepower used against a country the size of Ohio and a military that heavily relied on 1960-70's Soviet technology, more and more reports are surfacing that the Yugoslav Army emerged from this war virtually unscathed.

This is called lying. If anything people would have laughed their asses off, we have invented this little thing called the PC since vietnam and it can do wonderious things, like enable missiles to blow shit up with some level of accuracy, or predict the best way to f*ck someones day over without needing to strip an entire region clear of any landscape.

During the 78-day war, NATO crews flew 33,000 combat missions over Yugoslavia, dropped more than 20,000 laser or satellite-guided weapons and concluded that 99.6% found their targets.1 Of the more than one thousand planes used in the operation, 725 were American. Four hundred and fifty precision Tomahawk and 90 air-launched Cruise missiles were used.2 All told, 79,000 tons of explosives were dropped, including 152 containers with 35,450 cluster bombs, thermo-visual and graphite bombs.3 Despite this tremendous firepower used against a country the size of Ohio and a military that heavily relied on 1960-70's Soviet technology, more and more reports are surfacing that the Yugoslav Army emerged from this war virtually unscathed.

Yeah right, "It's always about oil." They said the same thing about Vietnam, yet the oil never materialized.

but none of the other U.S. military actions of the last few decades have been about oil--Lebanon, Somalia, Haiti, Kosovo.

Lebanon? Our entire Middle East policy is dominated by the black gold.

Kosovo? Again, not oil, but I'm sure that lead, zinc, cadmium, gold, silver, and coal mines have the interest of the US ruling class.

You must not live in an area that has a Pacifica station, which is better than NPR. But even Pacifica is being infiltrated now.

Yeah, I sure would like to know more about DU in weapons tech. - if you feel like posting more about it, you've got my vote.
I am familar, however, with some of the basics - uranium is primarially an Alpha ray emitter. These are basically harmless - a sheet of paper can stop them. Of course, decay can produce Beta and Gamma radiation. The fact that the "real" danger from, as you rightly point out, depleted uranium only arises when you're talking about inhalation of dust-like particles (for whatever that 'fact' means- according to the media today and yesterday in Ireland, Britain and France the 'facts' about DU seemed to change from station-to-station hour-to-hour) has not escaped me.
The thing that I find deplorable -if true- is the way that such matter can effectively and easily poison a water/food supply. I assume this could happen because of the radioactivity of the matter produced by a DU weapon's strike. However, details were sketchy on the TV reports.
I've looked up the subject of DU on the internet - again lots of controversy but with the anti-DU voice being the loudest.
Try http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/du.htm. I must state, I am very wary of a site like iacenter.org, but sites such as this (http://www.rama-usa.org/ducdi.htm) hold much more sway as they seem less politically motivated. Another site, this time an American veteran's, is here, and a very comprehensive site is here.
For my money, the better site is http://www.psr.org/duissuebrief.html.

Mind you, just to add my voice to the mass of anecdotal evidence out there: I've been around a variety of dangerous chemicals and elements. I've had fun with everything from quick silver(liquid mercury to the modern man) to a variety of radioactive isotopes(calm down- it was within the confines of a university 8). I am well aware that there is unecessary panic by those without a good knowledge of the related chemistry and/or physics. However, I am still very uneasy about certain things I have had direct contact and just because I've experienced no side-effects, it doesn't mean everyone else will escape side-affects after sharing the same experience as myself.

8)

Not surprising.

We come across as a violent nation that is eager to destabilize vulnerable nations -- under the slightest pretext, if it enhances our strategic interests.

(Case in question: Serbia. I'm not justifying the serbian army's ruthless campaign against serbian kosovars and guerillas. But you have to understand that this is a deep, complex, internal problem, which will need a complex, internal solution. If this perspective comes to you as new or surprising, please read about the background of US action, direct from the minds of other thinking Americans at International Action Center, New York: www.iacenter.org .)

When we are a violent nation, made up of violent adults, do we expect kids to be somehow different ?

Hope to see some thoughtful responses.