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.

 

Should Israel Have Nukes???

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2006 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel

Originally posted by mad scientist
No it was the French and Germans who built Saddams chemical arsenal, not the US.


No it wasnt. The chemicals they had were all color coded. Color coding is how the US military codes its chemicals.. "Agent Orange"??? It had an orange band!


LOL, you're joking right ? Almost everyone uses colour coding to denote the fill of a shell or bomb - NATO, the USSR, everyone. You're proof is ridiculous.


I've seen evidence to suggest that america and the UK gave them to him to use during his US sanctioned war with iran.


Oh ok, what evodence is this ? Saddam didn't need CW from the US or GB, he had the worlds largest CW factory in the world in Samarra. The chemicals and expertise needed to build this factory came from Germany and France.


...the Economy Minister of then West Germany, confirmed that the German companies had the lion's share in these transactions. The report said that since 1983, West German companies have exported to Iraq huge quantities of raw materials, equipment, and small industrial factories to produce poison gases. The report also said that these companies participated directly in building the Sa'd Project, the Iraqi chemical project, and the construction of the military complex in Al-Taji.

...In October 1985, the operations of this company ceased by order of the German judiciary after it sold Iraq two electronic systems that test toxic gas inhalation levels. These are used in closed gas chambers where they measure toxic gas reactions with biological tissues. They also measure the level of their effect on animals, such as dogs, donkeys, and mules as well as humans. These gases were tested on prisoners that opposed the Iraqi regime.

...The factories in the Samarra complex used to produce and stockpile the three lethal gas compounds of mustard gas, Tabun gas, and cyanide acid. Each time, the defunct regime claimed that the factories in Samarra was a complex of scientific research laboratories to produce pharmaceuticals and insecticides to protect the fluoride in the soil. German scientists estimate the production capacity of the Samarra complex at thousands of tons per year. This was also confirmed in the 1984 report published by the US Central Intelligence Agency. The report said that the factories in Sammara were producing lethal nerve gases. Later, the US government provided the German government with evidence related to the activities of this complex.The West German government rejected the evidence claiming that it did not prove anything against Iraq.

www.fas.org...



Maybe I can dig up the video I saw. (Video that was filmed by a soldier during the first gulf war of a bunker complex in southern iraq.)


And what did this footage show exactly ? colour coded drums ?




posted on May, 1 2006 @ 07:51 AM
link   
www.gulflink.osd.mil...

"UNSCOM inspected chemical munitions at or near Khamisiyah in October 1991 and identified 122-mm sarin/cyclo-sarin (GB/GF) nerve-agent-filled rockets and 155-mm mustard rounds. At that time it was not clear whether these chemical weapons had been present during the Gulf war or whether, as was suspected at other locations, the Iraqis moved the munitions there shortly before the 1991 UNSCOM inspection."

The video i'm talking about is shot by the marines at the khamisiyah bunker complex.

here is an areial view of the complex.. I'm still trying to find the video.



"Watching the video footage of the destruction of the bunkers, it becomes obvious that the Khamisiyah bunker event is a scandal of monumental proportions. If Saddam was gassing the Kurds, why was he doing it with illegal-to-transfer American weapons?"

antiwar.com...

---------------

Also..

www.scoop.co.nz...

I believe it may be in the documentary "Beyond Treason".. Yes, watch beyond treason. You can download it off my website at www.freestate.tv .. Start at time code 51:00 mins. It speaks about arming iraq.

The footage of the Khamisiyah bunker complex starts at time code 1:00:00



[edit on 1-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 08:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel
www.gulflink.osd.mil...

"UNSCOM inspected chemical munitions at or near Khamisiyah in October 1991 and identified 122-mm sarin/cyclo-sarin (GB/GF) nerve-agent-filled rockets and 155-mm mustard rounds. At that time it was not clear whether these chemical weapons had been present during the Gulf war or whether, as was suspected at other locations, the Iraqis moved the munitions there shortly before the 1991 UNSCOM inspection."

The video i'm talking about is shot by the marines at the khamisiyah bunker complex.


No one is denying Saddam had chemical weapons as my above link showed, they had huge CW complexes. There is no need for them to import chemical weapons from the US or GB.


