US Army dumped 64 million lbs of chemical weapons in ocean

Politics International Politics
1

That happened from the end of WWII until it was stopped in 1970. Radioactive waste was also dumped in a similar manner.

[quote]Federal lawmakers are demanding the Army reveal everything it knows about where it dumped chemical weapons into the world’s oceans, as well as provide proof the munitions won’t leak and cause an environmental catastrophe.

…

The newspaper found that the Army dumped at least 64 million pounds of chemical weapons, mostly mustard and nerve gas, from World War II until 1970 - and more than that off 16 other countries. The weapons likely are still active and slowly corroding in the salt water.

…

The Army says it doesn’t know the locations of almost half the dump zones that it created off the United States after World War II. Records are vague or missing or were destroyed.

…

When released, nerve gas lasts about six weeks in the ocean, killing every organism that it touches. Mustard gas forms a concentrated gel that survives at least five years in salt water, rolling around on the ocean floor.[/quote]

House to probe army’s chemical dumping

God, and this is just the US! God knows how much of that kind of stuff China and Russia have dumped, among others… There are other more detailed articles about the dumping at this website, but you need to register (free) and log-in to read them:

Daily Press US Military Chemical Dumping Stories

2

That’s gonna put the wind up some of those giant squid. I never liked them anyhows.

3

[quote]The weapons likely are still active and slowly corroding in the salt water.
[/quote]
Mustard gas remains active for five years, the story says, so this means the army was dumping it just a few years ago? While nerve gas remains active for 16 weeks, so the army is probably still dumping it right now?

But it says it was stopped in the 1970s. So there’s lots of deactivated mustard and nerve gas at the bottom of the sea. So what?

They want the army to provide details of what probably every country with old weapons and a coast have been doing half-a-century ago? I suppose these people have to find SOME way of making a living, but couldn’t they focus on something a bit more current?

Bunch of scaremongering pillocks.

4

Can we get some curry bombs dumped in around here?

I’ve taken a recent liking to various curry dishes and would like to experiment with some curry seafood recipes.

5

So they’re gonna get them for littering?

Where in which ocean was the stuff dumped?

6

[quote=“TainanCowboy”]Can we get some curry bombs dumped in around here?

I’ve taken a recent liking to various curry dishes and would like to experiment with some curry seafood recipes.[/quote]
Vindaloo cluster bombs?

7

Ha ha, environmental contamination. That is a funny one. Ha ha ha. :roflmao:

Of course it’s no surprise to see our most faithful “America Can Do No Wrong” poster making light of the issue. But at least a couple of the other posters have previously expressed their appreciation for the great outdoors, and for exploring the ocean. So I am truly baffled by why they take it so lightly.

Oh well, I think it sucks. Of course the government has created vast quantities of environmental contamination, on the land, in the sea, and into the atmosphere. Of course they have continuously lied, misled and concealed facts from the public regarding such incidents.

Take the disastrous Rocky Flats facility, for example, where they allowed millions of gallons of toxic chemicals and nuclear contaminated waste to leach into the soil and groundwater for decades.

Or take the ongoing efforts today to dispose of the massive stockpile of chemical weapons, which is years behind schedule, in violation of international law.

[quote]The Pentagon has extended its timeline to destroy its aging chemical weapons arsenal until 2023, despite concerns by Congress and watchdog groups that the stockpiles raise the risk of an accident or theft by terrorists.

The new schedule, outlined in Pentagon documents obtained by USA TODAY, means the military won’t eliminate its stock of deadly nerve gases and skin-blistering agents until 11 years after the 2012 deadline set by the international Chemical Weapons Convention. The U.S. government had already asked for a five-year extension from an earlier 2007 deadline.

Communities near the seven sites where weapons are stockpiled have long complained about the delays. Congress echoed those concerns this year, when it called eliminating the stockpiles “a homeland security imperative” and directed the Pentagon in a defense bill to “make every effort” to destroy them by the convention deadline or “soon thereafter.” . . .[/quote]
usatoday.com/news/washington … pons_x.htm

Ha ha ha. Funny stuff.

But, I guess what goes around comes around. From today’s news:

[quote]WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As many as 75,000 people may have drunk water contaminated by dry cleaning fluid at the U.S. Marine base at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Tuesday.

The contamination lasted for 30 years until the affected wells were closed. Marines and their families drank the contaminated water during base assignments of an average of 2 years, the CDC said.

The water was polluted with tetrachloroethylene, also known as PCE, a dry cleaning solvent that has been linked with cancer, the CDC said.[/quote]

8

Of course it was stupid and destructive MT, but it also happened and stopped happening a LONG time ago. Slavery was bad too and that was also sponsored by the government.

It is too easy to judge the past with our eyes. We don’t do it now. Now we do other stupid and destructive things. Let’s focus on those.

9

[quote=“jdsmith”]Of course it was stupid and destructive MT, but it also happened and stopped happening a LONG time ago. Slavery was bad too and that was also sponsored by the government.

