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.

 

Tactical Nuke Explodes in Iraq??

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 02:41 PM
link   
The MOAB (Massive Ordinance Air Burst) creates a mushroom cloud similar to a small nuclear weapon. There are even larger conventional weapons "on the drawing board" (read: in use).

The bright flash doesn't necassarily equal nuclear either. They were bombing a munitions depot, so there could have been large quantities of white phosphorous and magnesium around. Smaller explosions can be seen prior to the larger blast, which would make sense if anti aircraft weapons were in place, they would want to take those out before dropping a parachute-deployed weapon.

Or... I could be wrong! It might be a nuke.

[edit on 18-10-2006 by BlaznRob]




posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlaznRob
They were bombing a munitions depot, so there could have been large quantities of white phosphorous and magnesium around. Smaller explosions can be seen prior to the larger blast, which would make sense if anti aircraft weapons were in place, they would want to take those out before dropping a parachute-deployed weapon.

Or... I could be wrong! It might be a nuke.


C’mon!

This was a depot fire with plenty of “news” coverage…not some attack...

And eenv by the OP’s referenced site’s supporting link:

“a detonation in a major urban center would cause mass casualties, sickness, and physical damage…”

So…where are all these “damages” and “casualties”?...


mg



posted on Oct, 18 2006 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Missed Gear, did you miss these:

Falcon Ammo Dump
Destruction Photos


(posted on page 1)



posted on Oct, 19 2006 @ 05:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by thend
www.halturnershow.com...

At precisely three minutes, fifty-six seconds (3:56) into the video clip, the tactical nuclear explosion appears to happen. It can't be missed and there's no mistaking what it is.
www.halturnershow.com...


Mod Edit: All CAP title

[edit on 18-10-2006 by kinglizard]



You went to public school right???

Read the title page of the video when it opens..the one showing the source of the broadcast...or information...more like the hysteria network. You know...the tabloids at the check out stand. This is the kind of hysteria one learns when one watchs to much television or is television educated...sometimes it is called public schooling/television education..majoring in emotions.

Orangetom



posted on Oct, 19 2006 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by psyopswatcher
Missed Gear, did you miss these:

Falcon Ammo Dump
Destruction Photos


(posted on page 1)


And the point of those photos is??

What are you trying to get across??

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 19 2006 @ 05:41 AM
link   
Sorry but this subject thread shows ignorance of the entire nuclear weapons subject.

If that had been a nuke, there would have been no fire in the surrounding areas at the end of it, because the blast effects would have put them out. The thermal pulse of a nuclear weapon lasts only a short period time. You might get secondary fires at the periphery of the explosion one the blast wave has passed, but quite simply there would be nothing combustible left in teh immediate vicinity to burn.

Plus, the light energy released by the explosion would have blinded the camera completely if it was using thermal or night imaging equipmrnt.



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Sorry but this subject thread shows ignorance of the entire nuclear weapons subject.

If that had been a nuke, there would have been no fire in the surrounding areas at the end of it, because the blast effects would have put them out. The thermal pulse of a nuclear weapon lasts only a short period time. You might get secondary fires at the periphery of the explosion one the blast wave has passed, but quite simply there would be nothing combustible left in teh immediate vicinity to burn.

Plus, the light energy released by the explosion would have blinded the camera completely if it was using thermal or night imaging equipmrnt.


Nevermore,
I quite agree. These series of pictures are quite telling to those versed in some aspect of the nuclear trade.

Right away I noticed he absence of zoned off areas which would happen immediately in a contaminated area. You dont want contamination spreading any more than necessary. Likewise you would not be driving vehicles into this area if it was contaminated. Are there any decontamination stations visible?? Do any of you even know what one looks like?? The vehicles you see by the side of the concrete walls have inflated tires on them. In one picture you even see a porta potty ..green next to one of the walls and not that far from the burned out area.

Another picture when you scroll down to the last two frames you see the burned out area and down at the bottom is a tent looking guard station with a clothlike covering..it isnt burned though it looks like this area surrounded by the jersy barriers suffered some damage. There are also porta pottys close to this guard area. I would think that even with a tactical nuke ..the blast effect would be enough to either burn up these porta pottys or flip them over ...or both. Same with the tires of many of the vehicles visible though you dont know which vehicles are only recent arrivals.
Nevertheless with contamination...you would severely limit the vehicles admitted here so as not to spread contamination...if you let any in at all.

What I am noticing is that these concrete walls seem to have done thier intended job and quite well.

This story is someone reaching into the souls of easily led and uninformed people hooked on emotions and jerking them off. Pardon the crudity but I've seen this to much in our local news here in the USA. I dont need or want to be emotionally jerked off by this type of sensationalism. It happens enough every election cycle.
It is.. LCD...Lowest Common Denominator but it works well on the emotionally uninformed. It puts them right on the emotional puppet string.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 20 2006 @ 12:46 AM
link   
you are absolutely right astygia. if it was a nuke the emp electro magnetic pulse would of knocked out all the electrical there, but as you see the lights were still on. this is no nuke exsplosion, tho it is a large exsplosion, the mushroom cloud also is present in alot of high intensity exsplosions, resembling a look alike effect. DEFINETELLY NO NUKE EXSPLOSION.