"Watching the video footage of the destruction of the bunkers, it becomes obvious that the Khamisiyah bunker event is a scandal of monumental proportions. If Saddam was gassing the Kurds, why was he doing it with illegal-to-transfer American weapons?"

antiwar.com...


Hmm, well seems you're using an incredibly bias source which makes some type of vague allegation with no proof. What is this evidence which so clearly shows a scandal of monumental proportions ?



www.scoop.co.nz...

I believe it may be in the documentary "Beyond Treason".. Yes, watch beyond treason. You can download it off my website at www.freestate.tv .. Start at time code 51:00 mins. It speaks about arming iraq.

The footage of the Khamisiyah bunker complex starts at time code 1:00:00


And why is this truthful ? because someone has cobbled together a video with their own bias view ?



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 08:54 AM
link   
Ok, well if you aren't going to take a look at my evidence. I guess we've got nothing to talk about.

You don't even know what the video shows.. Or in what context. You haven't downloaded. How can you know if it's biased?

If they really were sold to iraq from america... They have every right in the world to be biased.



[edit on 1-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel

Ok, well if you aren't going to take a look at my evidence. I guess we've got nothing to talk about.

You don't even know what the video shows.. Or in what context. You haven't downloaded. How can you know if it's biased?

If they really were sold to iraq from america... They have every right in the world to be biased.


Why don't you quickly tell me what this video is supposed to show ? If it's just colour coded drums and shells, then that isn't evidence. Why would the Iraqi's import chemical weapons ? They could easily produce all the CW weapons they could ever need.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by mad scientist
Why don't you quickly tell me what this video is supposed to show ? If it's just colour coded drums and shells, then that isn't evidence. Why would the Iraqi's import chemical weapons ? They could easily produce all the CW weapons they could ever need.



Why won't you take the time to investigate?

I told you where to look.

There is also a senate intelligence report they talk about from congress which shows that america sold the WMD. But you didn't look at it. So you didn't see it =/

Maybe you didn't know about it already because you haven't taken the time. If it doesn't fit into the 30 second time slot, I don't have time for it.

...

They also have a first hand account of the NBC NCO who was in the engineering battalion that was responsible for blowing up that specific complex. He spoke out. He was there.

....

I went ahead and tried to find the congressional report for you.. Since you don't want to. Every .gov and .mil link to the Reigle Report entitled "United States Dual-Use Exports to Iraq and Their Impact on the Health of the Persian Gulf War Veterans" has been deleted. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

www.gulflink.osd.mil...

www.appc1.va.gov...

I was able to find.

www.chronicillnet.org...

But you will probably consider it "bias'd"

"The Ranking Member of this Committee, Senator D'Amato, and I have released today a report detailing an inquiry into this issue that provides important new information based upon Government documentation and other official reports.

The report establishes, first of all, that, contrary to the Department of Defense assertions, there is clear evidence that the chemical agents detected by the Czechs and others were at sufficient levels to harm U.S. troops.

Second, it establishes that the chemical agent detectors used by U.S. forces during the Gulf War were not sufficiently sensitive to detect sustained low levels of chemical agent and to monitor personnel for contamination. U.S. Army Material Safety Data Sheets, called MSDS, indicate that chronic exposure to levels of over 1/10,000th milligram per cubic meter of Sarin is hazardous and requires the use of protective equipment. The minimum amount of chemical agent required to activate the automatic chemical agent detection alarm that was commonly used during the war was 1,000 times greater than this amount.

In other words, the levels for the alarms used in the war were set at a rate 1,000 times greater than the actual level that we know from other military records to be damaging and hazardous to people if they are exposed to them over a period of time.

Third, the report provides detailed weather and information from unclassified satellite imagery which confirms that during much of the war, the smoke plumes from the coalition bombings were moving directly over U.S. troop positions.

Fourth, it explains that the United States did not have effective biological agent detectors deployed with the capability to confirm whether or not troops were being exposed to biological agents.

During a November 1993, unclassified briefing for Members of the United States Senate, in response to direct questioning, a DoD official said that the Department of Defense was withholding classified information on the exposure of U.S. forces to biological materials.

