Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- Profiting From Human Misery
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- With Little More Than a Note, Obama Deploys US Troops To Niger
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
- Decolonize the Consumerist Wasteland: Re-imagining a World Beyond Capitalism and Communism
- Who Can Own Life? Farmer vs. Monsanto Before US High Court
- Profiting From Human Misery
- Decolonize the Consumerist Wasteland: Re-imagining a World Beyond Capitalism and Communism
- Scale Implosion: After Ruining America, the Era of Giant Chain Stores Is Over
- 5 Reasons Why the Keystone XL Pipeline is Bad for the Economy
Popular content
Today's Top News
Did Toxic Chemical in Iraq Sicken GIs?
Larry Roberta's every breath is a painful reminder of his time in Iraq. He can't walk a block without gasping for air. His chest hurts, his migraines sometimes persist for days and he needs pills to help him sleep.
Sgt. David L. Moore during his National Guard service in Iraq in a photo provided by his brother Steve. The guardsman's post-war life was plagued by health problems until he died in 2008 of lung disease at age 42. (By Jared Fawks, AP) James Gentry came home with rashes, ear troubles and a shortness of breath. Later, things got much worse: He developed lung cancer.
David Moore's postwar life turned into a harrowing medical mystery: nosebleeds and labored breathing that made it impossible to work, much less speak. His desperate search for answers ended last year when he died of lung disease at age 42.
What these three men - one sick, one dying, one dead - had in common is they were National Guard soldiers on the same stretch of wind-swept desert in Iraq during the early months of the war in 2003.
These soldiers and hundreds of other Guard members from Indiana, Oregon and West Virginia were protecting workers hired by a subsidiary of the giant contractor, KBR Inc., to rebuild an Iraqi water treatment plant. The area, as it turned out, was contaminated with hexavalent chromium, a potent, sometimes deadly chemical linked to cancer and other devastating diseases.
No one disputes that. But that's where the agreement ends.
Among the issues now rippling from the courthouse to Capitol Hill are whether the chemical made people sick, when KBR knew it was there and how the company responded. But the debate is about more than this one case; it has raised broader questions about private contractors and health risks in war zones.
Questions, says Sen. Evan Bayh, who plans to hold hearings on the issues, such as these:
"How should we treat exposure to potentially hazardous chemicals as a threat to our soldiers? How seriously should that threat be taken? What is the role of private contractors? What about the potential conflict between their profit motives and taking all steps necessary to protect our soldiers?"
"This case," says the Indiana Democrat, "has brought to light the need for systemic reform."
For now, dozens of National Guard veterans have sued KBR and two subsidiaries, accusing them of minimizing and concealing the chemical's dangers, then downplaying nosebleeds and breathing problems as nothing more than sand allergies or a reaction to desert air.
KBR denies any wrongdoing. In a statement, the company said it actually found the chemical at the Qarmat Ali plant, restricted access, cleaned it up and "did not knowingly harm troops."
Ten civilians hired by a KBR subsidiary made similar claims in an arbitration resolved privately in June. (The workers' contract prevented them from suing.)
This isn't the first claim that toxins have harmed soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan; there have been allegations involving lead, depleted uranium and sarin gas.
This also isn't the first challenge to KBR, whose billions of dollars of war-related contracts have been the subject of congressional scrutiny and legal claims.
Among them are lawsuits recently filed in several states against KBR and Halliburton Co. - KBR's parent company until 2007 - that assert open-air pits used to burn refuse in Iraq and Afghanistan caused illnesses and death. (KBR says it's reviewing the charges. Halliburton maintains it was improperly named and expects to be dismissed from the case.)
This case stems from the chaotic start of the war in 2003 when a KBR subsidiary was hired to restart the treatment plant, which had been looted and virtually stripped bare. The Iraqis had used hexavalent chromium to prevent pipe corrosion at the plant, which produced industrial water used in oil production.
It's the same chemical linked to poisonings in California in a case made famous in the movie "Erin Brockovich."