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999

Originally posted by psyopswatcher
Missed Gear, did you miss these:

Falcon Ammo Dump
Destruction Photos


(posted on page 1)


And the point of those photos is??

What are you trying to get across??

Thanks,
Orangetom



The point is the damage shown in the daytime. But after further thought, even I can add a date to any pic I run across on the internet.

As for the video, the date it was submitted to Google is last January. It's been pointed out (elsewhere) that the video may have come from an Iraqi ammo dump being destroyed years ago when the invasion first took place.

If so, was someone out to destroy Saddam's WMD?



[edit on 22-10-2006 by psyopswatcher]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Also interesting to note... There was no camera shake from the powerful blast wave a nuclear explosion would cause... not even a wobble.

I agree that the camera is making the flash look brighter.

[edit on 22-10-2006 by nowthenlookhere]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 03:54 PM
link   
If you listen carefully to the Arabic spoken in the background, you can clearly hear someone shout..

!!!...كنت فقط يفترض ان تأتي من الأبوا
Translation: "You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off..."




[edit on 22-10-2006 by timski]



posted on Oct, 22 2006 @ 06:49 PM
link   
That was a low yield nuke, and if you recall all the new names they give them including daisy bombs then this is nothing new. Recall this was an AMMUNITION DEPO! Thus it would have been used by the bu#es and no doubt the Iraq Resistance hit it and set it on fire. Just one problem: maybe they did or didnt know that nuke was in there. If they knew then they didnt want the bu#es using it against them, if they didnt know then it was just a regular attack on ammo depo so that it could no longer be used. The bu#es do not HAVE to use a full fledged nuke in order for it to be considered a "nuclear attack" since the name usualy pertains to massive all out nuclear attacks with ICBM's or missiles. Bu#es want these low yield weapons so they can decimate large areas quickly and never have it considered a nuclear assault, luckily the one in the movie went off before they dropped it on someone.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 01:15 AM
link   
As someone else pointed out, the night camera is turned onto a sensitive setting.

Youd get the same effect if someone shone a torch at you if you were wearing night vision goggles.



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vekar
That was a low yield nuke, and if you recall all the new names they give them including daisy bombs then this is nothing new. Recall this was an AMMUNITION DEPO! Thus it would have been used by the bu#es and no doubt the Iraq Resistance hit it and set it on fire. Just one problem: maybe they did or didnt know that nuke was in there. If they knew then they didnt want the bu#es using it against them, if they didnt know then it was just a regular attack on ammo depo so that it could no longer be used. The bu#es do not HAVE to use a full fledged nuke in order for it to be considered a "nuclear attack" since the name usualy pertains to massive all out nuclear attacks with ICBM's or missiles. Bu#es want these low yield weapons so they can decimate large areas quickly and never have it considered a nuclear assault, luckily the one in the movie went off before they dropped it on someone.


You went to public school?? A television education majoring mostly in emotions??

Orangetom



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 09:06 AM
link   
Daisy Cutter...not Daisy Bomb. This is a conventional bomb of very large size originally used in Vietnam to clear jungle sites quickly for helicopter landing sites. Very effective too. This know how has been improved upon today. THe MOAB is a decendent of this technology. These tools are very expensive so they are not used much and for specific targets....carefully considered.

Read my post further up..look for evidence of roped off areas....yellow is the colour of contamination ropes..yellow and purple.... marking off radiation/contamination areas. Look for people running around in anti contamination clothing and with respirators...breathing equipment. A contaminated area would not allow vehicles in to disturb or spread contamination. Notice the tires on many of the vehicles in these areas are inflated ...meaning they are recent arrivals.

Notice how emotional and wildly speculative I am about all of this??? I'll probably need a makeover when I finish posting.

Thanks
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Looks like a small tactical nuke..

Alot of people don't know, but wrapped up in Bushs record breaking millitary budget was a programe to design 2 new tactical nuclear weapons. Small tactical nuclear weapons,about as big as a cruise missle. One is a bunker buster with a nuclear warhead, the other is pretty much a small cruise missle with a small nuclear warhead. Each would be equal to about 1/3 of the power of the Hiroshima nuke, and could be launched from a naval battle ship on the gulf by the hundreds..

maybe Bushy wanted to test his new toys..

[edit on 23-10-2006 by Great White Cheney]



posted on Oct, 23 2006 @ 08:18 PM
link   
White thank you for say thing, that is the point I am making. They have SMALLER nuclear weapons in their arsenal to use against people that are not as deadly on the "wipe out cities" scale.
orange you are extremely snide and downright rude as well as having a lack of honor and a consideration for others honor. I went to public school most of my life and only went to a private school 1 time and got discriminated against OUTRIGHT for being non-christian as well as others I knew. Thus I will NEVER have anything to do with private schools again, they are the WORST thing you can do to your children, brainwash them into chanting bu#es (very few private schools are decent anymore). Emotion is what makes us human, detach yourself from it you are no longer human but a lifeless hump of flesh in a chair typing away. Emotion keeps us from making mistakes that strip the lives of millions, the Nazi's removed their emotions for non-aryans and look what happened. I am PROUD to say I have emotions and will ALWAYS be proud of having them.

