Distorted report on depleted uranium?
In your May 2000 issue, Jeff Nelson writes of "depleted uranium weapons used by the U.S. during the Gulf War." I have investigated this serious charge and found it to be a distortion. The bombs used in the war were exclusively high explosives. The only depleted uranium was in our tanks. It seems that depleted uranium makes very tough armor plate.

I hope you ask Mr. Nelson to check the accuracy of his sources.

A. Wayne Schwab
Essex, NY

Ed. note: Here is Jeff Nelson's reply to Wayne Schwab's letter, as requested:

Thank you for forwarding me Wayne Schwab's letter and giving me a chance to answer some of his concerns about the use of depleted uranium [DU] during the Gulf War.

The use of DU has become very popular in the last decade of weapons manufacturing. It is used in tanks and also to coat armor-piercing munitions which can then be fired out of tanks or A-10 Warthog fighter planes. According to the Gulf War Research Center, allied troops fired almost one million rounds containing an estimated 300 tons of DU. Most of those hit Iraqi tanks or fell on Iraqi soil. U.S. soldiers were also exposed, either wounded by "friendly fire" or from inhaling contaminated dust as they clambered over Iraqi tanks at war's end. In the Presidential Advisory Committee on Gulf War Veterans' Illnesses' final report in December 1996 they concurred that, "U.S. service personnel also could have been exposed to DU if they inhaled or ingested DU dust particles during incidental contact with vehicles destroyed by DU munitions, or if they lived or worked in areas contaminated with DU dust from accidental munitions fires. Thus, unnecessary exposure of many individuals could have occurred." Many veterans now believe that DU exposure has been a contributing factor to Gulf War illnesses.

DU is the by-product of the process for converting ("enriching") natural uranium for use as nuclear fuel or nuclear weapons. DU is approximately 40 percent less radioactive than natural uranium. The DU used in armor-piercing munitions is also widely used in civilian industry, primarily for stabilizers in airplanes and boats. DU poses an extremely low radiological threat as long as it remains outside the body. Internalized in sufficient quantity, however, via metal fragments or dust-like particles and oxides, depleted uranium may pose a long-term health hazard.

Three years ago, researchers from the National Cancer Institute and other agencies exposed human cells to depleted uranium and injected them into mice. They developed tumors within four weeks. In the U.S., DU is considered enough of a risk that the Environmental Protection Agency requires detailed plans for protecting people and the environment at the three sites where the material is stored. No such precautions exist in southern Iraq. Children still play near burned-out tanks and farmers still grow tomatoes -- albeit stunted ones -- in fields they say were hit with missiles. Although some residents have been moved out of the area, the Iraqi government says it has neither the resources nor the responsibility to clean up any uranium. There has been a 262 percent jump in leukemia and other cancers nationwide since the Gulf War, the Iraqi Ministry of Health reports.

The use of DU is an issue that must be further studied and understood by the public. I would encourage all readers to take it upon themselves to discover the realities of these weapons that have become a staple of the U.S. arsenal. A good place to start is the recent article by Susan Taylor Martin that was published in the June 5, 2000 edition of the St. Petersburg Times entitled, "Children and War" (http://www.ngwrc.org/Dulink/children_and_war.htm). -- J.N.

'Plowshares Eight' 20th anniversary
September 9, 2000 is the 20th anniversary of the "Plowshares Eight" action in King of Prussia, Penn. It was the first in which an actual nuclear weapon was damaged: the nose of the Mark 12A 337-kiloton nuclear bomb. It was a symbolic exposure of what most U.S. citizenry accepted: the need for total destruction of an "enemy country" by using nuclear genocide in defiance both of God's law and international law, even when its cost is beggaring our nation's social and international responsibilities.

The Plowshares Eight startled the American public by exposing the consequences of our Mutually Assured Destruction military policy. Over 60 Plowshares actions have happened since 1980.

This year is also my 20th anniversary of resigning from General Electric for providing arms for nuclear war. As a "new" resister, I'd like to tell you of certain "Acts of Grace" that happened during their witness time and trial:

In the Fall of 1980, when five resisters were in the Norristown prison, some 200 Indians on their "Long Walk of Survival" to the U.N. stayed in nearby Abington Friends Meeting. At an evening meeting I asked their medicine man to visit our friends in prison. He said it would be a community decision: The community directed that a delegation should visit. They were refused admittance at the prison. Imagine my surprise the next day to see the whole Indian community marching and drumming, surrounding the Norristown prison. Was it an act of grace that these two like-minded communities' paths crossed in Norristown that day?

The Plowshares Eight trial opened on Ash Wednesday 1981. As the trial opened and the courtroom filled, music started from a nearby church: "Were You There When They Crucified My Lord?" Supporters first started humming, then singing -- at which point the judge cleared the courtroom! Who chose that music? Why was it playing at that particular moment?

Following many Plowshares actions and trials, I was struck by the unexpected, unexplained happenings that transpired. These insights made me a believer in the rightness of their actions.

These simple examples are not meant to overshadow the Plowshares actions. Plowshares actions continue because the need has accelerated. Even today, there are those who believe that nuclear genocide is morally justifiable if our country is "threatened militarily." Our country still places their security in a nuclear god, not in the One God of us all.

Bill Stuart-Whistler
Co-chair, Episcopal Peace Fellowship
Nuclear Issues Group
Gwynedd, PA