War heroes run in my family. We don’t have any purple hearts displayed, no medal of honor and no photos of my father or grandfather shaking hands with President Nixon or General MacArthur.

Their bravery almost persuaded me to join the Air Force in high school. Back then I was told the Air Force had the best track record of promoting and treating women equally — harrumph! How times have changed…
Part of me wanted to join for heroic glory. Part of me wanted money for college. All of me wanted to make the veterans in my family proud.
As a military brat, I’m inclined to support the current war heroes risking their lives for the next generation. And I believe most of my peers, opinions of the Bush administration and the war aside, share the same moral support.
But I wonder if the American government feels the same.
A lot of lip service has been given to the troops overseas, but behind the smoke and mirrors came a $25 billion cut last week from the Veterans Association’s budget allocation. They also slapped a $250 annual fee on every veteran who needs to see a doctor — even those who are homeless. These benefits, which affect the war heroes in my family, include an ever-elusive health care package.
I’d say shelling out money for a cavity filling or chiropractic visit is a small price for the government to pay for the services of our soldiers during the past few decades of conflicts. But while our soldiers are in the field dodging bullets and suicide bombers, we’re putting an even greater threat on their life with the military’s insistence on using depleted uranium shell munitions.
DU is a waste product from nuclear reactors that is used to coat weapons used for piercing heavy armor. When they explode, the coated shells release a fine dust that poses an extreme health hazard if inhaled, critics say. DU has been used in wars in the Balkans and Afghanistan in 1994, 1995, 1999 and 2000, and now in Operation Iraqi Freedom.
After enough exposure, Gulf War I and II soldiers are going to need their veterans’ benefits for a lot more than an eye exam.
Just how much does the government of the past and present support our troops if they allow servicemen and women to be exposed to dangerous amounts of DU? And what about the Iraqi people who will have to live with the environmental effects of the DU for years to come?
According to the Inter Press Agency, the Pentagon admitted using about 300 tons of DU in the first Gulf War. Independent estimates suggested that nearly 1,000 tons might have been used.
There have been no definitive studies in Iraq on the effects of DU; however, IPR reported one hospital in Baghdad has told of eight cases of babies born without eyes. Whether DU played a part, or whether some of Saddam Hussein’s chemical human rights crimes were involved, is unclear.
There have been voices of opposition to detrimental effects of DU on soldiers. The Canadian Press reported Sunday that Col. Ken Scott wrote a 1999 memo stating the series of media reports on DU was a “fantasy” that “will unfortunately perpetuate the mythology currently in existence concerning the illnesses in Gulf War veterans.” Others claim DU effects are similar to “Gulf War Syndrome.”
Despite a difference of opinion, the administration has a duty to its service men and women to look into the health effects of DU exposure, so that when they come — if they come home — they can be honored as the heroes they are, not as human experiments.