Hexavalent chromium - a toxic component of sodium dichromate - can cause severe liver and kidney damage and studies have linked it to leukemia as well as bone, stomach and other cancers, according to an expert who provided a deposition for the civilian workers.
The chemical "is one of the most potent carcinogens know to man," declared Max Costa, chairman of New York University's Department of Environmental Medicine.
KBR, however, says studies show only that industrial workers exposed to the chemical for more than two years have an increased risk of cancer - and in this case, soldiers were at the plant just days or months.
The company also notes air quality studies concluded the Indiana Guard soldiers were not exposed to high levels of hexavalent chromium. But Costa says those tests were done when the wind was not blowing.
Both soldiers and former workers say there were days when strong gusts kicked up ripped-open bags of the chemical, creating a yellow-orange haze that coated everything from their hair to their boots.
"I was spitting blood and I was not the only one doing that," recalls Danny Langford, who worked for the KBR subsidiary. "The wind was blowing 30, 40 miles an hour. You could just hardly see where you were going. I pulled my shirt over my nose and there would be blood on it."
Larry Roberta, a 44-year-old former Oregon National Guard member, remembers 137-degree heat and dust everywhere. He sat on a bag of the chemical, unaware it was dangerous.
"This orange crud blew up in your face, your eyes and on our food," he says. "I tried to wash my chicken patty off with my canteen. I started to get sick to my stomach right away."
Roberta had coughing spells and agonizing chest pains, he says, that "went all the way through my back. ... Every day I went there, I had something weird going on."
Russell Kimberling, a former Indiana National Guard captain, had severe sinus troubles that forced his medical evacuation to Germany. After returning, he became alarmed one August day in 2003 while escorting some officials to the plant in the southern Iraqi city of Basra.
"I jumped out of the truck and I turned around and they (KBR staff) had full chemical gear on," he says. "I looked at some of my soldiers and said, 'This can't be very good.' ... They could have told us to put chemical suits on."
Ed Blacke, hired as plant health, safety and environmental coordinator, says he became worried after workers started having breathing problems and a former colleague sent him an internal KBR memo outlining the chemical's dangers. Blacke says he complained, was labeled a troublemaker and resigned under pressure.
"Normally when you take over a job, you have a briefing - this is what's out there, here's what you need for protective equipment," says Blacke, who testified at a Senate Democratic Policy Committee hearing last year. "There was nothing, nothing at all."
Blacke and Langford were among those whose civil claims were resolved in arbitration.
Kimberling is among nearly 50 current or former Guard members - most from Indiana, a smaller number from Oregon - who've sued. Some soldiers who served with the West Virginia Guard are expected to follow soon.
Mike Doyle, a Houston lawyer representing the soldiers and civilians, maintains KBR knew as early as May 2003 the chemical was there, but didn't close the site until that September.
"Once they (KBR) found out about it, they didn't tell anybody and they did everything to conceal it," he contends. "Their staff was getting reports and soldiers and civilians who were in the field were told ... 'There's nothing to worry about."'
The lawsuit cites minutes of an August 2003 KBR meeting that mentions "serious health problems at the water treatment plant" and notes "almost 60% of the people now exhibit the symptoms."
In a recent Associated Press interview, KBR chairman William P. Utt said the company has been unfairly targeted for its military work.
"People think there's an opportunity here in Iraq, let's paint it on KBR, then we'll worry about making the facts precise or correct later," he said.
As for the water plant, KBR says once it learned of the chemical, it took precautions to protect workers, notified the Army Corps of Engineers and led the cleanup. It says the Corps had previously deemed the area safe.
KBR also points to Army tests of Indiana Guard soldiers that showed no medical problems that could be linked to exposure, as well as a military board review that found it unlikely anyone would suffer long-term medical consequences.
But Bayh and Doyle say those tests were done too late to be valid and note that soil tests were taken after the contaminated area was covered.
Doyle also disagrees with KBR's contention that workers weren't there long enough to have elevated cancer risks.
