It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iraq crisis: Isis jihadists 'seize Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons stockpile' - live

page: 9
74
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: theantediluvian




Dirty bombs? Are you insinuating that chemical weapon components are radioactive material? That doesn't even make sense.


Seriously shameful that comment EVEN has to be explained.

Chemical agents dispersed by explosive materials.

The chemical equivalent to a dirty bomb.


You're literally just going through the Bush administration playbook. Next you'll be warning that the smoking gun could be a "mushroom cloud." I'm not a munitions expert but chemical agents are a lot more readily available than radioactive material and have been for the better part of a century and though terrorists have used chemical agents in attacks, I have yet to hear of any using thermal dispersion. It stands to reason that it's an inherently flawed method of delivery since a large portion of the agent is likely to be incinerated.

If you'd like to provide some evidence that this is a realistic threat, I'd love to see it.


Hell the terrorists are making chemical weapons in their homes, busted in Iraq just last year.

Iraq arrests five in 'al-Qaeda chemical weapons plot'



Five men have been arrested in Iraq and three makeshift laboratories, allegedly designed to produce sarin and mustard gas, have been uncovered.

edit on 19-6-2014 by Swills because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Brotherman
a reply to: JJRichey

Also wanted to remind you (not that these are pleasent to remember)


Do you remember all the chlorine bombs that guerillas used to use in ramadi and fallujah? Those are chemical weapons too are they not? I mean granted they are not exactly military manufactured but still none the less are chemical in nature and highly lethal and those are apparently easily made with materials in high abundance just laying around.


Of course, anytime you use a chemical as a weapon its considered a chemical weapon. A good example of this is white phosphorous. When used to just light up an area it is not considered a chemical weapon, but use it against human beings for the purpose of killing them it then becomes a chemical weapon. Military grade or not, a weapon is a weapon.
edit on 19-6-2014 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 09:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: DeadSeraph

Still trolling I see.

I said the current administration didn't see it coming.

But hey nice trolling there.

Since all those events happened under it's watch.

Syria,Libya,Iraq.

Left Iraq, and it thought it would be all rainbows and unicorns.





Trolling? How that post qualifies trolling is beyond me. In fact, it's absolutely relevant.


edit on 19-6-2014 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Terminal1

Do you love The U.S. of A because that IS allowed to happen? Or...? I mean, it's a nice idea. But...some serious flaws...like any nation state.

Perhaps we imagine that there actually are no imaginary lines which determine x amount of "governmental" representation over physical land (Army included).

Just engineered preferences of culture.

Double Plus Good!




posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

How is it relevant to ISIS seizing Saddams Wmd bunkers ?

Really ENLIGHTEN ME.

Terrorists making wmds, in Syria.

Terrorists making wmds in Iraq that someone just linked:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Funny though,

That is EXACTLY what W and Cheney both SAID THEY WOULD DO.

So what is the relevance?
edit on 19-6-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:29 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

I'm not going to explain to you because you already know why. It's all very clear in the post you declare a troll.

It's all very clear why you declare that poster a troll.

If it was a true trolling post then ATS would have deemed it so, or will, but go ahead and alert them and we'll see what happens.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

True of false:

Have terrorists used WMD ?

Do terrorists want WMD ?

Did Bush and company NOT say they would ?

All of the above is TRUE.

BOTH

Syria, and Iraq PROVE it.

So who the hell 'lied' ?



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Swills

True of false:

Have terrorists used WMD ?

Do terrorists want WMD ?

Did Bush and company NOT say they would ?

All of the above is TRUE.

BOTH

Syria, and Iraq PROVE it.

So who the hell 'lied' ?


Lol oh what a tangled web we weave.

As if Bush and friends are the only ones who said terrorists would use WMDs if given the chance. I think everyone on the planet, including said terrorists would agree that if given the chance they would use them.

But in any case, as that poster was pointing out, Cheney was well aware back in 1991 of what would happen to Iraq if we invaded and exactly what he predicted has been unfolding since he helped topple Saddam.

It's almost as if it's a self fulfilling prophecy.

Either way, I would just stop arguing that the post in question is a troll and move on.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Well APPARENTLY

The current administration DIDN'T get the memo.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Correct me if I am wrong but I thought no weapons of mass destruction were found?



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

That's one hell of an assumption, but that's because you're still stuck in the 2 party system paradigm.

For me, the same agendas has been going on decade after decade no matter who dons the title US President and what party has control.

But let's not assume Obama and friends didn't see this coming because that's just silly. What's worse is Bush and friends saw this coming but decided to invade Iraq anyway. They started the fire but at the end of the day, Donkey or Elephant, it's all the same coin.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
The OP seemed to have forgot this little part from the article.


Although declared, the bunkers contents have yet to be confirmed.

So nobody really knows what was in those bunkers for all we know they could have been the CW's that Rumsfeld sold to Hussein. Now the question is why did Bush and his cronies not destroy these chemical plants before he signed the paperwork that made us cut and run from Iraq?


obama cut and ran, he's been in charge of iraq the same amount of time as bush.

hillary and obama failed to challenge the SOFA. they used it as an excuse to pull out.



