Cancer rise in Fallujah

[Travis]

Even if some was used....what of it? War is hell. We all know that.

 

[The Fool]

If you're going to make an argument from authority, don't you think the quality of your authority is relevant?

Its relevant. If the Authority is genuinely an authority then its no fallacy. The name of the fallacy should really be "Argument from invalid authority".

 

[The Fool]

Even if some was used....what of it? War is hell. We all know that.

ok, so what if warcrimes were committed? war is hell eh?

damn handy that "war is hell" statement.

My understanding is iraq is now a "goodie" so if we have messed up a city by leaving behind toxic carcinogens do you think we should bear some responsibility for a cleanup...or reparations?

damn handy that "war is hell" statement.

 

[JihadJane]

Good point: What was the DU intake of the people of Fallujah, FireGarden? Captain.Sassy? Anyone?

Any DU in Fallujah, anywhere? Anywhere at all?

The US military knows, presumably, what the DU input was into Fallujah, anywhere, anywhere at all.

 

[theprestige]

The US military knows, presumably, what the DU input was into Fallujah, anywhere, anywhere at all.

And you don't. Which automatically, entirely invalidates any argument from DU you (or FireGarden, or Captain.Sassy) care to make, because you don't know, and you have no evidence.

 

[Captain.Sassy]

The prestige;

There are a few arguments going on in this thread.



One argument is about whether or not Fallujah is having some baby problems, and whether or not these baby problems were around before the fighting in Fallujah in 2004.

Another argument is about how reasonable it is to assume that the US used DU munitions in Fallujah.

Another argument is about whether or not DU is safe or if it *could* potentially account for what's been seen in Fallujah.

I don't think anybody has definitively stated that DU is the cause of the Fallujah baby problems. Some of us (such as myself) think that this is a reasonable hypothesis, other's don't.

I hope this helps,

Your pal,

Captain.Sassy

 

[Mycroft]

ok, so what if warcrimes were committed? war is hell eh?

damn handy that "war is hell" statement.

What war-crimes are you alleging were committed?

My understanding is iraq is now a "goodie" so if we have messed up a city by leaving behind toxic carcinogens do you think we should bear some responsibility for a cleanup...or reparations?

I think it's reasonable to consider the impact on the health of the local population of that which the munitions were used to clean up.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I don't think anybody has definitively stated that DU is the cause of the Fallujah baby problems. Some of us (such as myself) think that this is a reasonable hypothesis, other's don't.

I hope this helps,

Your pal,

Captain.Sassy

With respect, your opinion on this issue is far more reasonable than some of the rabid reflexive America-bashers who usually vent their ignorance in these threads.

 

[theprestige]

The prestige;

There are a few arguments going on in this thread.



One argument is about whether or not Fallujah is having some baby problems, and whether or not these baby problems were around before the fighting in Fallujah in 2004.

Another argument is about how reasonable it is to assume that the US used DU munitions in Fallujah.

Another argument is about whether or not DU is safe or if it *could* potentially account for what's been seen in Fallujah.

I don't think anybody has definitively stated that DU is the cause of the Fallujah baby problems. Some of us (such as myself) think that this is a reasonable hypothesis, other's don't.

I hope this helps,

Your pal,

Captain.Sassy

Thank you for the feedback. However, you are actually listing four arguments in this thread: the fourth is whether or not your hypothesis, "that DU is the cause of the Fallujah baby problems", is actually reasonable.

My claim is that it is not a reasonable hypothesis, precisely because you have not yet resolved any of the three other disputes you mentioned.

If you don't yet know whether or not there really were baby problems of the kind alleged; and you don't yet know if DU really was used in the amount necessary to cause those problems; and you don't even know what the necessary amount is; then on what basis can you possibly form a reasonable hypothesis that DU has anything at all to do anything at all?

 

[Captain.Sassy]

omfg

I wrote "other's"



I'm so embarassed.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

omfg

I wrote "other's"



I'm so embarassed.

Spell check a few of my posts some time.

I stopped being embarrassed a long time ago.

 

[Travis]

ok, so what if warcrimes were committed? war is hell eh?

So destroying a tank in a battle is a "warcrime?" Because we have yet to establish any use of DU against civilians in Fallujah.

My understanding is iraq is now a "goodie" so if we have messed up a city by leaving behind toxic carcinogens do you think we should bear some responsibility for a cleanup...or reparations?

Sure. But do you think that the insurgents who instigated the battle in the city are in any way also culpable for the possible effects of the subsequent battle?

 

[The Fool]

So destroying a tank in a battle is a "warcrime?"

did anyone say that? No...I was just wondering what sort of things "war is hell" actually covers

Because we have yet to establish any use of DU against civilians in Fallujah.

I think the question is if the place is contaminated rather than what the specific target was.

Sure. But do you think that the insurgents who instigated the battle in the city are in any way also culpable for the possible effects of the subsequent battle?

variation on the "war is hell" principle? But nice to see you agree that if DU is found to be contaminating Fallujah that you support the principle that the people who put it there have an obligation to do something about it. I look forward to your support if and when it gets to that point.