It can take a long time for symptoms of illness to surface - five to 10 years or more for cancer. But some of those who say they were exposed are already ill.
James Gentry, a retired lieutenant colonel in the Indiana Guard, is in the late stages of lung cancer and the disease has spread to his ribs and spine, according to his friend, Christopher Lee.
Gentry hasn't sued but in a December 2008 deposition he said it was "very disappointing" KBR managers didn't share information soldiers were around cancer-causing chemical.
"I'm dying because of it," he said.
While acknowledging he wasn't 100% certain that's why he has cancer, Gentry - who served a second tour in Iraq - said his doctor "believes the most probable cause was my exposure to this chemical."
The Indiana, West Virginia and Oregon National Guards have sent hundreds of letters to soldiers notifying them of possible contamination and urging them to seek medical attention.
Bayh has introduced a bill calling for a medical registry that would require the Department of Defense to notify all military members of exposure to potential toxins and ensure their medical care. A similar measure that only mandates notification was approved Thursday in the U.S. House as an amendment to the defense authorization bill.
All these steps come too late for 1st Sgt. David Moore.
When he returned from Iraq, his persistent cough escalated into breathing problems, nosebleeds and boil-like rashes, recalls his brother, Steve.
Even when doctors couldn't figure out what was wrong, Moore didn't give up, Steve Moore says.
"He was always upbeat," he recalls. "He said, 'They'll figure it out, they'll figure it out.' He thought that until the last time I talked to him."
Moore died in February 2008. The cause was lung disease. His death was ruled service related. His brother believes it was hexavalent chromium.
Larry Roberta, the former Oregon Guardsman who needed stomach surgery after his return, says he suffers from post-traumatic stress, mood swings, nose polyps, chest pains and debilitating migraines.
"I have 100% disability," he says. "I've got a long laundry list of things that happened to me while I was there. If you add it all up, I'd be almost 200% disabled."
Kimberling, the former Indiana Guardsman, struggles as well.
The father of two young children - he's a pharmaceutical salesman in Louisville - says he hasn't been able to get life insurance because his possible exposure is mentioned on his medical records.
Sometimes, he says, it's hard to separate his ailments - sinus problems and joint pains - from his fears.
"I feel like I'm a 38-year-old in a 60-year-old's body," he says. ... "I'm not sure if it's the anxiety of finding out about it or not. I kind of know and feel it's just a matter of time before it catches up with me."
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...


24 Comments so far
Show All"KBR also points to Army tests of Indiana Guard soldiers that showed no medical problems that could be linked to exposure, as well as a military board review that found it unlikely anyone would suffer long-term medical consequences."
Oh, yeah: go to the military for an open and honest answer. "War, what is it good for?.......(?)"
"People think there's an opportunity here in Iraq, let's paint it on KBR, then we'll worry about making the facts precise or correct later," he said.
"bush and blair thought there's an opportunity here in Iraq, let's paint it on Saddam, then we'll worry about making the facts precise or correct later."
see: downing street memo.
"... a painful reminder of his time in Iraq."
Sorry about your pain, pal, but spare a thought for the number of Iraqis who will have to live with even more painful souvenirs of your sojourn for the rest of their lives -- not to mention the painful "tender loving care" some of your buddies have inflicted and continue to inflict on "detainees", including juveniles, at places like Abu Ghraib and Kandahar. You might consider too the "depleted" uranium that you and your comrades in arms left behind which should guarantee even more reminders for generations to come.
A few reminders that "war is hell" applies to civilian victims as well as to its volunteer practitioners might spare a lot of future pain on both sides.
After the first gulf war and the terrible effects on Iraqi civilians especially the children from the uranium tipped bombs and other chemicals and the gulf war syndrome U.S. soldiers suffered from, I was sure that our government would never send troops to Iraq again.I did not understand why there was not outrage over the U.S. policy of aggression and the use of chemicals, uranium tipped bombs,cluster bombs being used against Iraq, a country that had never been allowed to rebuild after the first gulf war. It took the pentagon years to admit that Gulf war syndrome was a result of the chemical exposure in Iraq after the first gulf war. How can congress allow uncivilized U.S.policies to be repeated over and over again?
