EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Israeli Bombs Are Source of Uranium at Shelled Site, Syria Says
Israeli missiles are the source of traces of uranium that diplomats at the International Atomic Energy Agency say were found at a suspected nuclear site in Syria, according to Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem.
``The basis of American complaint and allegations, presented to the IAEA seven months after the Israeli raid, is that a reactor was under construction, not operating, so where did the uranium particles come from?'' al-Moallem said late yesterday, according to the state-run Syrian Arab News Agency. ``Why has nobody asked about the content and type of Israeli shells used in destroying this building, in light of the U.S. and Israel's use of uranium in their shells?''
IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei said Sept. 22 that United Nations inspectors, on a visit in June, hadn't found any traces of nuclear material at the site in al-Kibar that was bombed by Israel in September 2007. U.S. intelligence officials, who suspected Syria of having a covert nuclear program in the 1990s, said they were certain the government in Damascus was building a secret facility with North Korean help in early 2007, according to Congressional testimony in April.
The IAEA will present findings on its investigation into the Syrian site to the UN agency's 35-member board of directors before their next meeting on Nov. 27, ElBaradei said in Prague this week.
``I regret very much the fact that we were not allowed to investigate the issue before the facility was destroyed,'' ElBaradei said Nov. 11 in a Prague press briefing. ``The job has become much more complicated for us.''
Syria, which is a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, has denied the U.S. allegations. Israel's government has declined to comment on the issue.
Al-Moallem said ``leaks of information by some Western diplomats is a clear indication that the goal is to put pressure on Syria, particularly as the campaign came before ElBaradei reports to the board of governors. This means that the subject is not technical but political.''
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
8 Comments so far
Show AllIt will be really really easy to determine the truth. If the traces are depleted uranium as used in a "conventional" bomb (that is not a fissionable bomb) then its probably the Isrealis and if it is non-depleted, then odds are it was Syrian. It honsetly could have been either source and neither would really be news at this point.
It need not be depleted uranium.
The IDF isn't above playing dirty tricks - ask the the USS Liberty survivors.
OK. So the Israelis attack a building with bombs and then sprinkle U at the site to make it look like the Syrians were working on a reactor? Maybe, but why? They don't really get any flak from anyone for their actions anyway. Seems like they could as well have called it a bioweapons facility and bombed it without all the work. So simply said they wanted to bomb Syria for fun. No one would have done anything. The Syrians didn't even scramble their air defenses from what we currently know.
The point being made by al-Moallem was that there was no functioning reactor at this site.
Since nuclear reactors use radioactive isotopes to function, and it would make no sense for Syria to store radioactive materials at a non-functioning nuclear facility, why does the stuff turn up in the debris?
The reasonable conclusion is that Israel used weapons hardened with depleted uranium casings to penetrate through the reinforced concrete structure being attacked.
Depleted uranium is neither depleted nor harmless and the term is intended to imply. It is a highly radioactive substance capable of inflicting chromosomal and cardinogenic damage to living organisms. Depleted uranium IS a weapon of mass destruction in and of itself.
>>Depleted uranium is neither depleted nor harmless and the term is intended to imply.<<
The term is not intended to imply anything.
It is an exact scientific/industrial term that describes the metal.
It is depleted because 60-70% of U234/5 is removed leaving the 99% or so that is U238 and some small inclusions of the other isotopes. U238 is nasty nasty stuff and it should not be handled or inhaled. It is NOT a weapon of mass destruction though. It is used in industry all over the country and has been for years. It is used in all aircraft as counterweights for ailerons, it is in some pottery glazes including all yellow fiestaware from before 1940. It is available mail order in the US and has lots of applications and you may well have some within 20 feet of you as you read this.
"Weapons of Mass Destruction" also has an exact definition of weapons that kill primarily by biological, chemical or nuclear action. DU is used to increase mass and density of projectiles so that they penetrate more armor or concrete. The phyrophoric nature of the element is not significant as 80-90% or the penetrator of DU munitions is not pulverized on impact thus not phyrophoric. It simply of value because of its density and really for no other reason.
DU's radioactive profile is many many many times less radioactive than the unprocessed pure U element. U238, the primary component of DU is an alpha emitter and alpha particles are stopped by any barrier as thick as paper. (thus it is dangerous when inhaled as it gets in the lungs where it is VERY dangerous over 30-50 years) Most of the Beta and Gamma radiation is removed with the U234 and U235.
There are many service people that were wounded by Iraqi DU shells during the gulf war and they are *to date* not showing any increased signs of cancer although many still have fragments embeded in them.
Remember that energy on impact is mass times velocity so a cannon round that would be composed of lead and copper or steel is roughly 2/3rds the mass of a DU round so the energy of a DU round is roughly 50% higher than the corresponding non DU round.
In penetration of concrete, that is really a lot of difference.
If the material is DU, then I concur, it is probably there from Israeli bombs. If it is NOT DU, but U or enriched U then it was probably there from the Syrians. It would be pretty normal operating proceedure to begin to accumulate U at the site before completion. Especially if other storage facilities were not as well guarded as the site of whatever reactor they were producing.
In either event, it really isn't news. It is there from the attack or was there previous to it. That really doesn't tell us much.
DU is a little worse than mentioned above:
http://www.uraniumweaponsconference.de/background.htm
most of the DU in shells does burn up on impact due to the amount of energy dissipated on impact. bunker buster bombs might be different since the velocity of the round is lower
Uranium is also a heavy metal with all of those nasty problems...
Out of 6 Posts so far on this Item, three are from Goose4, who sometimes seems
quite "Progressive".
But as I have noticed over the years, when it comes to Israel even the most
"Progressive" sounding people, from the "Israel right or wrong Crowd" go into
a state of "DENIAL" when anybody criticizes Israel.
But the majority of the people in the world now realize what is going on in
the Middle East, and will not "Tolerate" anymore Agression from Israel.
That settles it for me. I am sure the Syrians would NEVER ever lie.