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.

 

The new nuclear bomb...

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 07:16 PM
link   
i personally found this quote to be quite interesting :



As The Sunday Times reveals today, the data produced by the test were part of a much wider, secret research programme to build a new nuclear weapon that some experts say will breach the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT).


isnt britian saying to iran that iran is breaching the NPT? hypocracy?




posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by byhiniur

Who's 'our'? And if this is true it even further undermines the need for obtaining a new nuclear deterrent.


Thank you,now I see.You have a golden mouth.
Of course,having the means to destroy strategic vectors,means that nations no longer need to spend money to aquire faster and better missiles.So,the powerfull nations will abandon their stocks,while countries like China,Iran,NK,Brazil,India,Pakistan,South Africa.....
Well,the whell of history turns again..now the rich will be safe and the poor live under constant threat of nuclear annihilation
Extremely convenient for the NWO.
Technology will dcide who lives and who dies horribly on our 7 bln people Earth.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago

Islam seems to me to be a rediculous religion, in no other religion do people go blow them selves up by a group of people then they do...I couldn't give a damn what they think about the west.


i think you may want to read up on tamil tiger, IRA, buddists in tibet they all have carried out suicide bombings as well. people usally do extreme things when they are under extreme cercumstances. also you may want to read up on kamakazies of japan, and i suggest you read up on secular nationalits in syrian/lebonese that carried out suicide bombings against the isralei millitry in lebanon. suicide bombing is just another way of delivering a bomb no different then dropping it out of an aircraft i still dont understand why people are so shocked. people for some reason are more shocked at a suicide bombing that killed 2 people then they are with nukes that where dropped on japan that killed hundreds of thousands just becuase suicide was the delivery method of the weopon.

america has killed more civillians deliberatly in a single press of a button then all the terrorist orginisations on earth combined have in the last 50 years and for some reason muslims get the bad rep thats what happens when you control the media you control the news and views/opinions of anybody that watches it.



posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 08:54 PM
link   
I personal view is its more humain to "push a button" then strap TNT to yourself, and blow people up.

and i'm not going to get into the WWII issue, the fact is that was a war, one side against another, and not just killing people for no purpose.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx
america has killed more civillians deliberatly in a single press of a button then all the terrorist orginisations on earth combined have in the last 50 years and for some reason muslims get the bad rep thats what happens when you control the media you control the news and views/opinions of anybody that watches it.


Gawd, here we go, obviously someone who who either deliberately glosses over or has no idea of the circumstances which caused the atomic bombs to be used. Go and educate yourself



Originally posted by iqonx
i personally found this quote to be quite interesting :



As The Sunday Times reveals today, the data produced by the test were part of a much wider, secret research programme to build a new nuclear weapon that some experts say will breach the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT).


isnt britian saying to iran that iran is breaching the NPT? hypocracy?


Erm, can't you read, is says some, which could be just 2 experts out of hundreds. Kind of like selective hearing.

[edit on 15-3-2006 by rogue1]



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1

Originally posted by iqonx
america has killed more civillians deliberatly in a single press of a button then all the terrorist orginisations on earth combined have in the last 50 years and for some reason muslims get the bad rep thats what happens when you control the media you control the news and views/opinions of anybody that watches it.


Gawd, here we go, obviously someone who who either deliberately glosses over or has no idea of the circumstances which caused the atomic bombs to be used. Go and educate yourself



let me guess america are special so they are allowed to kill civillians any time to influence the political decison of a government but its not terrorism but if anybody else does the exact same thing its terrorism.


please go educate yourself on double standards. its pretty sick that american can justify nukes on civillains and then jump on irans back saying hey no nukes for you becuase you might nuke someone what a joke.

quote]Originally posted by rogue1

Originally posted by iqonx
i personally found this quote to be quite interesting :



As The Sunday Times reveals today, the data produced by the test were part of a much wider, secret research programme to build a new nuclear weapon that some experts say will breach the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT).


isnt britian saying to iran that iran is breaching the NPT? hypocracy?


Erm, can't you read, is says some, which could be just 2 experts out of hundreds. Kind of like selective hearing.

[edit on 15-3-2006 by rogue1]

a violation is a violation you cant say oh well violate this and that but wont with that then there no point in sighing or agreeing to the terms and then jumping on someone elses back for violating things like iran. you cannot violate even 1 part of the NPT and then point fingers at another country.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx
let me guess america are special so they are allowed to kill civillians any time to influence the political decison of a government but its not terrorism but if anybody else does the exact same thing its terrorism.
please go educate yourself on double standards. its pretty sick that american can justify nukes on civillains and then jump on irans back saying hey no nukes for you becuase you might nuke someone what a joke.