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Sparkymedic

I love it because I've been around it. Not like a truck driver "move around" but an army brat "move around". I've been around enough to know it is a wonderful land we have here in the U.S. of A. I've seen forest, the rockies and desert ... and even once in one state. New Mexico where my father was stationed at White Sands, New Mexico. My father being the first enlisted man on the Patriot Project when the patriot missile was first being developed back in the 70's.

Did 8 myself in the 80s...

So yea.. I love America. I've seen her few warts and Americas vast resources. You bet I do.

I also think that since the majority of people are carefree and enjoying the bread and circuses... nothing will change. Until that changes nothing can be done but I still have hope. One day something will disrupt either bread or circuses... watch out.

Yea... I love America. Been to Europe a few times and I liked it all. No bad memories. But I love America...

Know what I mean?
edit on 19-6-2014 by Terminal1 because: clarity

edit on 19-6-2014 by Terminal1 because: I'm still half druck



posted on Jun, 19 2014 @ 11:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
Just a reminder to all of those who are saying that Iraq never had WMD's.

Ask the Kurds.

(just sayin')


and didn't his scud missiles carry chem heads?

that were shot at israel and others?



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 12:12 AM
link   
Let's see here...This is what I think happened:wonkette.com...< br />
I think they weren't destroyed at sea when we were told they would take them from Syria. They want a credible threat and the Caliphate could supply that.They just need it to fester and then we HAVE to act.
It also GATHERS them together in a consolidated state we can define and use to bolster the cold war.
They will need the WMD s to hit India,once they sign a pact with China.
edit on 20-6-2014 by cavtrooper7 because: miss worded



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 12:31 AM
link   
We invade telling the world there are WMD's.
We never find WMD's
We acknowledged he never had WMD's and the evidence was faulty
11years later, a group of fanatics break into the number 1 chemical weapons factory and find chemical weapons.

Please don't declare this on ATS, it would be a tad embarrassing sharing such a decent site with such gullible fools

Saddam didn't have any WMD's after the 90's. Saddam didnt ship any to Syria and Syria isnt using Iraq's weapons.

This sounds like nothing more than a chemical substance that has been stored underground in canisters because it was toxic left overs from the chemical making process in the 80's.

Really, did you think we just forgot to inspect the number 1 chemical weapons factory when we invaded?




posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 12:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Agit8dChop
I say it is as INTENDED.
It fits the pattern of gun running FAILURE and probably will eventually be what Stevens was killed trying to do.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 12:37 AM
link   
I have no doubt that Clinton, both Bushes and the present president lied....heard 'em tell a few myself. I also have no doubt that they all knew that Saddam had WMDs because we sold/gave them the technology. At least that was my understanding at the time from some of the documents a researcher or three had scrounged up. It was clear, to me anyway, that we knew what he had and what he was capable of producing because we had excellent sources within his government.
I can't for the life of me understand why some otherwise really, really smart people continue to cling to the two-party lies and deception. I've said it before and I'll say it again---they are all in it together. They are given talking points and they repeat them---again and again----and then they head out for the next fundraising event where they'll collect massive checks from those who profit from destruction and death. Sometimes one side gets the "good" points and gets them out fast and hard while the other side must appear to be "overcome" and "surprised" and stumble, mumble through their own weak points.
I never really understood the whole MSM "Bush lied" crisis. I honestly don't see how anyone could declare with authority "There were no WMDs." since there were so many places they could have been hidden or so many countries he could have "loaned" them to. I'm told by those who have reason to know that unlike the US, where we tell everyone where our dangerous "decommissioned" WMDs are, these desert folk are a bit more crafty.
Now it amazes me that WMDs can magically reappear when militants need them and yet all the UN's horses and all the UN's men could find them just a few short years ago. How the heck did those insurgent militants know where to find them? Did the US and the UN put up signs telling them where to look?



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 01:37 AM
link   


During the early years of the war they were said to have been moved to Syria.

And that is where ISIS went from IRaq.
a reply to: neo96

There you go neo using your smart parts! Do you happen to know who moved those weapons out of Iraq? Give you a hint, the same country that wonderful man Putin runs
The media did tell the public we were waiting for Russian "advisors" to leave Baghdad before we attacked the place. Best way to hide something in plain sight.



posted on Jun, 20 2014 @ 02:21 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96


Ill help clear this up there chemical munitions this was released in a report to congress.On June 21, 2006 the U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released key points from a classified report from the National Ground Intelligence Center on the recovery of a small number of degraded chemical munitions in Iraq. The report stated that "Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent." All are thought to be pre-Gulf War munitions.

These munitions meet the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction, according to the commander of the National Ground Intelligence Center. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee. The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, though agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said.

So in other words as munitions they wouldnt work they were intended for destruction but they have to be dismantled first. Well if they knew what they were doing and didnt kill themselves the agents are still in there and usable. But it would be a very dangerous job trying to do that and im guessing not many ISIS members have the skills required.



new topics

top topics



 
74
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join