
Legacy of Agent Orange - lambtron
http://widerimage.reuters.com/story/legacy-of-agent-orange
======
jacquesm
A component of Agent Orange, 2,4,5-T was produced by Philips-Duphar (A
chemical subsdiary of the industry giant) in the Netherlands. At the end of
the Vietnam war the remaining stock was dumped in a polder just North of
Amsterdam. When the scandal broke it was too late and the chemicals had
reacted to form various dioxins which had leached in a gigantic plume into the
ground water around the town of Broek In Waterland.

To this day the area where this all happened is off-limits, even though the
soil has been excavated to many meters depth. This will likely be a permanent
feature in what used to be one of the Netherlands nicest areas to recreate.

Photo of the site during the cleanup:

[http://siebeswart.photoshelter.com/image/I0000jbBzIgQOwR4](http://siebeswart.photoshelter.com/image/I0000jbBzIgQOwR4)

This is the entrance to the site as it approximately looks today:

[https://www.google.com/maps/@52.42447,4.991151,3a,75y,103.82...](https://www.google.com/maps/@52.42447,4.991151,3a,75y,103.82h,85.26t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s9BTzdD4dnGQjxXtQ2QAL5w!2e0)

It's one of the most expensive toxic waste operations ever in Europe and the
most expensive one to date in NL.

People were living within 100 meters of this dump!

And that dump is a small fraction of what was dropped over Vietnam.

~~~
nate_meurer
Bloody hell, thanks so much for this, I had no idea. What would be the word
for this, "collateral war crime"?

FWIW, even though far larger quantities were sprayed over Vietnam, the
spraying made the contamination less permanent than in the Netherlands.
Hopefully most of what was sprayed in the war has been run off into the ocean,
with no pluming and relatively little groundwater contamination.

Although "relatively" is rather less comforting when the contamination
involves dioxins.

~~~
jacquesm
> Although "relatively" is rather less comforting when the contamination
> involves dioxins.

Yes. It's incredible how toxic that stuff is.

------
pandatigox
This is just absolutely disgusting. I wasn't quite sure what Agent Orange was,
so I looked it up in Wikipedia... as a Y gen, I knew that the Vietnam War was
bad, but not this bad... It is absolutely disgusting and atrocious what humans
can do each other.

From the article
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange#Use_in_the_Vietnam...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange#Use_in_the_Vietnam_War)):

1\. 20,000,000 U.S. gallons were sprayed

2\. Military was told to destroy crops used to feed guerrillas.

3\. Later discovered nearly all of the food they destroyed were being used to
support the local civilian population.

4\. In Quang Ngai province, 85% of the crop lands were scheduled to be
destroyed in 1970 alone, leaving many to die from the famine.

I remember reading a book, Crimes Against Humanity, which said how Nazi
leaders, especially those participated in the Holocaust were tried for their
crimes. I cannot see how US Military leaders should not be tried for their
actions in an international court.

And that's the thing. It annoys how easily the Americans are willing to
criticize everyone else, and yet shift the blame away from themselves. If they
weren't such a superpower, they wouldn't even be able to get away with all
this.

This stuff sickens me

~~~
mhurron
> I cannot see how US Military leaders should not be tried for their actions
> in an international court.

War crimes are a final insult of the victor over the vanquished. While the US
was not victorious in Vietnam, neither were they defeated by the
Vietnamese/USSR.

Don't think that war crime trials are about any sort of justice.

~~~
justinator
> While the US was not victorious in Vietnam, neither were they defeated by
> the Vietnamese/USSR.

Wait, what? At the very end US Troops were evacuated from Saigon, and the city
was taken over by the Viet Cong. That was the end of the Vietnam war. South
Vietnam was reunified with North Vietnam. It's still a communist country.

I'm very sorry, but exactly how is that not complete and total defeat, except
under ridiculous exceptions like, "it wasn't really a war because: Congress"?
What a disservice to everyone that fought.

The war escalated to the point where LBJ could neither stop, nor continue
without basically destroying his legacy (as well as humanitarian and social
goals), so he just kept fighting.

~~~
dionidium
You completely missed his point, which is that nobody was in a position to try
the U.S. for war crimes after Vietnam. There are many kinds of defeat. To be
charged with war crimes requires utter defeat, not merely an unfavorable end
to the conflict.

~~~
dragonwriter
> To be charged with war crimes requires utter defeat

Officials from _all_ factions in (for one example) the Bosnian civil war have
been tried by the ICTY. So unless all sides suffered "utter defeat", that is
demonstrably untrue.

