President Bush has let us know how important it is for him to maintain his
physical fitness. During his nearly five-week vacation — minus several
trips to shore up support for the war in Iraq — he was determined to keep
up his fitness regimen on his 1,600-acre ranch outside Crawford, Texas. And
who better to assist the president with his workout schedule than Lance
Armstrong, the recently retired seven-time winner of the Tour de France,
who went on a 15-mile bicycle ride with Bush near Crawford.

Bush is no doubt one of the most physically fit presidents in history.
However, cognitive fitness ought to be an even higher priority than
physical conditioning for a president who put the lives of U.S. servicemen
and women in harm’s way when he decided to invade Iraq. Nearly 1,900 U.S.
troops have died, thousands more have been horribly wounded, tens of
thousands of Iraqis have been killed and nearly $300 billion spent as a
direct result of Bush’s ill-fated decision to invade Iraq.

We expect the person who occupies the office of the president of the United
States to be a cut above average as far as his mental ability to make
decisions, to solve problems, to make policy, and to draw logical
inferences that make sense to us. Without intending to be humorous, Bush
once said that his “job is to think beyond the immediate.” That’s pretty
important for a commander in chief. After all, the responsibilities of
leadership and command require not just the ability to think, but to think
deeply, and to act in terms of long-range strategic consequences.

Speaking of “thinking beyond the immediate,” I wonder how much time Bush
spends thinking about the issue of depleted uranium, a substance that has a
radioactive half-life of some 2.5 billion years. The United States has been
using this terrible material in its munitions since the first Gulf War, and
there is evidence that it has harmed and will continue to harm the lives of
U.S. troops, as well as the lives of countless other people as well.

According to a recent column by Thomas Jefferson School of Law professor
Marjorie Cohn (“Bush and the Bomb,” Truthout.org, Aug. 10), “although less
spectacular and obvious than a mushroom cloud, the United States has used
nuclear weapons — depleted uranium warheads — in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan
and Iraq. Reporters from the Christian Science Monitor have measured
radiation levels in downtown Baghdad that are 1,000 to 1,900 times higher
than normal background radiation levels.”

According to Cohn, “The United States is committing ongoing crimes against
humanity by its use of depleted uranium.” From an indigenous perspective,
the potential of depleted uranium to make entire regions of the globe, such
as Iraq, virtually uninhabitable — along with the fact that depleted
uranium contaminates the air, earth and water upon which we all depend —
means that the use of depleted uranium by the United States constitutes a
crime not just against humanity, but against the global environment.

In October 2003, Bush himself stated: “See, free nations are peaceful
nations. Free nations don’t attack each other. Free nations don’t develop
weapons of mass destruction.” Given the United States’ attack upon and
invasion of Iraq, and given the fact that the United States has developed
and used of weapons of mass destruction such as depleted uranium — based
on Bush’s own criteria, the United States is far from a “free nation.” The
United States has expended some 1,000 tons of depleted uranium in
Afghanistan and some 3,000 tons of depleted uranium in Iraq during this
war.

Radiation specialist and whistle-blower Leuren Moret has said that “since
1991, the U.S. has released the radioactive equivalent of at least 400,000
Nagasaki bombs into the global atmosphere.” This spewing of depleted
uranium into the environment cannot possibly make the United States or any
other part of the world “free.” Rather, it places the entire world in the
grip of a toxic, radioactive force that is wreaking havoc on our beautiful
planet.

Take, for example, Iraq. The radioactive sands in Iraq blow across the
landscape. U.S. and other troops, and the Iraqi people, breathe radioactive
dust into their nasal passages and lungs. Depleted uranium thereby enters
their bodies and attacks at a molecular and genetic level. The result is a
greater likelihood of various forms of cancer, organ disease and birth
defects. Depleted uranium is also sexually transmitted and, as a result,
depleted uranium attacks the woman’s reproductive system and the fetus in
the womb.

Depleted uranium will continue to create shock waves of health maladies for
generations to come. Just to give some idea of the scale of the problem, in
some studies, of those U.S. troops who had healthy babies before the first
Gulf War, some 67 percent had babies with birth defects after being in the
war. Every mother and father, and every potential mother and father, ought
to be outraged over this wanton and senseless destruction of life on Mother
Earth. Yet where is the outrage?

Speaking of mothers, Cindy Sheehan and many other mothers and fathers of
fallen U.S. soldiers traveled to Crawford, Texas to protest the war.
Sheehan demanded a face-to-face meeting with Bush to ask him, “For what
noble cause did my son Casey die?” Bush refused to see her, claiming that
an earlier meeting with her would have to suffice.

In any case, Sheehan’s question suggests some other questions: “For what
noble cause is the United States using weapons of mass destruction —
depleted uranium weaponry — in the Middle East?” Is it to spread liberty
and democracy? Is it to support the U.S. troops, whose health it is very
likely destroying? Is it to support the Iraqi people, whose health it is
very likely destroying? Is it to end terrorism? Is not depleted uranium
itself a form of terrorism for those whose lives and environment it will
destroy? If so, then how do you end “terrorism” by using a radioactive
weapon that will threaten countless generations?

Anyone who loves and values life, and who loves and values the beauty of
Mother Earth, needs to know that depleted uranium is a radioactive material
that attacks the very basis of life itself. Thus, by allowing this crime to
continue against humanity and the environment, this self-proclaimed
Christian and “pro-life” president is certainly not demonstrating an
ability to think “beyond the immediate” or to act beneficially on behalf of
future generations.

Steven Newcomb, Shawnee-Lenape, is the Indigenous Law Research Coordinator
at Kumeyaay Community College, co-founder and co-director of the Indigenous
Law Institute, and a columnist for Indian Country Today.