Rouge1, I'd just point out that it seems America is turning to terrorism seeing how many threads on this site seem to support the idea that explosives brought down the twin towers. America basically trained Al-Queida. America supported Saddam Hussain, a crack pot dictator, and gave him chemical weapons in his war in Iran. It isn't known how many civilians they have killed in their war on Iraq.

America, land of the free...


Originally posted by iqonx
a violation is a violation you cant say oh well violate this and that but wont with that then there no point in sighing or agreeing to the terms and then jumping on someone elses back for violating things like iran. you cannot violate even 1 part of the NPT and then point fingers at another country.


Let's say there are only two scientists saying it could be illegal, it still gives Iran reason to demand nuclear weapons, like you point out.

Removing our nuclear stockpiles would not mean WWIII. It would be possible to moniter other countries to ensure they don't produce them. Maybe if America helped the world, rather than being the source of many of it's problems, we could realise a better world.

I think that defence should be removed, but now I understand it couldn't be done over night. We would need time, but it could and should be done.

[edit on 15/3/06 by byhiniur]



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx

i think you may want to read up on tamil tiger, IRA, buddists in tibet they all have carried out suicide bombings as well.


Not true - the IRA have never carried out a suicide bombing.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Poon

Originally posted by iqonx

i think you may want to read up on tamil tiger, IRA, buddists in tibet they all have carried out suicide bombings as well.


Not true - the IRA have n
ever carried out a suicide bombing.


yes they did they carried out multiple sucide bomb attacks against british targets please read up or infact if you live in the UK i think it was the history channel UK that did a show and in there they showed and talked to ex-millitry ex-IRA and ex-police on both sides and showed that ira carried out suicide atatcks.

what they did was kidnap familes of rival christian groups and threaten to kill there wife/children if they didnt drive the car to british targets and detonate the vehicle and on other attacks they did the same but didnt tell the driver the vehicle was going to explode and they would detonate it with a remote control. they actually invented the modern circutry/electronics that are used in the modern sucide car/truck bombs in the middle east. the IRA actually went to the middle east and trainned people there and funny thing is those exact same bomb types show up there. the impovised roadside bomb, the car/truck bomb, pipe bombs, road side bombs, shaped charge bombs all IRA design being recycled and slightly modifyed and used in the middle east nowadays.

so yes the IRA carried out 2 types of sucide bomb one by making a guy do it and the other by tricking them into it.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx
let me guess america are special so they are allowed to kill civillians any time to influence the political decison of a government but its not terrorism but if anybody else does the exact same thing its terrorism.


please go educate yourself on double standards. its pretty sick that american can justify nukes on civillains and then jump on irans back saying hey no nukes for you becuase you might nuke someone what a joke.


Hey brains
I suggest you look up WWII and do a little reading on it, actually make that alot. Then you might be able to see the context in which the atomic bombs were used. The argument has been replayed here many times
Only dullards cannot see the reason the atomic bombs were used.
Moron.



a violation is a violation you cant say oh well violate this and that but wont with that then there no point in sighing or agreeing to the terms and then jumping on someone elses back for violating things like iran. you cannot violate even 1 part of the NPT and then point fingers at another country.


Erm, in whose opinion as little as 2 experts, what do the rest of them say - it isn't a violation. You see the thing is, Britain already has nuclear weapons - how can there be proliferation if they already hvae them. Not only do they have them, they hvae greatly reduced their arsenal.
This new weapon if it's built, won't be any more powerful, it will just be safer to use and maintain - that's all


Funny how people like you seem to take an opinion and some how automatically it becomes fact - Isn't the motto of this site Deny Ignorance ?


the IRA actually went to the middle east and trainned people there and funny thing is those exact same bomb types show up there. the impovised roadside bomb, the car/truck bomb, pipe bombs, road side bombs, shaped charge bombs all IRA design being recycled and slightly modifyed and used in the middle east nowadays.


These types of bombs have been around long before the IRA ever copied and used them


BTW - I'd class a suiced bomb as someone who actually willingly blows tehmselves up. None of the cases you have presented about the IRA are suicide bombs. They were either coerced or tricked


[edit on 15-3-2006 by rogue1]



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx

yes they did they carried out multiple sucide bomb attacks against british targets please read up or infact if you live in the UK i think it was the history channel UK that did a show and in there they showed and talked to ex-millitry ex-IRA and ex-police on both sides and showed that ira carried out suicide atatcks.

what they did was kidnap familes of rival christian groups and threaten to kill there wife/children if they didnt drive the car to british targets and detonate the vehicle and on other attacks they did the same but didnt tell the driver the vehicle was going to explode and they would detonate it with a remote control. they actually invented the modern circutry/electronics that are used in the modern sucide car/truck bombs in the middle east. the IRA actually went to the middle east and trainned people there and funny thing is those exact same bomb types show up there. the impovised roadside bomb, the car/truck bomb, pipe bombs, road side bombs, shaped charge bombs all IRA design being recycled and slightly modifyed and used in the middle east nowadays.

so yes the IRA carried out 2 types of sucide bomb one by making a guy do it and the other by tricking them into it.