"How can congress allow uncivilized U.S.policies to be repeated over and over again?"
very easily and without a shred of conscience.
odoc
GENIE - they allow the uncivilized behavior to continue because 1) many of them make money off the enterprises, 2) many are simply racists, 3) many are religious zealots - more than you would believe.
So, money + racism + religious zealotry = American foreign policy for centuries.
The long-term medical and genetic consequences of our occupation and rape of Iraq will be far more expensive to humanity than we have begun to be told. Our government, as with Agent Orange in Viet Nam, is once again underplaying the health implications of chemicals such as hexavalent chromium and depleted uranium. The gene pool in Iraq may be irreversibly contaminated, with increasing rates of deformities at birth, illnesses the source(s) of which cannot be pinned down (remember "Gulf War Syndrome"?), soldiers returning to the states who should be told bluntly not to try to have children but will have them anyway followed by a lifetime of heartbreak and expense, etc. Joseph Stiglitz' Trillion-Dollar-War, for which he was vilified a couple of years ago, was a gross underestimate of the long-term costs. War isn't just Hell; it is folly.
Our Media tend to "humanize" the crimes by focussing on the individual experience---whether of the rape of a teenager and the murder of her and her family, or the legal struggles of those at Guantanamo, or the plight of returning soldiers (as is the case in the above Associated Press report), but rarely are we told of the SYSTEMIC ATROCITY. The Truth? You want the Truth? You can't handle the Truth! Take yore pain and suffering and find some dark corner and cough yourself to death. We'll give you a military funeral, and your young widow a carefully folded flag.
-30-
AhHah! There WERE WMDs in Iraq -- they just didn't come from there -- the US brought them there. I guess we are now bringing them to Afghanistan too. I wonder where else?
"War is based on deception"--Sun Tzu in "The Art of War".
"Business is War", therefore business is based on deception.
"The business of America is business", therefore the business of America is deception.
Republicans are the business party, therefore Republicans live by deception.
Republicans are conservative, therefore conservatives live by deception.
Deceit requires lying, therefore conservatives are liars.
Conservatives lie for business purposes.
Conservatives would kill us all for money.
EZ!
Great summery!
Like father like son - the Toxic George's feel our pain.
This could be a breakthrough for 'common sense'.
If more Americans refused to allow any sympathy be awarded those who are killed, wounded maimed or otherwise damaged by there--voluntary-- participation in either Afghanistan or Iraq---both illegal wars of aggression----whether they be Military or Mercenary or Civilian contractors; then those who would consider such participation in the future----might not consider it in the future---for a long time to come anyway.
But then that would be rather illogical of me to think such a thing.
Most Americans are loathe to learn from the mistakes of the past, and so they are doomed to repeat them. Their 'history' will bear that out---without doubt.
Taking into consideration the recent 'repeats of history's mistakes' and the global impact ---most of which has only begun to take effect; the Americans who 'are loathe to learn' from those mistakes, having repeated them on a scale as never before, will most likely not have much time left---in their present form anyway.
Good Luck America, the world cannot possibly tolerate you much longer.
As others mentioned, like the Vietnamese and Agent orange, the real victims are the Iraqi people who will have to live with the mess the US left behind for generations.
Will I do have some empathy for the US servicemen and women who are now suffering perhaps NEXT time they wont be so eager to sign up to kill "Sand Niggers" and will realize who the true enemy really is and that the Government of the USA and the joined at the hip contracters.
I am sure more then a few German soldiers serving in Poland in WW11 were exposed to gas and died an early death because of it.
STOP invading other countries.
To ezeflyer on this thread---
While I appreciate your sentiments, some of your propositions are really weak:
* ""Business is War", therefore business is based on deception."
Where did this quote come from? Certainly not Sun Tzu. "Business," to the contrary, may be viewed as the avoidance of War.
* "Republicans are conservative, therefore conservatives live by deception.
