| Talkback | |
|
Title: | DU munitions and the press | |||
| |||||
| Name: | Mark Lincoln | | |||
| |||||
| City: | Houston | State: | Texas | | |
| I can understand how Reza Shah could argue for US use of DU bombs. There is a big controversy, largely on the left, and not entirely hysterical over the long-term effects of DU munitions. As the largest user of such weapons so far is the US, much of the press coverage is stridently anti-US. Those involved in the controversy tend to be well intentioned, but devoid of technical knowledge, and thus the reports they generate tend to confuse different types of weapons. DU is ideal for Armor Piercing rounds. When alloyed with metals such as Titanium or Molybdenum it is easy to manufacture, is strong enough to survive the initial penetration (it is within an AP shell). As the shell passes through the armor it is compressed, heated, and either liquifies or disintegrates. Upon emerging in the vehicle, it bursts into flame. Quite effective. For earth and concrete penetration other materials are far better. |
| |  |
|
 |
|
 |
