Environmental Issues linked to Health Issues

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/84318_10084318.html

The environmental implications in any country usually play second fiddle to the human consequences. The environment, generally, is only important in so far as it affects human beings. So while it is all well and good to worry about the impact of war on the landscape, what it ultimately boils down to is the people. The article discusses various health problems US army service women have experienced since being on tours of duty in Iraq. The health issues include hair loss, fatigue and fever. While the symptoms could be attributed to extreme stress, as war understandably puts its combatats under emotional duress, the sheer number of US airwomen suffering from similar symptoms begs the question, does environment have something to do with it? The study does not explore the illness, which it dubs "Gulf War Syndrome" after the illness that struck many troops during the 1991 Gulf War,any further, and it would be interesting to know whether or not the syndrome affects women living in the area, or foreign aid workers, if the women living in the area have built up an immunity to whatever viral strain is causing the syndrome. The only reason to not attribute it to war stress is that thus far the syndrome has not affected male air troops.

I know we are discussing the environmental impacts, but because the environment is so obviously inextricably linked to the people, it is interesting to see what impacts the war has on people via the environment.

Destroying the Garden of Eden

The following is a link to a video report on the environment in Iraq from the United Nations Environmental Programme:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UASfxGC7ZO0

The video explains how in 1991, after the United States withdrew forces from Iraq, the Marsh Arabs of southern Iraq were forced to continue the fight against Saddam Hussein on their own. In order to demolish these forces and their resources, Hussein damned and drained the marshes in the South, which were once called “the Garden of Eden” and as a result, driving the Marsh Arabs into internal exile. After the second U.S. invasion in Iraq and once Sadddam Hussein’s regime fell, the southern Iraqis immediately destroyed the dams and returned the marshes to these areas. Unfortunately, the water has been greatly affected. For example, Stalinization levels have changed and now, the water is not safe to drink directly from its source. In response, six water treatment plants have been implemented to purify the water—the water is once again available and useable, but it took great pains and pricy reforms to bring the marshes back.

I found this video interesting because it specifically focuses on war tactics that actually exploit environmental degradation, as opposed to simply the negative impacts that the environment experiences due to warfare. This environmental warfare appears much more intentional and deliberate, but I am forced to question, if you can in fact compare the two, whether it is worse than the United State’s influence on the Iraqi environment. American forces are not actively destroying river systems to devastate Iraqi livelihoods, but they are, nevertheless, waging a war that still has its own environmental consequences. The United States is also extremely invested in the production of oil, which is a large factor in environmental degradation. Can exploitation of a land and its resources for the United State’s own interests be compared to deliberate environmental warfare?

Depleted Uranium in US Weapons

Depleted uranium is used in armor plating, radiation shielding, ballast in missiles and aircraft counterweights. Soldiers are advised to be away from the impact of vehicles containing or hit by depleted uranium to prevent heavy metal poisoning. This isn't always possible for troops, and the Iraqi people who live in continuous combat have even more difficulty escaping the deleterious effects of depleted uranium on the battlefield. This is the country where they live after all. What kind of effects does the use of DU have exposed Iraqis? The concerns about radiation are not as troubling as depleted uranium being a potentially poisonous heavy metal. Depleted uranium dust and shrapnel exposure have been cited as the source of birth abnormalities leukemia by returning US soldiers. It is unclear if the dramatically increased incidence of cancer in Basra, where the water supply was contaminated by depleted uranium, can be completely attributed to DU. But this does spell concerns about the use of depleted uranium ammunition. While the US has resisted attempts to ban the use of depleted uranium, studies still point to the tenfold increase in childhood cancer as signs that the use of depleted uranium for tactical reasons needs to be reexamined.

SlideShow

Here is a great slideshow about the First Gulf War and about terrorism and the possibilities for the Second Gulf War and its environmental impacts. I really wanted to lay claim to this piece of media so my analysis and thoughts will follow when I come back from work later tonight

Tigris River

this article talks a little bit about the pollution of the Tigris due to the impacts of the US occupation of Iraq. The Euphrates-Tigris river valley is considered by many the birth of civilization, and the access to a flowing fresh river is one of the reasons why. Today, however, the Tigris is anything but mighty or flowing. It has been dammed at its source in Turkey to stop flooding, but in many parts, the river doesn't flow, but is staganat, and even dries up. The lack of flow also incrases the salt concentration in the water, making it unusable for drinking and unlivable for much of the ecosystem.

More pertinent to the war, before 2003, the river, had an ample and stable fish population. Pollution from war chemicals as well as dead bodies (mostly torture victims) thrown into the river have contributed to its contamination. Near Baghdad, fishermen have reported that the fish are scarce, but that they also cannot even try to fish there because it separates the city from US controlled Green Zone, which includes soldiers patrolling the waters. During the day, they make fishermen leave, and at night, fishermen risk being mistaken for "insurgents planting bombs."


Here is the link: http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/consequences/2006/1113river.htm

Iraq War's Environmental Impact

I found this interesting article from just before the Iraq War, in January 2003 in "THE GUARDIAN". (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/jan/19/iraq5)It talked about the possible effects of a new Iraq war, if it happened...which it did (obviously).
It talked about the effect that the First Gulf War had on the environment but also on civilians and it makes some assumptions about the latest war.

Another article was from 2005, from BBC, talking about the impact that the war had on the environment of Iraq. It mentions some of the things from the previous article and it projects that costs for decontamination of Iraq would be around $40 million.
This is very interesting, since I found a bunch of random facts about the war on this site where it states how much pollution the war has caused so far (in carbon emissions) and how much money has been poured into it.

It is really amazing and truly fascinating to think that the U.S. would rather waste so much money by attacking a nation and then trying to rebuild it, instead of providing that money for stopping the current global warming trends, or spending more money on the war in Iraq than the whole world spends in order to stop global warming. I'm just overwhelmed by the information... I am not sure how accurate they are, or how accurate they can even be, but still.... even if it's somewhere near that, it's ridiculous.

article from NY Times

This is completely irrelevant to this week's topic but I thought it was pretty interesting. you may have to sign up to be a member of NY Times to read the whole article but it is free.


Link