Deceit requires lying, therefore conservatives are liars."
Who says "Republicans are conservative"? With the possible exception of Gerald Ford's unelected interregnum, the last Republican "conservative" President was Eisenhower. Ike wanted to end the (undeclared) Korean War, and he did. Nixon chafed at having been Ike's VP and sought to transcend his evident place in history. He pretended to seek peace in Viet Nam, and he destroyed the international Bretton-Woods (New Hampshire) metal-basis for The Dollar, inevitably leading to our current global financial crisis.
Nor can the vast military buildup of Reagan be considered "conservative." In addition he and his Fed Chief Paul Volcker jacked up interest rates in the early 80s to slow down the rampant war-inflation, causing massive unemployment as they provided tax breaks to the rich and invoked "trickle-down economics." (This was the "Greatest Recession" since the Great Depression.) They also slashed the Social Safety Net and set up Latin American death squads to murder and assassinate indigenous grass roots movements seeking such as Land Reform. This contributed to major population shifts with refugees fleeing to this country where they were exploited, and still are, for cheap labor.
The short run of Bush I is too complex to entertain here, but it led to Bush II, who also felt the cold shadow of the father figure and was determined to transcend his father's "failed presidency" by invading Iraq and overthrowing and then arranging the execution of Saddam ("He tried to kill my Daddy") under what some of us back knew to be totally false pretenses. Major war crimes. Bush II also totally plundered the U.S. Treasury, destroyed the economy, gave trillions in tax breaks to the very rich at the expense of The Commonweal, did nothing to regulate the excesses of Wall Street, and appointed the successor to the Fed's Greenspan, Bernanke, who did nothing to slow down the Housing Bubble, but instead, together with Bush II's Treasury Secretary, Paulson, gave away or "lent" trillions to the Banksters to bail out a toxic SYSTEM, while the people at the bottom of this pile of garbage---the mortgaged Middle Class or aspirants thereto---got a broomhandle up their arse.
None of this is "conservative" in any historical sense of the term. For myself, I consider myself a "radical," but I have great respect for the true conservatives in American economic and political history, who sought a consensus and a polity, and certainly did not favor Naomi Klein's "Disaster Capitalism" as we are seeing it being expressed today. We are tilting toward Fascism these days. It feeds on chaos and disaster and offers itself as the Salvation. In Classic Mode, it is the Combine of Big Government and Big Business, at the expense of everyone else. E.g., while the Nazi War Machine was feeding on caviar, their slaves were starving while building V-2 rockets.
Whew! Got that off my chest. Time to mow the goddam lawn before the next storm comes in... Hope this helps, folks.
-30-
You're thinking of the old, frugal, careful, people that were called conservative before frugality became greed and being careful became pre-emptive war.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
John Kenneth Galbraith
BTW:
Carl von Clausewitz: Business is War
"Rather than comparing [war] to art we could more accurately compare it to commerce, which is also a conflict of human interests and activities; and it is still closer to politics, which in turn may be considered as a kind of commerce on a larger scale." On War, Book I, Ch. 3
"Business is war. Arm yourself." Motoman 2-page ad in Manufacturing Engineering, August 1994.
"Did Toxic Chemicals in Iraq Sicken GIs?" Yes! What was hexavalent chromium doing in the area of an Iraqi water treatment plant? During the sanctions I heard about the thousands of deaths, every month, of children under 5 years of age due to contaminated water after the first gulf war. Was this chemical one of the pollutants? Why were not the Iraqi people trained and paid the same as the KBR employees to safely clean it up. There must be other places in Iraq that need experts trained on how to clean up hazardous chemicals. This nation that is rich in oil, needs to get their people living wage jobs and end the corruption of Iraqi Leaders and U.S. corporate contractors.Iraqi people are intelligent and can learn anything that KBR contractors know and because they know the language and land they probably can do it better at a reasonable cost. Get Halliburton KBR and subsidiaries out of Iraq.