It is too easy to judge the past with our eyes. We don’t do it now. Now we do other stupid and destructive things. Let’s focus on those.[/quote]
Or you could always go live on another planet. As I said, why the fuck should the US be singled out for this? This is not a dirty US bastards issue, its a dirty human bastards issue. Hate the filth we cause, sure, but don’t just single out the yanks.

10

Fair call. Remember the indiscrete nuclear turds the Russkies have left smolderring in the world’s seas, for example.

Hey, they’re rich these days, so ya reckon they’ll sort some of that shit out now?

HG

11

Agreed. As the OP said. . .

But one always hopes that The World’s Only SuperPower, the Greatest Nation on Earth, The World’s Leading Economy, the United God Blessed States of America, can do better. Better when it comes to international relations, better when it comes to human rights, and better when it comes to the environment. In general it does fairly well, but it’s not unreasonable to hold the US to a higher standard and to be disappointed when it falls short.

But in any event, I didn’t even realize this was a US bashing thread, if that’s what it is. My disappointment was not with the US so much as with the idea of tons of chemical weapons being dumped in the sea, which I find sad regardless of who did it.

12

[quote=“Huang Guang Chen”]Fair call. Remember the indiscrete nuclear turds the Russkies have left smolderring in the world’s seas, for example.

Hey, they’re rich these days, so ya reckon they’ll sort some of that shit out now?

HG[/quote]
Hells bells, remember 10 years ago when you didn’t need to be Jesus to walk across the Dansui River.

Harping on this old stuff is stupid. Documenting it is a good idea, but using past stupidity to criticize present government is lame…UNLESS they are still doing the same thing. Having new Congressional hearings is waste of good money that could be spent on a war on foreign soil.

MT just said:[quote]
but it’s not unreasonable to hold the US to a higher standard and to be disappointed when it falls short. [/quote]
After WWII what would base holding the US to higher standard on? We had just obilterated 300,000 or so people.

The whole “higher standard” argument is shortbus. If you want higher standards, thank the NIxon adminstration. Apparently the dumping stopped during his reign.

13

JD, I don’t wish to argue. I’m not blaming anyone. I just don’t like the idea of the ocean, desert, space or other such places serving as dumping grounds for toxic waste.

14

I’m glad Congress has ordered this investigation. Even if the chemicals are no longer “active”, does that mean they can no longer be used as weapons against humans, or does it mean they are harmless in all environments, or what? I’d like to see an environmental impact assessment done.

15

No problem. I understand completely. :slight_smile:

16

I seriously doubt a barrel of this crap that’s been at the bottom of the sea for 40-70 years can be found, much used for anything.

17

[quote=“jdsmith”]Harping on this old stuff is stupid. Documenting it is a good idea, but using past stupidity to criticize present government is lame…UNLESS they are still doing the same thing. Having new Congressional hearings is waste of good money that could be spent on a war on foreign soil.[/quote]LOL. I like that. “Why waste good money on maybe cleaning up a mess, when we could be making one?” Oh man…

If that junk was gone, done, and finished… fine. Not a priority.
But it’s like still active, in corroding containers… a nasty mess just waiting to happen. Maybe not a high priority, but not to be ignored. Besides, if you can’t fix the bigger mess, why not turn some attention to the lesser ones?

18

A barrel? I’m pretty sure 64 million pounds of chemicals might fill more than one barrel.

Again, I really don’t think we know enough to just wave this away. Those chemicals could be harmful to the environment, or they could not be. If those barrels are starting to degrade and the chemicals are releasing into the ocean, it’s hard to imagine they would not have some kind of effect. Nitrogen-rich agricultural run-off isn’t a chemical weapon, but it has caused a lot of damage in the Gulf of Mexico because it creates large algae blankets over the ocean, blocking out the sunlight. It is at least conceivable these chemicals could be a problem.

But sitting around guessing isn’t going to do us any good. We need to get a team of specialists to conduct an environmental impact assessment and see what’s really going on. Congress is doing the right thing.

19

[quote]Mustard gas remains active for five years, the story says, so this means the army was dumping it just a few years ago? While nerve gas remains active for 16 weeks, so the army is probably still dumping it right now?

But it says it was stopped in the 1970s. So there’s lots of deactivated mustard and nerve gas at the bottom of the sea. So what?
[/quote]

Read more carefully please. The article said, “WHEN RELEASED it lasts for 5 years/6 weeks”. Obviously the Army didn’t dump the crap RAW into the see, it was in metal containers. Who knows how much of that stuff is still there waiting to kill? (Incidentally, there were recent photos of dead dolphins that had washed up off Jersey with what looked like chemical burns in one of the articles. Care to laugh that off?)

And while it did happen a while back, much like the Army’s plot to conduct terrorism IN THE US which some of you apologists were so dismissive of, ignoring this kind of utterly despicable behavior (on ANYONE’S part, but since I’m American it’s particularly pertinent to me and all Americans) is conducive to similar acts happening in the future. Utterly exposing and condemning it is one small step to making sure it is not repeated.

20

streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetch

And I say that knowing that some wierd skin disease is killing fish in the seas and that it is caused by running chemicals from pig farms. The disease causes the skin to look like it has been burned.