# Ron Paul: Honest or Nuts? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 14, 2011, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-honest-or-nuts/596249 "2011-09-14T03:58:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 100
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [September 17, 2011, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-honest-or-nuts/596249/100 "2011-09-17T23:39:16Z")
> [@So Will The Sky Fall If The UN Declare Palestine a State?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-will-the-sky-fall-if-the-un-declare-palestine-a-state/595182/95): > > Frankly, I think 9/11 was a good thing and that the US deserved it. I think Barack Obama should be hunted down and shot, like Bin Laden was. And this, of course, is why sometimes it pays to read a post backwards. > [@So Will The Sky Fall If The UN Declare Palestine a State?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-will-the-sky-fall-if-the-un-declare-palestine-a-state/595182/95): > > [http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/11/30/why\_they\_hate\_us\_ii\_how\_many\_muslims\_has\_the\_us\_killed\_in\_the\_past\_30\_years](http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/11/30/why_they_hate_us_ii_how_many_muslims_has_the_us_killed_in_the_past_30_years) 1. You’re going to hang your hat on Stephen “The Zionists Are Hiding Under My Bed!” Walt’s back-of-the-envelope math that’s uncited, unsourced, and unsubstantiated? Okay… 2. Even then, the total for pre-2001 deaths among Muslim civilians is actually set at about 3800 by Walt, with roughly 300 being from the disaster that was the Vincennes Affair and 3500 coming from the global coalition that fought against Iraq’s war of aggression against another Muslim nation. The proof of Walt’s desperation is that he tries to include sanctions against Iraq in the mix which UNSCR 661 was approved by a supermajority of nations involved and only had a handful of abstentions, and even then was about protecting the region from Sadaam’s military ambitions. > [@So Will The Sky Fall If The UN Declare Palestine a State?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-will-the-sky-fall-if-the-un-declare-palestine-a-state/595182/95): > > This is not even counting Israel, which by the pro-Israeli’s own arguments is a US base and outpost in the middle east. I don’t know why you’re throwing off the idea that Israel is a proxy state of the US… that’s what the US claims it is… their number 1 ally in the middle east. At best, bombastic bluster and bullshit. Nobody who has clue 1 calls Israel a US base or a US outpost, as it is neither. One might note that you’re also using fictional “pro-Israelis’ “ arguments to bolster your bluster. You’re also egregiously abusing language to the point where you claim that saying a nation is our strongest ally means that it’s our “proxy state”. That’s an absurdity heaped high on counter-factual claims, and it evinces that your argument cannot be taken at face value. > [@So Will The Sky Fall If The UN Declare Palestine a State?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-will-the-sky-fall-if-the-un-declare-palestine-a-state/595182/95): > > Nobody has proved they used dirty bombs in Vietnam yet, but with the amount of horrific birth defects, cancer, disfigured and deformed people in Vietnam, it would be very hard to believe that there weren’t dirty bombs used. Your uncited, unsourced, non-statistical, non-medical, non-epidemiological analysis is certainly compelling. Even if we were to accept that there were mutagenic, carcinogenic compounds introduced into the environment, that’s still not proof of your original claim, which you have yet to cite or substantiate. > [@So Will The Sky Fall If The UN Declare Palestine a State?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-will-the-sky-fall-if-the-un-declare-palestine-a-state/595182/95): > > The UN are still trying to deny that they are using dirty bombs in Libya. If you cannot cleave to basic factual accuracy, then your entire argument is tainted. DU is not a “dirty bomb” any more than a close ally is a “proxy state”. You’re also wildly incorrect about the actual health risks of DU. [ > [@](#): > > • Under most circumstances, use of DU will make a negligible contribution to the overall natural background levels of uranium in the environment. Probably the greatest potential for DU exposure will follow conflict where DU munitions are used. > • A recent United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) report giving field measurements taken around selected impact sites in Kosovo (Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) indicates that contamination by DU in the environment was localized to a few tens of metres around impact sites. Contamination by DU dusts of local vegetation and water supplies was found to be extremely low. Thus, the probability of significant exposure to local populations was considered to be very low. > […] > • In a number of studies on uranium miners, an increased risk of lung cancer was demonstrated, but this has been attributed to exposure from radon decay products. Lung tissue damage is possible leading to a risk of lung cancer that increases with increasing radiation dose. However, because DU is only weakly radioactive, very large amounts of dust (on the order of grams) would have to be inhaled for the additional risk of lung cancer to be detectable in an exposed group. Risks for other radiation-induced cancers, including leukaemia, are considered to be very much lower than for lung cancer. > • Erythema (superficial inflammation of the skin) or other effects on the skin are unlikely to occur even if DU is held against the skin for long periods (weeks). > • No consistent or confirmed adverse chemical effects of uranium have been reported for the skeleton or liver. > • No reproductive or developmental effects have been reported in humans. > • Although uranium released from embedded fragments may accumulate in the central nervous system (CNS) tissue, and some animal and human studies are suggestive of effects on CNS function, it is difficult to draw firm conclusions from the few studies reported. > […] > For the general population, neither civilian nor military use of DU is likely to produce exposures to DU significantly above normal background levels of uranium. Therefore, individual exposure assessments for DU will normally not be required. Exposure assessments based on environmental measurements may, however, be needed for public information and reassurance. > […] > There are no specific means to decrease the absorption of uranium from the gastrointestinal tract or lungs. Following severe internal contamination, treatment in special hospitals consists of the slow intravenous transfusion of isotonic 1.4 % sodium bicarbonate to increase excretion of uranium. DU levels in the human, however, are not expected to reach a value that would justify intravenous treatment any more than dialysis. ]([http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/](http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/)) --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ron-paul-honest-or-nuts/596249)._