EXCERPTS:
James Gentry came home with rashes, ear troubles and a shortness of breath. Later, things got much worse: He developed lung cancer.
...
Hexavalent chromium - a toxic component of sodium dichromate - can cause severe liver and kidney damage and studies have linked it to leukemia as well as bone, stomach and other cancers, according to an expert who provided a deposition for the civilian workers.
The chemical "is one of the most potent carcinogens know to man," declared Max Costa, chairman of New York University's Department of Environmental Medicine.
END OF EXCERPTS
YES, poisonous, carcinogenic chemicals and metals due to the war, given the lack of or lower presence of these elements before the war was launched in March 2003. BUT, ... also D.U.
Maybe it's these other toxic pollutants that have been causing the rather major increase of cancers and demorities among Iraqis, the children anyway, but the following investigative report by a Japanese journalist, who went to Baghdad and conducted his investigations, or some of them, in hospitals there, and found alarming increases in very bad health findings.
The journalist speaks in Japanese, but some of what he says has been translated and preseented in text (English for this video clip).
"Depleted Uranium Children Iraq" (3:34), posted by ConflictingTruth, June 26, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWJmOweKC_4
I got that via a Uruknet copy, but found the following piece with Dr Rosalie Bertell, who's an epidemiologist, PhD in biometrics, through a related video linked in the above Youtube page. There are other video clips of her at Youtube on other topics, certainly chemtrails, but I believe also metals that have been polluting, poisoning the natural world due to the criminal use and spread of these by governments and, "of course", corporations.
"The EFFECTS of DEPLETED URANIUM in IRAQ Trailer" (2:14), posted March 14, 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQoXEOuJnqA
Quote: "In five billion years, our sun will explode into a white dwarf, according to NASA projections. The half-life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. This means ...".
"Part 1 The EFFECTS of DEPLETED URANIUM in IRAQ movie" (7:04), posted April 12, 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSCCsUV7PqQ
"Part 2 The EFFECTS ..." (7:05),
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9MNQDQXkzs
The next video is not about D.U., but I think it contains a little on toxic pollution caused in and due to wars of today, and what she says and explains is something everyone serious and honest should want to know about. What she says in the following clip is ... what? Stunning, and scary, or very scary, as well as something to certainly hope that she's definitely mistaken about. Is she mistaken though? Awfully scary is reality if the accurate answer to that question is 'no', and without be a physicist or geo-physicist ..., I have some college studies in physics, chemistry, ... and think that it may be scientifically possible that technlogy(ies) can be used as she describes (in this following video).
She literally speaks of the things mentioned or listed in the second quoted paragraph from the text for the latter video clip, which I'll quote.
"Rosalie Bertell MAKE IT VISIBLE II earthquake?" (10:00), posted March 26, 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEFJGDurfa4
QUOTE:
Dr. Rosalie Bertell maintains the nuclear industry and military policy makers are the world's main polluters.
Dr. Bertell explores here possible explanations for recent earthquake anomalies: a gamma ray/gravity wave from space? Or HAARP-induce deep earth tomography or direct wave weapon, accident or purposeful? Sr. Rosalie concludes: We can do enough damage to our world that it doesnt survive. But it doesnt seem to enter their heads that the Earth is alive.
END QUOTE
Any readers not familiar with the U.S. government's HAARP antenna array in Alaska and the uses this system of antennas can be put to can certainly find articles about this at www.globalresearch.ca, f.e., to learn more about it than what Dr Bertell says in the above video clip.
Anyway, what U.S. troops and Iraqis will suffer from, for those not yet suffering from breathing in and/or drinking toxicities caused by this war and possibly also Gulf War I, these conditions may be caused by chemicals and metals, as well as D.U. Leuren Moret, Doug Rokke, plenty of others, and now I learn of Dr Bertell, having just learned of her yesterday; all of these people say that D.U. is certainly radiological, enough to poison and cause serious environmental and health impacts.