One could argue that prior to the establishment of modern tribunals starting
with the ICTY (but also including the ICTR and ICC), that was the case. And
there might be other reasons that the US, in particular, is difficult to hold
accountable. But its pretty clear that it is no longer the case that "to be
charged with war crimes requires utter defeat", or even _mere_ defeat.

~~~
dionidium
You should read "utter defeat" to mean "subject to the decisions of others."
Nothing more, really. You can charge anybody with anything. I'm talking about
enforcement.

------
shoo

        I would like to talk, representing all those veterans, and say
        that several months ago in Detroit, we had an investigation at
        which over 150 honorably discharged and many very highly
        decorated veterans testified to war crimes committed in
        Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on
        a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all
        levels of command....
    
        They told the stories at times they had personally raped, cut
        off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones
        to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs,
        blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages
        in fashion reminiscent of Genghis Khan, shot cattle and dogs
        for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the
        countryside of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage
        of war, and the normal and very particular ravaging which is
        done by the applied bombing power of this country.
    

\-- John Kerry, 1971

[[https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/johnkerr...](https://facultystaff.richmond.edu/~ebolt/history398/johnkerrytestimony.html)]

------
rotorblade
Does any one know...

Was this considered 'war crime', or was it a too modern way of conducting war
so that it was not covered by the international laws at the time?

If against international law or not, has it ever been a case in an
international court for the tactics used in Vietnam during this war? If not,
is there a documented reason as to why not?

~~~
Synaesthesia
It is uncontroversially a war crime. Chemical warfare is explicity banned by
the Geneva convention, to which the US is of course a signatory.

However, great powers are exempt from being challenged by international law,
because they simply don't permit it.

~~~
happyscrappy
At least the Germans didn't pretend they were getting rid of foliage when they
gassed the Jews.

~~~
mschuster91
It wasn't foliage, but hair lice and other pests... the jews were shaven their
heads and told to shower. Only when the doors locked, they realized what was
going on.

~~~
nothrabannosir
Why did they shave their heads?

~~~
mschuster91
Most definitely for lice protection (and to maintain the illusion), and
according to Wikipedia (
[http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanada_(KZ_Auschwitz)](http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanada_\(KZ_Auschwitz\))
) the hairs were used for commercial purposes.

------
perakojotgenije
From wikipedia: "Agent Orange was manufactured for the U.S. Department of
Defense primarily by Monsanto Corporation and Dow Chemical. It was given its
name from the color of the orange-striped barrels in which it was shipped, and
was by far the most widely used of the so-called "Rainbow Herbicides".[4] The
2,4,5-T used to produce Agent Orange was contaminated with
2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzodioxin (TCDD), an extremely toxic dioxin compound.
In some areas, TCDD concentrations in soil and water were hundreds of times
greater than the levels considered safe by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency."

When someone asks me why I don't want Monsanto to grow my food I think I need
no other answer.

~~~
TeMPOraL
First of all, weren't Monsanto a) just manufacturing this stuff on the request
of DoD and b) the ones who discovered it's contaminated and warned the
Government about it? It's like the very next occurrence of the word "Monsanto"
in the Wiki article.

Secondly, and I apologize for Godwining the thread, you probably know that IBM
built and sold machines to Nazi Germany, having full knowledge that they will
be used for oppression and murder. They even found a way to avoid the business
ban during wartime. Hell, ever seen the serial numbers tattooed on the arms of
concentration camps' prisoners? You can thank IBM punch-card systems for that.

And yet I'm willing to bet that you don't avoid IBM computers, servers and
software for that reason. Because what they did during WWII has little to do
with the quality of hardware they manufacture now. And so is with Monsanto.
The fact that they did work on herbicides-turned-chemical-weapons for USGOV
doesn't mean anything about their ability to put healthy food on your table.

If you want someone to blame for Agent Orange, blame the DoD.

~~~
briantakita
> The fact that they did work on herbicides-turned-chemical-weapons for USGOV
> doesn't mean anything about their ability to put healthy food on your table.

Monsanto & healthy food is an oxymoron. Try drinking some Roundup. I hear it's
"safe" ;-)

~~~
TeMPOraL
If you're referring to that interview then keep in mind that it was just a
crappy "journalist" trying to make a show out of what was supposed to be an
interview on a topic completely not related to Monsanto.

Apparently he succeeded. I guess it's a lesson in designing propaganda - be an
asshole, people will believe you.

Also, I'm not particularly convinced that the insane amount of stuff farmers
dump on their crops is really better than replacing all of it with just one
pesticide.

~~~
briantakita
> If you're referring to that interview then keep in mind that it was just a
> crappy "journalist" trying to make a show out of what was supposed to be an
> interview on a topic completely not related to Monsanto.

Well, it's supposed to be "safe". Why didn't he drink it?

And the interview was originally about Golden Rice.

> Also, I'm not particularly convinced that the insane amount of stuff farmers
> dump on their crops is really better than replacing all of it with just one
> pesticide.

Actually, in a functioning ecosystem, no pesticides are needed. Insects &
other microorganisms are natural parts of the food web.