Why? Because it shows I CARE about people and am unwilling to detach myself from that for any reason. I would rather DIE than become a heartless creature. None the less what I said was not based on emotion but on fact. I DO support the Iraq Resistance, I do NOT support the bu#e troops, I DO support the removal of the US from Iraq, I do NOT support the blatant use of "mini nukes" on the field. They are facts not emotional based statements.

End of story.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 12:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vekar
White thank you for say thing, that is the point I am making. They have SMALLER nuclear weapons in their arsenal to use against people that are not as deadly on the "wipe out cities" scale.
orange you are extremely snide and downright rude as well as having a lack of honor and a consideration for others honor. I went to public school most of my life and only went to a private school 1 time and got discriminated against OUTRIGHT for being non-christian as well as others I knew. Thus I will NEVER have anything to do with private schools again, they are the WORST thing you can do to your children, brainwash them into chanting bu#es (very few private schools are decent anymore). Emotion is what makes us human, detach yourself from it you are no longer human but a lifeless hump of flesh in a chair typing away. Emotion keeps us from making mistakes that strip the lives of millions, the Nazi's removed their emotions for non-aryans and look what happened. I am PROUD to say I have emotions and will ALWAYS be proud of having them.

Why? Because it shows I CARE about people and am unwilling to detach myself from that for any reason. I would rather DIE than become a heartless creature. None the less what I said was not based on emotion but on fact. I DO support the Iraq Resistance, I do NOT support the bu#e troops, I DO support the removal of the US from Iraq, I do NOT support the blatant use of "mini nukes" on the field. They are facts not emotional based statements.

End of story.


Vekar,

I went to public schools too. I have spend the bulk of my life working to get over it.

I dont have a problem with you caring for people. That is great. I am saying dont do it in such a panicked emotional manner as you and some others post on here.

I am a nuclear fueler by trade. I was in a reactor yesterday. Getting ready to go back in today. I know about radiation and contamination. Not once in your emotional uphoria and feelings did you or many of the other posters address the issue of contamination...even from a small tactical nuke.
I have been in high radiation areas..also high areas of high contamination counts.
Vekar I have emotions too. What I have learned to do is dicipline them. One has to do this to accomplish certain tasks in these and other enviornments in which I have worked over the years.
I dont live for my emotions daily. I can spot this in people and their posts. It is a fingerprint of thier real values. It is also a fingerprint of what they consider dicipline.
Vekar..you with your emotions/feelings will make a good predictable, controllable,
malliable voter in the voting booth on election day. Congraulations.

Vekar..there are people out here who have experiences more than emotions and feelings. Emotions/feeling ..in spite of the political climate are not a default setting to play through unchallanged...as the body politic is wont to use or misuse to control thier voters.
I dont think you are accustomed to people questioning you about your thinking process justified by emotions/feelings. The default setting is more your bailywick.

Thanks,
Orangetom


Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 12:19 PM
link   
If that were a nuclear device, tactical or otherwise, the device making the recording would undoubtedly been immediately disabled upon detonation, from the EMP. Especially considering the range.

No doubt the cameraman would have suffered flash burns as well.

And the power in the entire city would have been disabled.

And the surrounding fires would have been extinguished.

And the buildings in the foreground would have been destroyed by the shockwave.

Etc, etc. etc...

this is straight from the syllabus of Propaganda 101.



posted on Oct, 24 2006 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vekar
That was a low yield nuke, and if you recall all the new names they give them including daisy bombs then this is nothing new. Recall this was an AMMUNITION DEPO! Thus it would have been used by the bu#es and no doubt the Iraq Resistance hit it and set it on fire. Just one problem: maybe they did or didnt know that nuke was in there. If they knew then they didnt want the bu#es using it against them, if they didnt know then it was just a regular attack on ammo depo so that it could no longer be used. The bu#es do not HAVE to use a full fledged nuke in order for it to be considered a "nuclear attack" since the name usualy pertains to massive all out nuclear attacks with ICBM's or missiles. Bu#es want these low yield weapons so they can decimate large areas quickly and never have it considered a nuclear assault, luckily the one in the movie went off before they dropped it on someone.



You mean that this was one of those top secret H-bombs that use nanotechnology? Like the ones they used to knock down the World Trade Center?








GET REAL.

First. Nukes no matter what their size don't detonate when exposed to fire. They cook off. A cook off is just the detonation of the plastic explosive that is used to start the chain reaction when a nuke is properly detonated.

Second. A nuke 1/3 the size of the Hiroshima weapon is still one hell of a bomb. That camera wouldn't be there let alone showing you a picture.

Third. Like Orange said "Where's the radiation?"

Last. If you are trying to hide the so called Nukes why put them in a bunker in Iraq when you could keep them on an aircraft carrier or fly them in from the US. Why take a chance on an insurgent getting lucky?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join