I've read that the D.U. is the key reason for the Canadian government, under PM Jean Chretien, not sending troops to the present war on Iraq; although if that's true, then why would the government have thought that it would be okay to send troops to Afghanistan, since if the U.S. was going to use D.U. in Iraq, then it surely also would in Afghanistan. Maybe he thought the U.S. wouldn't use any more, that the troops would only be at risk of D.U. poisoning from the amount used in Gulf War I. In any case, the source for this reason for not sending troops in 2003 to Iraq normally is a respectable individual; just that I forget precisely who it is, only recalling that the person behind the claim made it credible. Also, Cdn troops are known, to the Cdn government and some Cdns, to be D.U.-poisoned from the 1999 war on Kosovo, or maybe more than that during all of their time in the Balkans.
this article, while somewhat informative, doesn't really get to the point. it's one of those things you read and then feel like ripping someone a new asshole.
let's start with evan bayh and his words of wisdom and his questions of ignorance:
"How should we treat exposure to potentially hazardous chemicals as a threat to our soldiers? How seriously should that threat be taken? What is the role of private contractors? What about the potential conflict between their profit motives and taking all steps necessary to protect our soldiers?"
"This case," says the Indiana Democrat, "has brought to light the need for systemic reform."
you're all smoke, evan. smoke is directly related to hot air. you are no more concerned about hazardous chemicals threatening soldiers than you are concerned about hazardous chemicals threatening the native and indigenous peoples of iraq. or afghanistan. or pakistan. or any other country that the united states - the country you represent at the expense of my tax dollars - has its greedy little paws in.
"systemic reform" can only happen when our election process is purified, cleansed, and disinfected of you sorry sonofabitches and then rebuilt from the ground up.
once again, until heads roll, literally, nothing will change.
now let's get on to you soldiers and guardsmen who bought the lie. live it. and in some instances, die by it. or get a job as a pharmaceutical rep upon your return to the amber fields of grain and the purple mountains' majesty.
america, your time is just about up. and due, in no small part, to the rockets red glare.
ezeflyer,
I agree with both posts, albeit am not sure how what JK Galbraith said and which you quoted or paraphrased fits in with this CD page, with the article, but maybe you're replying to one of the reader posts.
As for business being war, it definitely is, and we have no reason to not realise that this is the truth about the wars of the U.S. today. Like former USMC Major General Smedley Butler wrote, "War [is] a Racket", and this definitely holds true with today's wars of the U.S. The wars on Iraq, Afghanistan, and covert or certainly more covert in African countries, are all about economics; as also holds true about the U.S. vis-a-vis Latin and Central American countries, and Cuba, Haiti, etcetera.
The U.S. military and CIA, the ops branch of the CIA, that is, work for Big Business; [not] for The People of the USA or The Peoples of any other countries. Given Big Business basically is the boss of the military and CIA ops branch, and uses so-called "think" tanks to try to influence U.S. foreign policy (and also national policy), war is business and business is war for Big Business; Big Oil, Big MIC, Big Pharma., ... Big Finance or Financial Industry.
Big Business being war doesn't always make use of military warfare or CIA ops; sometimes it's tough, dog-eat-dog, rather ruthless, but still without military and CIA ops, market competition. Some cases involve stealing of trade secrets and surely are other dirty practices; all without use of military and CIA ops, that sort of "stuff".
Even the board game of Monopoly can be considered a soft form of war, esp. when players take the game very seriously. Chess is a more obvious example of war-like board games: one "kingdom" against another, while each tries to conquer the adversary or opponent. These games don't feed the psyche with desire for real war, but they're war in likeness; more evident with chess, but I think it's still present with Monopoly.
One concrete example of Big Business conducting war for business and without the use of military and CIA-like ops is Big Oil working with Big Auto. to keep cars guzzling major volumes of fuel when they could have converted to very fuel-efficient cars in the 1960's, if not earlier. Back in the 1960's, it was definitely possible and easy to make cars so that they'd provide 60-65 mpg, and Ford had tried this with one line or model, but called back all of the cars within either 6 or 12 months and removed the efficiency tech. or modification; and patents for very efficient vehicles were buried because of Big Business and the U.S. government criminally partnering.