 

[The Fool]

What war-crimes are you alleging were committed?

actually no. Thats why I said "so what if" did you miss those words?

I think it's reasonable to consider the impact on the health of the local population of that which the munitions were used to clean up.

ok thats nice but its not an answer to the question I was asking is it.

to clarify...here is the question again.

My understanding is iraq is now a "goodie" so if we have messed up a city by leaving behind toxic carcinogens do you think we should bear some responsibility for a cleanup...or reparations?

its a fairly straightforward question. Are you game?

 

[WildCat]

My understanding is iraq is now a "goodie" so if we have messed up a city by leaving behind toxic carcinogens do you think we should bear some responsibility for a cleanup...or reparations?

My understanding is no one has any evidence at all that we left anything carcinogenic behind in Fallujah.

Do you have any The Fool?

 

[Travis]

variation on the "war is hell" principle? But nice to see you agree that if DU is found to be contaminating Fallujah that you support the principle that the people who put it there have an obligation to do something about it. I look forward to your support if and when it gets to that point.

And if enough regular bullets are expended that lead poisoning of the locals becomes a problem I would expect remediation of that problem too. But, strangely, no one ever makes a huge political stink about the lead problem only about DU which, as science seems to indicate, is no more dangerous than the much more numerous lead.

 

[The Fool]

My understanding is no one has any evidence at all that we left anything carcinogenic behind in Fallujah.

Do you have any The Fool?

Just the circumstantial evidence that what the medical people are seeing is consistant with the proposition...

but I have no doubt that all will come out in time. The US government may decide to publish the figures on DU use in falluja before wikileaks releases it


anyway...are you game for the question? Travis was brave enough...Mycroft not so much. How about you?

My understanding is iraq is now a "goodie" so if we have messed up a city by leaving behind toxic carcinogens do you think we should bear some responsibility for a cleanup...or reparations?

 

[theprestige]

Just the circumstantial evidence that what the medical people are seeing is consistant with the proposition...

The circumstantial evidence is consistent with propositions ranging from a poorly-conducted study (actually itself a number of different propositions), to Al-Qaeda propaganda, to increased smoking, to contaminated [by mundane sources] water supplies, to high levels of exposure to DU.

Please let us know when you have even the tiniest clue about which of these many propositions to rule out.

but I have no doubt that all will come out in time. The US government may decide to publish the figures on DU use in falluja before wikileaks releases it

Are you hoping that Wikileaks is also going to release an independent high quality study verifying the results of the first one? Are you hoping Wikileaks is also going to release information indicating exactly how much DU exposure is necessary to cause the effects shown in the study, and show that the DU used in Fallujah meets this requirement?

Because that's what you'd need, in order for your proposition to be valid.

anyway...are you game for the question? Travis was brave enough...Mycroft not so much. How about you?

My understanding is iraq is now a "goodie" so if we have messed up a city by leaving behind toxic carcinogens do you think we should bear some responsibility for a cleanup...or reparations?

The only reason I haven't answered the question is becasuse I have no idea what you mean by "goodie".

 

[The Fool]

The circumstantial evidence is consistent with propositions ranging from a poorly-conducted study (actually itself a number of different propositions), to Al-Qaeda propaganda, to increased smoking, to contaminated [by mundane sources] water supplies, to high levels of exposure to DU.

Please let us know when you have even the tiniest clue about which of these many propositions to rule out.

ok...its a deal.

Are you hoping that Wikileaks is also going to release an independent high quality study verifying the results of the first one? Are you hoping Wikileaks is also going to release information indicating exactly how much DU exposure is necessary to cause the effects shown in the study, and show that the DU used in Fallujah meets this requirement?

well, it may cause some of the deniers to move a step further....past "no DU there" maybe? They could move on to DU is not harmfull....





[/quote]
The only reason I haven't answered the question is becasuse I have no idea what you mean by "goodie".[/QUOTE]

oh come on....never heard of the term? OK here is some clarification.

wears a white hat...force for good not evil....can call their enemy terrorists...get to be photographed standing next to the POTUS.....

 

[theprestige]

oh come on....never heard of the term? OK here is some clarification.

wears a white hat...force for good not evil....can call their enemy terrorists...get to be photographed standing next to the POTUS.....

I think the word you're looking for is "good guy", or "friend" or "ally". Colloquially, "goodie" in English means a small treat, such as a piece of candy or an amusing trinket; a chocolate bar in a Christmas stocking, for example (on the low end), or an iPod in a gift bag at a celebrity publicity event (on the high end).

In my opinion, reconstruction and reparations are always a moral obligation of the aggressor, regardless of the righteousness of the war, and whether or not the vanquished enemy ever becomes a friend of the victor.

But how does answering this question get us any closer to validating the study, determining whether or not DU was used in Fallujah, or finding out how much DU exposure is necessary to produce the alleged effects?