'USAF struck Syrian nuclear site'

Just how would Al-j know what was on those aircraft? I think that they are putting out anti-USA propaganda. if any had been used even on small scale would have put fallout right over Israel. why would they even load for that? doesn't make sense and Israel wouldn't support it.

reply to post by Now_Then

---

Perhaps if you find it, others here will interpret the graph for us?

Everyone seems to agree on Sept. 6th. IIRC it was early morning, just after dawn Syria time. The location? Reported to be Here. Zoom out as needed to get a handle on just where that is.

Best of luck.

[edit on 11/2/07 by makeitso]

And this post should have ended this thread. Closed - done. Instead we get personal attacks and continued fantastical make believe stories. Time to move on....

[edit on 11/2/07 by surfinguru]

reply to post by surfinguru

---

I think we can be fairly sure that if there were any evidence that the USAF had launched ANY KIND if attack on Syria, then the Syrian Government would be kicking up one enormous stink in the UN General Assembly and there would be mass protests in the streets of all the world's major capital cities.

If any kind of battlefield/tactical/strategic weapon with a nuclear component had been used by Israel or any other power, on Syria or elsewhere, then we can be pretty sure the site in Syria would be crawling with international media and this would be the dominant story on the airwaves for weeks past.

But wait - ah, the origin of this 'nuclear armed aircraft' story is 'an anonymous source...a businessman' somewhere. Oh, that would be 100% reliable then.

The story is rubbish, obviously.

and in alternative news found at

source

the dog walker of the son of the second cousin of an unamed undersecretary of someone sort of important has said that the story in the link is in fact false and that it was the elite strike fighters ( The British Aerospace FA-38 `Nightwraith`) sold to a `foreign unamed government` using red mercury weapons that attacked the target.


apparantly they also landed and had a cup of tea as well.

That was part of my early post when I said who is to say we were not flying with the RAF just to make sure that they wree firing on what they said they were doing. Like I said earlier, we might have just been along for the ride.

reply to post by Harlequin

---

Thnak you very much for contributing your very educated opinion to the thread.

reply to post by traderonwallst

---

i guess the satire was lost upon you.a shame.

Let me get this straight Trader. You seem to think US planes carried out the attack and were carrying tactical nukes but didn't use them and used conventional bomb loads to destroy the Syrian target. At the same time Israeli jets, are just up above Syria as a distraction? Convulted to say the least as the Israeli jets were more than capable of doing the task.

If they used a tactical nuke the photo evidence afterwards does not indicate it. Those photos should be the nail in the coffin of your claims.

What is your rationale for having US jets do the job when Israel is/was more than willing to do it themselves. Just doesn't make much sense.

Also there is a big difference between tactical nukes and strategic ones, get your terminology straight.

USAF using a nuclear weapon? BS. If nuclear weapons were used, many countries would have detected it and start whining like toddlers.

I'm glad that site was destroyed. Israel did the world a HUGE favor when they did the same to Iraq. Good for whoever did it to Syria. Remember:

The worse thing to do against evil is Nothing.

I forgot, was it you I was having the discussion with in another thread regarding the "after" pictures as compared to the "waaaay after" pictures?

Can you point me in the direction of those "after" pictures?

Peace

[edit on 2-11-2007 by Dr Love]

The most amusing aspect of this...

It's not that the raid was carried out by U.S. aircraft carrying tactical nuclear weapons, nor that nuclear weapons were used to eradicate the suspected reactor site. It's not that Israel was relegated to a diversionary role in the strike, and had no issue with nuclear weapons being used so close to their border. It's not that Syria would suffer a covert nuclear strike withing their borders and not even utter a peep. It's not that the surrounding countries would also remain completely silent about a nuclear strike and the subsequent fallout from such a strike. It's not that the China, Russia, France and the U.K. who have the ability to detect such an event have made no mention of it...

No, the most amusing thing is that Al-Jezeera has presented this to "story" to it's target audience as "news."

It was a tactical nuke. Not to be confused with Little Boy or Fat Man which were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, respectively.

No disrespect, thats still a big bomb.

[edit on 2-11-2007 by deltaboy]

reply to post by deltaboy

---

Oh, I agree. And I NEVER advocate war, much less the use of nuclear weapons.

But, some on here were reflecting upon the days of old when nuclear weapons wiped out entire cities. No longer is that a must on the modern battlefield.

Weapons that once could level an entire city:


Have been reduced to be able to target manufacturing facilities, while limiting collateral damage:

And al-jazeera knows the loadout HOW?

Do you think they tow a big banner - Nuclear Weapon On-board?

Come on, guy, common sense would have you question their magic knowledge of classified info! LOGIC LOGIC LOGIC!

They still create identifiable emissions.

Especially in a ground burst. You could limit it somewhat in an airburst with the right weapon. But ground contact makes for isotope production.

reply to post by pavil

---

Is it our right as America and Israel to determine what is right and what is wrong? Who is evil, who is righteous? That saying changes drastically when the perspective is changed, and one dimensional thinking isn't healthy for "understanding."

Al Jazeera's English website is not reporting this, at least based on my searches of the site. Can anyone else find it?

No plane would take off on an offensive strike carrying a nuclear payload unless they plan to use it.