[http://www.permaculture.com/node/140](http://www.permaculture.com/node/140)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yPjoh9YJMk&feature=youtu.be](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yPjoh9YJMk&feature=youtu.be)

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _Well, it 's supposed to be "safe". Why didn't he drink it?_

Urine is also safe. Would you drink your own in front of a camera if I asked
you to during an interview on water purification systems?

Most people react negatively to such weird requests, especially if they're out
of the blue, in front of a camera, and asked by person who evidently tries to
prove some point at your expense.

> _And the interview was originally about Golden Rice._

Yes, which has nothing whatsoever to do with Roundup. Golden rice is a cool
piece of biotech created to save more than half a million lives of children
annually (and save many more from blindness) and is given away for free to
grow (and replant) by people that need it. Bringing up Monsanto's pesticide in
that interview was disingenuous, not to mention off-topic.

> _Actually, in a functioning ecosystem, no pesticides are needed. Insects &
> other microorganisms are natural parts of the food web._

First of all, not really. That is, sure if you don't mind half your crops
being rotten. I've never seen the evidence that you can successfully run a
high-yield zero-pesticide farm. But I'm not _that_ into farming and I'll be
more than happy to learn I'm wrong.

But more importantly, even if possible, apparently almost no one does that.
Especially not organic farmers, who dump even more chemicals on food than
usual, with only difference is that those chemicals have "organic-certified"
label. So between "a lot of pesticides", "even more pesticides applied by
industry that tries to cheat you into thinking they're not using pesticides"
the "one pesticide" solution suddenly doesn't sound that bad.

~~~
briantakita
> Urine is also safe. Would you drink your own in front of a camera if I asked
> you to during an interview on water purification systems?

The differences are I'm not trying to peddle my urine as the "only" way to
grow food and urine actually is safe. Roundup is not safe.

Btw, urine is a wonderful fertilizer. It's more effective & more
environmentally friendly than the petrol biz solutions.

It's funny that the people spraying pesticides need to wear haz mat suits. If
it were so safe, why wear the suits?

Here's some of the effects that these "safe" pesticides have on people.

[http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/argentina-the-
country...](http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/argentina-the-country-that-
monsanto-poisoned/)

IMO, this whole notion that we accept poisons on our food is ridiculous. But
ymmv. Many people are content getting fat & diabetic eating McDonalds.

> That is, sure if you don't mind half your crops being rotten.

Sorry, but that's a load of BS. Local farms don't really have this issue. Also
note there is a huge problem of waste with conventional farming & animal meat
production.

Re: "pests". Pests have predators. If you encourage the predators to thrive,
you don't have a pest problem. Conventional monoculture chemical agricultural
practices are prone to disease & pests because the natural food web &
community is disrupted. It's an unsound architecture that requires expensive &
destructive inputs to maintain. It's the industrial model fighting nature.

Why not work with nature instead?

> I've never seen the evidence that you can successfully run a high-yield
> zero-pesticide farm.

See the links I posted above. Both high-yield farms use zero-pesticides.

> But I'm not that into farming and I'll be more than happy to learn I'm
> wrong.

Maybe you should look more into it before stating such a strong opinion...It
sounds like you are heavily influenced by propaganda from large chemical &
petrol companies. I don't blame you, they have huge marketing budgets & are
owned by the same interests that run the major media outlets. Too bad nature
doesn't have a marketing department, huh?

> But more importantly, even if possible, apparently almost no one does that.

That's untrue. Natural methods are still dominant in most of the world.
America is an outlier.

America subsidizes petrol chemical centralized agriculture. We don't subsidize
natural methods. Lobbying & corporate interests drive this behavior.

> Especially not organic farmers, who dump even more chemicals on food than
> usual, with only difference is that those chemicals have "organic-certified"
> label.

The USDA Organic label is pretty asinine. Many think it's a way of sabotaging
natural chemical free methods.

Note that natural food webs don't need chemicals. It has been done
successfully but does not receive much attention on a large scale because it
does not suit large scale corporate interests. If you take an interest in
chemical free gardening, you can try it out yourself.

Natural methods emphasizes small, autonomous farms. It's also better for the
environment since natural ecosystems are built (serving a variety of
functions), instead of the monoculture pesticide drenched, petrol subsidized,
environmentally destructive system that we have today.

------
defractional
When I heard a vet recount how he was ordered to load AO straight instead of
diluted, I realized it was as much a program of chemical warfare as
defoliation.

[http://www.gulfwarvets.com/ao.html](http://www.gulfwarvets.com/ao.html)

------
primroot
And let's also not forget more recent developments.

[http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-
prov...](http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/08/26/exclusive-cia-files-prove-
america-helped-saddam-as-he-gassed-iran/)

[http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/15/usa.iraq](http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/nov/15/usa.iraq)

[http://www.wola.org/commentary/time_to_abandon_coca_fumigati...](http://www.wola.org/commentary/time_to_abandon_coca_fumigation_in_colombia)

------
drikerf
Disgusting. When I visited HCMC a couple of years ago a photo exhibition was
held showing the damage of Agent Orange. If you ever visit, check if it's
still on.