Then in a Department of Defense-sponsored Conference on Counterproliferation held at Los Alamos National Laboratory on May 6 and 7, 1994, this same official admitted that biological agent detection is a priority development for the Department of Defense since there currently is no biological agent detection system fielded with any U.S. forces anywhere in the world.

Fifth, it provides evidence that the United States shipped biological materials to Iraq which contributed to the Iraqi biological warfare program.

The report also draws upon direct eyewitness accounts from full interviews of more than 600 Gulf War veterans who were directly interviewed by Committee staff. A representative cross-section of 30 of these individuals is presented in full detail in the report, but it is very illustrative of the entire body of interviews that we have now taken, and we are continuing to take interviews and we will continue to do so."

.....

Too bad the report he's talking about got deleted and we can't read it =/



[edit on 1-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel
Why won't you take the time to investigate?

I told you where to look.


Don't have broadband, so I'm not going to waste hours d/l it. Hence why I asked you what the evidence was.



There is also a senate intelligence report they talk about from congress which shows that america sold the WMD. But you didn't look at it. So you didn't see it


There is ? Why don't you link to it. If this is so, then it would hvae been all over the news.


Maybe you didn't know about it already because you haven't taken the time. If it doesn't fit into the 30 second time slot, I don't have time for it.


Erm no lol. I've been reading about Saddam and his CW inventory long before it became fashionable before the 1st Gulf War. I also have a very extensive knowledge of NBC warfare and the weapons involved.



They also have a first hand account of the NBC NCO who was in the engineering battalion that was responsible for blowing up that specific complex. He spoke out. He was there.


And what ? what did he say or see ?



[edit on 1-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:50 AM
link   
www.scoop.co.nz...

Some of his comments are posted here. I'm looking for more links.

I was editing my post after you replied. Please re-read my last post.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel
I went ahead and tried to find the congressional report for you.. Since you don't want to. Every .gov and .mil link to the Reigle Report entitled "United States Dual-Use Exports to Iraq and Their Impact on the Health of the Persian Gulf War Veterans" has been deleted. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

www.gulflink.osd.mil...

www.appc1.va.gov...


Oh right so you're changing your tune. You said the US and GB directly supplied CW;s to Iraq. If a light bulb was used in Samarra or elsewhere it could be considered duel use as it is being used in the CW program.




"Fifth, it provides evidence that the United States shipped biological materials to Iraq which contributed to the Iraqi biological warfare program."

www.chronicillnet.org...

But you will probably consider it "bias'd"


Once again it does not stipulate what these biological materials were, they could hvae easily been growth medium, which are used the world over to culture bacteria for civilian purposes.
Otherwise if you're talking about the diseases such as Anthrax they were available legally as to all other countries for medical research from the American Type Culture Collection, one of many around the world.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 09:53 AM
link   
"Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs – which oversees American exports policy – reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Snr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene."

www.doublestandards.org...



I want to see the report that was deleted! The report that describes what was sold has been deleted! Where is it? Why was it deleted? A little convient dont you think?


Here we go.. This should work for you..

www.washingtonpost.com...

he story of U.S. involvement with Saddam Hussein in the years before his 1990 attack on Kuwait -- which included large-scale intelligence sharing, supply of cluster bombs through a Chilean front company, and facilitating Iraq's acquisition of chemical and biological precursors -- is a topical example of the underside of U.S. foreign policy. It is a world in which deals can be struck with dictators, human rights violations sometimes overlooked, and accommodations made with arms proliferators, all on the principle that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend."


[edit on 1-5-2006 by tsensel]

[edit on 1-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel


I mean, we're ready to nuke iran because they're currently trying to produce nuclear materials for power. But we just let pakistan and india have them? Seems suspicious to me.



Its not that simple..
Let me explain..

The US obv didn't want India, Pakistan OR Iran (and maybe even Israel) to have nukes.
The only thing they could do to pressurise the Indians from going nuclear were economic sanctions.. No military action would been effective even in the wildest of scenarios. The US got a whiff of the Indian nuclear ambitions way back in 95' just before the Indians were going to test. They did a lot of arm-twisting and the then Indian govt. choked..
However in 98 the test sites in India were carefully choreographed to look like routine movements on satellites.
As a result the US actually got to knowabout the Indian tests only via the news channels and maybe through USGS or something.So all they could do at the time was slap sanctions.
The Pakistan test were a knee jerk reaction to the Indian ones. They would never have gone nuclear on their own. They too got the sanction bit.

