Thread by @wammezz

And toxic ghost from the past appears as DoD approvs #depleteduranium export to Ukraine: despite US overstating the case, the use of DU would only complicate conflict-pollution in #Ukraine and counters the global norm against its use 1/x
wsj.com/articles/u-s-s…

What past wars showed was that DU was not decisive. In the Gulf Wars, most tanks were destroyed with Hellfires and Maverick missiles. Tungsten rounds still are able to destroy Russian tanks, and DU was no silver bullet. 2/x wise-uranium.org/pdf/dumyths.pdf

What our @PAXforpeace research in #Iraq found was that the US was uninterested in clean-up and remediation of DU and contaminated materials, putting civilians at risk of exposure, in particular children playing on tanks and scrapmetal workers. 3/x paxforpeace.nl/wp-content/upl…

Moreover, looking the A-10 use of DU in our 2016 report with @ICBUW , most targets that were hit were non-armoured, including buildings and mounted troops, often also in populated areas. 4/x ceobs.org/wp-content/upl…

The lessons learned from DU use in #Iraq and #Syria also showed the lack of interest of clean-up out of monetary concerns and fear of accountability,@PAXforpeace learned from FOI data released by the DoD with support of @theCCR 5/x

As for #Ukraine, most tanks kills so far have not been from tank-to-tank battles, and DU is not going to give #Ukraine an advantage. Current US domestic policy to stop production of DU and look for alternative metals. cc @mgordonwsj / @glubold paxforpeace.nl/news/no-future…

In sum, adding a toxic and radioactive munition to the arsenal isn't going to help #Ukraine win, and in the long-term would only add to the mounting health concerns of civilians. #Depleteduranium is a Cold War relic which should be banned