~~~
tirant
It is still on, in the War Remnants Museum. It is shocking, very shocking. I
had to leave after watching only half of it. Not an easy view.

------
refurb
Has any epidemiological studies been published on Agent Orange in Vietnam?

Birth defects happen even when no one is exposed to Agent Orange. Without a
study, you wouldn't be able to determine how many _more_ birth defects
happened.

~~~
hn_
The VA has an overview of the research:

[http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/researc...](http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/agentorange/research-
studies.asp)

~~~
refurb
Interesting! Of course, the VA would have followed up. A quick perusal of the
papers seems to indicate that the connection between AO and cancer are "non-
significant" at least in the studies done so far.

 _Little difference in risk, however, was noted according to dates of service,
type of unit, military region, or any other characteristics that may have been
associated with the use of Agent Orange._

------
TazeTSchnitzel
When trying to read this on iOS, the video traps me in the page. Once it
starts playing and goes fullscreen, if you try to stop/pause/rewind/exit it,
it just starts playing again and goes fullscreen again.

------
leaveyou
Does US pay some compensation for these mistakes ? The consequences are
horrible..

~~~
tomaskafka
Few dolalrs per life lost, to the 'lucky' ones.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange#Legal_and_diplomat...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange#Legal_and_diplomatic_proceedings)

------
jmkni
Heads up if you're in work, the imagery in this article, while appropriate,
probably NSFW, wait until you get home.

~~~
moron4hire
These mickey-mouse rules of what is and is not considered "safe" for work is
one of the many, many reasons I don't work in an office anymore. The
corporatist hivemind treats the individual worker like a child, incapable of
discerning for themselves the difference between nudity and sexual imagery.

~~~
riffraff
while the corporate hiveminds may well do what you think, it might still be
the case that your coworkers are upset by nudity, gore, violence etc.

The conclusion of not working in an office might be the same, but it's not
just because of The Man.

~~~
moron4hire
I'm including such coworkers, who can't discern the difference between
offensive material and journalism--and clamor for rules to be applied to the
rest of us--in the "corporate hivemind".

~~~
acdha
> I'm including such coworkers, who can't discern the difference between
> offensive material and journalism

What about people who just don't want to spend the mental energy on it? You
can think that this is an important story, one that every American has an
obligation to see, etc. and still want to save that for a time when you don't
need to focus on your job.

I'd also remind you that not everyone is completely detached from these
things. I've worked with Vietnamese immigrants, American veterans, and many
people have family members who have birth defects which are similar to some of
those pictures even if they weren't caused by Agent Orange. I certainly would
hesitate to show any of them something like this without advanced warning.

~~~
moron4hire
I fail to see what any of this has to do with my usage, or why rules should be
made out of it. The most rule you need is "get your work done or you're
fired."

~~~
Dylan16807
The point of "not safe for work" is for what other people will see on your
screen.

And it's not their failing if such important depressing things distract them
from getting their work done. It doesn't have to be offensive to be a bad idea
to share with people that are trying to be productive.

~~~
moron4hire
I always thought it was for what the network content filters would catch and
report against you to your boss.

The way you describe it, you must work in one of those interminable open floor
plan offices.

~~~
Dylan16807
Same sort of thing. If it's reported, then the boss sees it.

Impressions are often more important than content here.

~~~
moron4hire
My point is that we should be rational people and not abide the impression
"zomg, pubic hair means porn!"

~~~
Dylan16807
Oh, I think I see your point better now, and I agree with that. But I was
focusing on the horrifying deformities as something that can legitimately be a
problem in a workplace, not incidental nudity.

------
kushti
Germany paid big contributions to war sacrifices. I guess 'murica haven't paid
any reasonable amount of compensations. I think it would be good for the
country to pay compensations to 'murican war crimes sacrifices around the
globe, hopefully it will prevent 'murican taxpayers from supporting new
crimes(happening every day, in fact, e.g. innocent people killing in Pakistan
with drones, [http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/04/10/fewer-than-2-percent-
of-...](http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/04/10/fewer-than-2-percent-of-drone-
strike-victims-in-pakistan-are-senior-al-qaeda-leaders/) )

~~~
freehunter
First off, look up the Marshall Plan before you say America hasn't paid to
cover damages from a war. Secondly, what the fuck is a 'murican?

~~~
kushti
It's hard to see similarities between marshall plan and war crimes
compensations. 'murica is the widely recognized meme for the country of war
crimes

~~~
nitrogen
If one cannot win an argument without calling names or using slurs, perhaps
one should revisit the premise of the argument.