Now the real deal here was that much before these test both Pakistan and India were known to be 'quiet' nuclear weapons states. Just like Israel is now.Each country had sufficeint means to assemble and deliver crude nuclear devices. Infact the only reason India carried oput the test was to test a thermonuclear yield (simulated 200kT+ yield) and to test tactical yields (sub KT) for small theatre weapon warheads. Pakistani tests were not so much a scientific venture, but more of a tit for tat thing.

So at the time these states went 'nuclear', they were already suspected to have an infant nuclear capability.Infact India had actually tested its first device way back in 1974 and Pakistan was suspected to have reached weapons grade level for plutonium in 1987-88.

Another thing is that taking military action against these two(India or Pakistan/esp India) would just propel things out of control. It would serve the US no purpose whatsoever.
However note that contignecy plans(pre emptive strikes/spec ops team insertions) to take out/take control of Pakistani nuclear assets are well chalked out by Indian and maybe even US strategists in case a fundamentalist Islamic govt. comes to power there.

Finally, also remember that neither India or Pakistan are signatories of the NPT and hence are not 'bound' by any international treaty obligations.
Furthermore, India has got a 'clean' non-proliferation record and hence it is being given access to nuclear tech(civilian of course) even though it is not a signatory of the CTBT, NPT etc. etc..
Pakistan's case is a little more complicated. Its proliferation record is not so clean as it is credited with providing vital N-tech to Iran. However it has been a key American ally right from the Afghan resistance movement against the Soviets in the 80s right upto the war on terror. Hence it is allowed more concessions.

Iran on the other hand has:

1. Signed onto the NPT
2. Has evaded IAEA inspections that enforce the NPT and infact broken NPT regulations by acquirng N-tech by dubious means..(pakistan)
3. Has made brazen statements about other countries and their right to exist.
4. Has been untrustworthy in the past regarding nuclaer issues and hence cannot be taken for word when it says it wants N tech only for peaceful purposes..
5. Nobody wants ANOTHER nuclear power in the region. NOBODY..



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 10:18 AM
link   


I wasn't sure of the exact situation I had bits and pieces of intel. I wasn't quite sure how it all fit together. Thanks for explaining it all out.

Do you have any comments on my previous post about the US selling Iraq chemicals and biologicals?



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 10:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel
"Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs – which oversees American exports policy – reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Snr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene."

www.doublestandards.org...


That's a ridiculous statement. The Gulf War was in 1991, why would ( if they were at all ) be selling Saddam these WMD's, if they'd just spent billions destrying them. Some common sense please. Lay off the google a bit and read the articales at least before you post them




he story of U.S. involvement with Saddam Hussein in the years before his 1990 attack on Kuwait -- which included large-scale intelligence sharing, supply of cluster bombs through a Chilean front company, and facilitating Iraq's acquisition of chemical and biological precursors -- is a topical example of the underside of U.S. foreign policy. It is a world in which deals can be struck with dictators, human rights violations sometimes overlooked, and accommodations made with arms proliferators, all on the principle that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend."


Do you know what precursors are ? They are not CW's - you said there was proof in some bunker that there were US made CW epoans there



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Dunno, We could find out if we could have access to the actual report.

I don't find it so hard to believe that they would continue trad even after we started war with them. When has a law ever stopped a Bush?

If we had access to the senate report off of a .gov website it would be an open ended discussion.

[edit on 1-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 11:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsensel



I wasn't sure of the exact situation I had bits and pieces of intel. I wasn't quite sure how it all fit together. Thanks for explaining it all out.

Do you have any comments on my previous post about the US selling Iraq chemicals and biologicals?



Not really.. you see I wouldn't want to intervene in this discussion as I have a very biased view on this particular topic. Biased with good reason of course but in order to engage in a fruitful discussion one must be able to back up their claims with sources, and those I do not have.
But I will go as far as saying that I(we) have sufficient reason to believe that the US was well aware of Saddam's plans for Kuwait and maybe even endorsed them to an extent, but then did a 180 at the last moment.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by the_sentinal
i can see being pro human but when your always defending iran stop and look at just what your defending !!