Those were the despicable proxy bombs, probably one of the worst atrocities the provos carried out.

However, these were not suicide bombs as IRA members did not blow themselves up.

I'm from Northern Ireland btw, and am totally against violence from either side of the divide.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 09:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by byhiniur

Rouge1, I'd just point out that it seems America is turning to terrorism seeing how many threads on this site seem to support the idea that explosives brought down the twin towers.


LOL, yeah right. SO what if there are many threads in here - there are plenty of looneys. Where is the evidence ? A couple of supposed demolition people saying so, LOL. Please



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL, yeah right. SO what if there are many threads in here - there are plenty of looneys. Where is the evidence ? A couple of supposed demolition people saying so, LOL. Please


I doubt it is just a bunch of 'loonys'.
I doubt its a 'couple of "supposed" demolitions people'.

I didn't want to say before because I couldn't remember the correct name. But the main source of people's information is here. As its called "Scholars for truth" I think we can assume they have no alterior motives and are tryin to decipher what actually happened.

Looking at the Zacarias Moussaoui court case (latest update), we were told near the beginning of the trial that the defence argued the government knew more about 9/11 before it happened than Moussaoui.

It doesn't seem the US is as blameless as your trying to say.


(Reason for edit: Rouge, have you read your quote. Where does JFK say "make sure we get loads of nukes so the world's a safe place"?)


[edit on 15/3/06 by byhiniur]



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 11:05 AM
link   
This is the page that rogue's signature takes you too. It is a transcript of a JFK speech from June 10th 1963.

I had a quick skim and found this.



I speak of peace because of the new face of war. Total war makes no sense in an age when great powers can maintain large and relatively invulnerable nuclear forces and refuse to surrender without resort to those forces. It makes no sense in an age when a single nuclear weapon contains almost ten times the explosive force delivered by all of the allied air forces in the Second World War. It makes no sense in an age when the deadly poisons produced by a nuclear exchange would be carried by the wind and water and soil and seed to the far corners of the globe and to generations unborn.
Today the expenditure of billions of dollars every year on weapons acquired for the purpose of making sure we never need to use them is essential to keeping the peace. But surely the acquisition of such idle stockpiles - - which can only destroy and never create - - is not the only, much less the most efficient, means of assuring peace.


Need I say anything more in this thread?

(Edit because I thought the code was es rather than ex, and then I noticed I'd spelt rogue, rouge... sometimes
)

[edit on 15/3/06 by byhiniur]



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by byhiniur
Rouge1, I'd just point out that it seems America is turning to terrorism seeing how many threads on this site seem to support the idea that explosives brought down the twin towers.


Then the buildings can take a sevearl hundred ton plane hitting into it at high speed then having its fuel explode into a fireball?

If it can I would be impressed since some military buildings cant take that.


Btw, if your meaning america is turning to terrorism does that mean that school yard bullies are also too?

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by byhiniur
This is the page that rogue's signature takes you too. It is a transcript of a JFK speech from June 10th 1963.



Good speech isn't it



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 02:24 PM
link   
For those of you on this thread that are against violence either personal or military need to wake up. The world is NOT peacefull and never HAS been peacefull. There have been and always will be those out there that prey on the weak. No country is innocent and I can accept the fact that the US has done some pretty bad things in its history (Native Americans for example), but you have to take the good with the bad.

Lowering your defenses will just show others that you are either a)stupid, or b)weak and they WILL take advantage of the situation. Nukes are a horrid weapon, that is a pandora's box that should have never been opened, but, since it was we have to deal with the reality of it today.

The majority of people in this world would love to see a world with no war, no genocide, etc... but some of us are realistic and live in reality not a dreamworld. Its time everybody wakes up and understands this.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 03:01 PM
link   
99% of nations do not want nuclear weapons (or to upgrade) so they can use them in war.

established nations want these weapons so they 'DON'T haveto use them!!!

NO nuclear power will ever attack ANOTHER nuclear power, its just committing sucide for both nations really
(as someone pointed out in this thread about the cold war).

yet a nation like iran/syria having these weapons (they would use them)!!

theres TOO much rivaliry in the middle-east - i'm not too happy with isreal/pakkistan/india even reported in having these weapons.

its quite scary actaully, because countrys like those WOULD use them and not think twice about doing it.


[edit on 15-3-2006 by st3ve_o]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join