deeply grokked paranoia

it would be deeply remiss of us to ignore the rhetoric coming out of the US administration with regards to Iran. the casual assumption that the US wouldn't invade that nation because it has nuclear capabilities is seriously questionable given both the behavior of the US towards Iraq and the history of the use of nuclear weapons against an enemy. there are three factors to consider when evaluating whether the US would attack Iran and whether it would attack Iran with nuclear weapons.

factor one: one of the most dangerous and toxic natural elements found in the US is radon gas. it has a radioactive half-life of 3.85 days during which it begins to break down into other less potent, less toxic elemental forms finally resolving itself into lead(not exactly free from a toxicity of its own). radon gas is the leading cause of lung cancer in non-smoking US citizens, and is contributory to lung cancer in those who smoke. it can leak into our homes and basements and schools and so forth, poisoning us without our knowledge. but remember it lasts only 3.85 days and can be dealt with by filtration and active air movement systems.

factor two: in gulf war one and in gulf war two the US used more than 2500 tons of depleted uranium munitions on iraq. studies on such weapon use in bosnia and kosovo(approximately 60 tons worth) show that this radioactive elemental dust has blown over most of the balkans and spread to areas far from the initial targets. in iraq, the volume of dust is exponentially large as are the winds and other factors that spread this material all across the region. though depleted uranium DU is a low level radioactive substance, in that it only emits 1/1000th of the particles as does radon gas, as a dust, and particulate areosol it is far more toxic and deadly. this is due to its relatively long half life. i say relatively because scientists can only conclude an estimate of its decay rate against the theoretical lifespan of the planet earth. thus it is assumed that at the very least DU's half life is something over 4 billion years. with radon gas you go from a toxic dose of rads to a non-toxic dose in less than a month. with DU you have a low level source of rads for essentially ever. and in iraq, you have literally tons of it all over the place. how much DU dust is too much DU dust?? we need only ask those members of the military who served in the first Iraq conflict. the DoD has tried for more than a decade to kill the story, but many many thousands of troops are sick and getting sicker from their exposure. the current amounts used combine with the previous amounts and create a virtual toxic killing field for the rest of human history.

factor three: the US understands that iraq is now a radioactive hazard. in order to extract the oil resources technologies will be used to overcome the threat of DU and protect those assigned to that task. unlike the lack of protection for those assigned to protect those contracted to extract the oil. to bomb the nuclear facilities of iran and create a contiguous radiological hazard zone underwhich lies vast amounts of oil resources can not be considered improbable. if we look carefully at a map of the region we can see a beltline between Kosovo/Bosnia-DU deposited; Ukraine-Chernobyl blew; Iraq-vast DU covering; Iran-potential high level radioactive sites; onto various former soviet nations that have histories of their own radiological accidents. in a sense the earth has its own international sacrifice zone. adding to this by bombing iran's nuclear centers and spreading that material all over that nation and, well low and behold, afghanistan is just north and downwind from iran. eliminating the nuclear threat of iran, without using troops is perfectly good military policy for the Bush administration. and it is something we have to think is possible when we vote. because these guys have no moral values whatsoever.