I am not defending Iran at all...what I am defending is equality. If there was no other country in the Mideast that didn't have nuclear power or WOMD's then Iran would have absolutely no right to have them or nuclear power. Just because the administration of my country allows double-standards to reign on their policies doesn't mean the citizens have to agree with it. Your insinuation that Iran's government is mad is true enough, but yet you won't agree with the fact that so too is Israels government. Neither one of them should have WOMD, but if you are going to allow one madman to have them then you have to allow the other as well. There is a reason why Israel built their weapons on the sneak and did not allow outside oversight, its because no one wanted them to have these weapons, so they went and did it anyway, just like Iran will do. If we deny them the right to Nuclear knowledge and the use of it, they will just do it anyway and they will do it on the sneak. At least if its approved properly we can get an idea what they are up to and monitor them.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Originally posted by the_sentinal
i can see being pro human but when your always defending iran stop and look at just what your defending !!

I am not defending Iran at all...



it sure seems like you are!!!




Just because the administration of my country allows double-standards to reign on their policies doesn't mean the citizens have to agree with it.


i never said that i aggreed with my country's administration and it's obvious double standard



Your insinuation that Iran's government is mad is true enough,


so you want to put nukes in the hands of mad men in the interest of fairness?? that's just nonsense.. how fair would that be to the millions of innocent killed by these mad men in the interest of fairness




but if you are going to allow one madman to have them then you have to allow the other as well.


i think in this situation less is more....but you want to be fair...but is life fair??? NO it is not!!! you deal with thing's the best you can and in this case iran has proven it's uncapable of handeling nukes......that just my humble opinion.




If we deny them the right to Nuclear knowledge and the use of it, they will just do it anyway and they will do it on the sneak.


then they should suffer the consequences of going against the international community on this one...




At least if its approved properly we can get an idea what they are up to and monitor them.



yea they have been so honest thus far we should trust them even more



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by the_sentinal


i never said that i aggreed with my country's administration and it's obvious double standard


So why do you keep advocating it then?


so you want to put nukes in the hands of mad men in the interest of fairness?? that's just nonsense.. how fair would that be to the millions of innocent killed by these mad men in the interest of fairness

My friend....I wouldn't exactly count killing thousands of innocent Palestinians as sanity either but yet you are saying its ok for them to have?




i think in this situation less is more....but you want to be fair...but is life fair??? NO it is not!!! you deal with thing's the best you can and in this case iran has proven it's uncapable of handeling nukes......that just my humble opinion.

As has Israel but yet I don't see her renouncing the use of WOMD's for themselves.


then they should suffer the consequences of going against the international community on this one...

Hmmm I don't think I have to compare here as you probably already know how many UN warnings Israel has recieved and ignored under the protection of the US.



yea they have been so honest thus far we should trust them even more

Ok Lets go ask if we can inspect the Dimona plant and see what they tell us. Ask Mordechai Vannunu about their honesty to the international community.


By all your reasonings listed we should invade Israel and take away their rights to Nuclear technology too, but we don't. I thought you were against double standards?










[edit on 1-5-2006 by ThePieMaN]



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 02:31 PM
link   
BTW your thread title should read "Israel Should Have Nukes!!!" instead of your seemingly wanting to be asking for opinions. It seems you have your mind made up for one thing.



posted on May, 1 2006 @ 02:51 PM
link   
While I am not as up to the minute as you all are, I will gladly stick my two cents in.

I have no problem with Israel having nukes "now" because they have had them for years and not used them. If I am not mistaken, they had them during some wars and still restrained from using them even when most of the middle east was lined up against them.

I am also not aware of Israel making any official proclamation that any other country should not exist. The same can not be said about Iran.

So other than defending their borders, fighting off attacks, and dealing with the terrorist organization on their doorstep, I do not see Israel even suggesting a nuclear option.

By the was tsensel has put out some really good links and I can attest that they are safe to click on and very interesting to investigate



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join