I doubt that governments can be left out of the "equation", because if governments were governed in intelligent and ethical, moral terms, then Big Business couldn't get away with all of these methods of warring on humanity. But they don't always need to resort to the military and CIA-like ops, as John Perkins, author of "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" and, from what I vaguely recall, a more recent book on the same theme or similar, wrote about.
Using economic hit men is business warfare against peoples and their governments, but doesn't involve the military and CIA-like ops.
Even small businesses commit war when they, f.e., price-gouge. The organic food industry has some guilty parties, for many enough have definitely exploited or tried to exploit consumers by demanding much higher prices than are really justifiable.
Humanity is being warred upon or against in many ways, and there are very few ways in which we aren't being warred against. Meanwhile, many people don't see this ... BIG PICTURE of reality; broad reality, one that is replete with injustices, while consistaing of relatively few cases of justice. Justice is evidently known mostly on an individual basis; not a broad one, far from all-encompassing. And the individual cases probably are often short-lived.
Even the UN wars on innocent people. We can see this very sadly, but clearly in Haiti today, f.e. The UN "peacekeeping" force there, consisting, apparently anyway, mostly or else entirely of Brazilian soldiers or mercenaries wearing blue helmets and military uniforms, just shot into the funeral procession for Father Gerard Jean-Juste over the past week; and these "peacekeepers" have killed Haitians of the poverty class plenty of times since Feb. 29, 2004, while also standing by, so aiding and abetting, brutal, sadistic crimes by the extreme criminals the U.S., Canada, France and the UN "peacekeepers" put into police power there.
That's also about "business"; certainly cheap labor for manufacturers of the USA, Canada, and possibly other NATO countries, like Britain and France, perhaps.
"War [is] a Racket" and "Rackets [are] Wars", even if no one has yet written a book by the latter title; and Big Business is Big Racket, often, if not usually, and that's if it's not always.
Hi Mike. Possibly business (and war) began with the invention of money. Prior to that, barter and trade limited the amount of possessions anyone could hoard. Like so many other modern conveniences have, the convenience of hoarded money as a representation of the value of objects has probably led to society's greatest problems of which one of the greatest is war.
After having finished reading the article, it seems to me that not only should the soldiers and other victims for the same reasons be allowed to sue and big time, there should be some "chiefs" at KBR and Halliburton investigated and put on trial for their extreme criminality, including murder. The article states KBR belonged to Halliburton in 2003, so the latter corporation shouldn't get off the hook today because of these crimes towards the soldiers and other victims who worked in this and possibly other highly toxic environments in Iraq.
Trials, including for murder! The Guards soldiers who have developed cancer, deadly kinds, perhaps are not all dead yet, but those who are were, imo, murdered by the criminally responsible people at KBR and Halliburton.
After all, they went there in fully protective chemical suits in May 2003, and this isn't the only proof found in this one article, alone.
If I'm off-base about this, then I misunderstood something in what the article says, but am pretty sure to have understood it well enough.
The chemical was used for water pipes serving the oil field so that they don't corrode. Not for drinking!
They were sitting on bags of the stuff! How come the weapons inspectors didn't identify it and pass it on as hazardous? I'll tell you why, LOW PRIORITY.
---------
I think about the fight for single payer health coverage. The taxpayer is paying for soldiers made sick or wounded at a tremendous long term cost!
Obama whines about single payer costing too much and I have to laugh. Seems the new economy sees that as a jobs opportunity.
WAR IS BIG BUSINESS!
"KBR, however, says studies show only that industrial workers exposed to the chemical for more than two years have an increased risk of cancer - and in this case, soldiers were at the plant just days or months."
There's FAR more that matters than mere duration of exposure. Dosage for example. Temperature is another. A short high dosage at a high temperature could have as damaging an effect as a long low dosage at a lower temperature.
KBR is OBVIOUSLY just grasping at straws. If the lawyers for these soldiers let them get away with it, they are most likely traitors.