The Syndicate of Chemists in Lebanon (SCL) warned yesterday that the extent of destruction and the depth of damage to buildings and the ground confirms the use of internationally banned bombs containing depleted uranium by Israeli forces, warning of the risk of contracting many diseases as a result of inhaling the dust caused by the bombing.
It said in a “very important warning” that it condemns “the barbaric aggression against civilians in Lebanon and the massacres being committed against the Lebanese people,” noting that the warning aims “to raise awareness about the effects of inhaling the dust from Israeli bombings in several Lebanese areas.”
“The extent of destruction and the penetration of buildings and ground by dozens of metres is evidence of the use of bombs containing depleted uranium, which has tremendous penetrating power,” it added.
The SCL stressed that “the use of such types of internationally banned weapons, especially in densely populated Beirut, leads to massive destruction, and their dust causes many diseases, especially when inhaled.”
The SCL called on “the international community to stop the aggression against Lebanon, and to stop the use of internationally banned bombs.”
It also called on the Lebanese state to file a lawsuit with the UN Security Council “against the violations taking place on Lebanese soil and the attempted mass killings of innocent civilians.”
Citizens, it added, should not “approach the bombed areas within a radius of more than two kilometres,” while those forced to approach these areas must “wear protective clothing”.
The SCL confirmed that it “closely monitors the enemy’s use of internationally banned weapons.”
The most prominent use of these anti-fortification bombs was during the assassination of Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah on 27 September, in addition to attempts to kill his successor, Hashem Safieddine.
Israel has killed 1,204 people in Lebanon since it launched its most vicious attack on the country in nearly 20 years on 23 September. More than 1.2 million have been displaced.
Officially, it would be for bunker busting to penetrate deeper into the ground and fortified structures. Unofficially, this is an easy way to make a "mild" dirty bomb. There's nothing this does that tungsten alloys can't, although tungsten dust from KE penetrators will also poison you.
That's not exactly true, tungsten is not self sharpening on impact, while DU is, which allows for greater penetration. That's not even considering the pyrophoric/incendiary properties of DU, in which the DU material ignites on contact with the air in the interior of a target after penetrating the armour, due to the high temperature, leading to secondary explosions and the ignition of anyone or anything inside. There is a reason Russia and China have also developed penetrator rounds using DU. This stuff needs to be banned in weaponry before every large military on the planet gets their hands on it. Though every time a ban or investigation is proposed, the USA, France and the UK vote against it, while Russia and China are absent or abstain from voting on the issue, because these countries are the primary manufacturers of DU penetrator weapons. They do not want to give up their perceived military advantages.
That's true, but overrated; for the actual applications of DU and Tungsten, which is penetrating armour, tungsten is not inferior by much.
DU doesn't self sharpen in the way people think it does, it just kind of mushrooms less, though it might help penetration in very poorly normalized impacts. And the fact that it ignites is inconsequential in Soviet style autoloaded tanks anyways, since if you hit the carousel you explode instantly. Might be a bit more useful vs western tanks with the bustle ammo ig?
The primary advantage of DU is if you have a nuclear program you get it for much much cheaper than tungsten.
Just the fact that tungsten is slightly inferior is enough for militaries in countries with a nuclear programme to pursue DU weapons. Militaries are looking for any possible advantage, no matter how small, which is likely why China, Russia and Pakistan have also made DU weaponry.
For sure, but usually its more of an economic decision, or in the case of isntreal a decision to cause the most damage to civilians.