American global might: Do foreign children pay for the sins of their parents?

Fallujah doctors report rise in birth defects

The BBC has not formally indicted the U.S. Military nor does the cautious Iraqi leadership.

Given the abusive history of America’s wedded relationship with Iraq, would you blame the Iraqis for not wanting to make the mighty mad?

The use of depleted uranium is an issue now 7 years in existence.

How mighty does America’s military need to be to defend our borders?

Is there a justifiable need for the kind of dangerous weaponry wielded against a civilian population in the name of war?

What is America’s attitude regarding collateral damage abroad when human beings who have never declared war nor aided and abetted terrorism against the Imperium are still forced to pay the ultimate price?

Why do we wage wars of revenge baring our self-inflated muscles over collateral damage suffered here but hyper-critically refuse to acknowledge our own crimes against humanity now in much greater numbers than the attacks of 2001?

Some defenders of the faith will tell you that depleted uranium (DU for short) - a prized toy in the arsenal of invasion and occupation – is not and has not been what it’s effects suggest.

So humor me. I’ll agree if …

Well, let me start by acknowledging the possibility that DU is no more dangerous do an enemy’s villagers than a bow and arrow .

Let’s ask experts and defenders of the imperial foreign policy to respond honestly, openly and reasonably to honest, open and reasonable questions.

(1) Ethically, why would anyone say that any weapon - possessed of DU or not - is safe for civilian bystanders?

(2) Unless someone can justify/defend America's need to involve nuclear crap in our tactical (non-strategic) weaponry as vital to the defense of the nation, should we not be concerned about non-combatants anywhere when we ponder the use of DU?

(3) Is then it true that without DU our military is somehow emasculated and insufficiently potent to get the job done?

(4) Or do we need to go around shooting field  mice with elephant guns because our generals and defense contractors need the economic stimulus offered by sales of weapons that include DU?

 

As a Veteran with a big mouth and an opinion I'm entitled to, I'll admit to the following biases and concerns:

 

- I am the patriarch of our particular military family with it's own tradition going back decades. My deceased WWII father's flag sits on the wall in my study. My own medals and uniform fruit salad ribbons are in the special box I put them upon receipt of an honorable discharge thirty five years ago.

- I don't wear a silly little flag on my lapel nor stick cheap metal ribbons on my vehicle to prove how patriotic I am. I leave that to gullibles who think Fox News is honest broadcasting.

- I was against Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq from the get-go. I still am.

I don’t think this country will get past the psychology of war criminality in the Middle East until we do something about those who murdered innocents in our name more than 60 years ago and called it patriotism, creating in effect a rationale for justifiable homicide.

It’s the same psychology of guilt our parents bear when that Democrat  Mister  Truman  decided  that  collateral damage (death by A-bomb) to two entire cities was an okay crime to commit in the name of America’s defense.

- My family is not anti-war nor part of that political crowd. But we are also nobody's gullible puppets and nobody's pretend patriots conforming to false logic.

- Invading Iraq was never justified, necessary and was a false prop for Bush & Company's flawed definition of what a "war on terror" is or should look like.

- In that context, using depleted uranium - serious as that may be in terms of risk -  is secondary to blowing up our soldier family members and innocent by-standing civilians based on what does or does not naturally occur in nature.

Can its defenders and promoters absolutely promise that depleted uranium has no lethal side effects based on nuclear radiation - being  essentially then harmless except for the traditional lethal intent of those weapons that do not include DU?  

Defenders do acknowledge that original intent don't they? To clarify, blowing up people and things?

- If doctors in Fallujah where DU was used extensively are advising mothers not to have children, can defenders of the DU faith guarantee that my family and I and all who read here can absolutely sleep at night without concern about DU cause they’ve done our homework for us?

– Do we have absolutely no reason to worry about DU as the cause of any  potential "agent orange" kind of illness or sterilization in our  military sons and daughters?

- DU absolutely will not be the reason if our soldier families become parents of grandchildren with birth defects?

- Will American military and civilian leadership formally declare that any increased incidence of sterilization and birth defects in the innocent by-standing Iraqi civilian population is not going to be a consequence of DU and that America should have no guilty conscience?

If those who authorize this monstrous dis-use of science can't make that guarantee then perhaps they should go do more homework.

And perhaps we should re-read our school texts on civic responsibility and membership in a global humanity.

If we intentionally kill or maim all non-Americans who annoy us, what will that do the the customer base for a global McDonalds, Disneyworlds and the labor base for Walmart products?