Hawaii reporter gives an alternative view on the Depleted Uranium story

I previously told of the research into soaring child cancer rates and birth deformities in Iraqi children. All the research pointed to the depleted uranium (DU) munitions used by the US and British forces in Southern Iraq during the 1991 Gulf War, and then even more during the 2003 invasion.

I found an article on the Hawaii Reporter: Hawaii Reporter website that appears to support the use of DU and claims:

"DU is a life saver for American soldiers. Because it is 70% more dense than lead, and when alloyed with tungsten tends to sharpen rather than flatten on impact, a DU round will zip right through enemy armor.

It then ignites causing ammunition and fuel to explode and burn, killing all the head-chopping Islamic fascists inside and thus saving hundreds of humans.

Equivalent lead ammunition would just bounce off. DU’s effectiveness reduces the number of shots needed to kill an enemy, thus reducing the risk posed by stray bullets to civilians.

DU is one of the reasons American deaths in Iraq are 3,250 compared to 58,000 in Vietnam or 33,000 in Korea. Low casualties are a major source of frustration for anti-Americans."

It goes on to say: "No Iraqi children will be affected by DU radiation; they are infinitely more at risk from radiation from the bright desert sun—and from the fascist Islamist baby killers who are inspired by propagandists such as Ms. Rose to believe they can defeat America by killing Iraqi children in front of TV cameras."

Is this writer an extreme nationalist who can't bear the fact that their country has possibly given nearly 1 in 5 Iraqi children birth deformities and cancer or are they right to support the American governments decision to use DU?