Dr. Busby has been the most visible scientist behind these studies, and for that reason a lot of criticism has been directed at him. He is considered by many to be a "controversial" figure, which only means that his research has often challenged official government positions.
His studies on Fallujah have similarly earned the title of "controversial". Many journals were afraid to publish his second study because of " pressure " from "outside people". "Outside people" means types like Roger Helbig "-a retired Lieutenant Colonel in the US Air Force who has a history of harassing and cyber-bullying anyone who takes a critical stance against uranium weapons"-and groups with similar agendas.
Some have criticized the methodology of this study, and they have used this as an excuse to dismiss the entire issue. But as other experts have noted "[t]he role of "quick and dirty' studies like this one, conducted under difficult conditions, is not to inform policy, but rather to generate hypotheses about important questions when resources are not yet available and other research methods are not possible."
Busby is not the only researcher who takes "controversial" positions. His findings are complimented by the work of Dr. Dai Williams, an independent weapons researcher. Williams has been investigating what he calls " third-generation uranium weapons ". He has found patents for weapon systems that could use undepleted uranium or slightly enriched uranium interchangeably with tungsten, either as a dense metal or as a reactive metal.
Undepleted and slightly enriched uranium have also been found on other battle fields (Afghanistan and Lebanon). These findings lead researchers like Dr. Williams to believe that there is a new generation of weapons being used, possibly by the American and Israeli militaries, that could have serious indiscriminate health effects on the populations living near bombing targets.
Many people have dismissed these hypotheses as speculative, and with that they dismiss the research, the issue, and the suffering of the people on the ground. What these naysayers fail to understand is that hypotheses are always speculative to a degree"-they are informed, but they are claims meant to be verified or falsified. This is the nature of the scientific method. First you observe some phenomena in the world; then you come up with a hypothesis to explain that phenomena. Then you conduct an experiment to test your hypothesis.
Many of these naysayers have not responded to these studies by calling for more research and investigation to test the hypotheses of Dr. Busby or Dr. Williams. Rather, they dismiss these hypotheses because they don't like their moral and political implications. In doing so, they show a great deal of antipathy for the scientific method and the pursuit of truth. But more importantly, they also dismiss the suffering of the people of Fallujah, and all people affected by these issues.
One weapon system which may use uranium, in some form or another, is the SMAW NE (Shoulder-fired Multi-purpose Assault Weapon - Novel Explosive). My former unit battle tested this weapon for the first time in Fallujah during Operation Phantom Fury in 2004. It is not my intention to irresponsibly lay blame on the US military. There is a potential connection with this weapons system and the health crisis in Fallujah. This connection needs to be investigated.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
6
6
5
