It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Govt. Finds Loopholes: Illegal Missles Are Now Legal

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:23 PM

Originally posted by InSanE1
reply to post by mattifikation

For example, if you were to have an automatic rifle, it would be illegal as well and if caught with one you would be arrested and charged regardless of you trying redefine the weapon type.
[edit on 23-6-2008 by InSanE1]

Not in Texas...

We can have whatever we want down here.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:33 PM
The Cabal wants many countries to hate americans. Build up the fear and animosity. Its part of escalation. THen they can get us to agree to annhilate each other and have more stuff for themselves.

Easier to control less people, especially after chaos.

Dare us to take on china? Yeah, great idea. Lets destroy the whole earth.

On the surface it appears china would whoop our azz but im not so sure. We havent had to use our most sophisticated wtuff since WW2. Think how many years weve been spending far more than china and other countries.

1/3 of the world military spending. Plus unbelievable black budgets nobody knows about. Some are saying, the top elite families could be worth anywhere from 20-120 trillion dollars. And who needs money if we have free energy.

Many of the whistle blowers puts our teechnology in fantasy land. Just cuz our aircraftcarriers look like sitting ducks doesnt mean that cant beam down missiles with lasers or put up force fields. Man who knows.

Whos knows where chinas technology is either.

The western secret gangbanksters control all the western armies. Nobody wants to mess with that. Doesnt matter how tough china or russia are, it means this world will be hell if anyone allows these guys to unload everything.

With free energy all we really need is food and water. And whos the breadbasket?

I prefer peace.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:21 PM
I think everyone got away from the point of the original poster. It's not who was killed in the attack, it's that a country used a loophole to use a weapon system that was considered 'illegal' because of it's possible human right violation.

I won't try to convince anyone weather or not the killing of Talibans is justified, but the fact remain that it is a war. War kill people, that's what they do. But the point here is now why they used the weapon or against whom. It's that they find a way to make it legal. Well, maybe it was simply because the term Thermobaric had not been properly defined in the law. It had no clear cut definition and therefor, renaming the weapon was enough to circumvent that law. Had the term been defined, it would have been more difficult. For example a nuclear weapon is very well defined, calling it a pixie dust propagator doesn't change that it's still classified as a nuclear weapon in the eyes of the law.

The lesson we have to learn here, is to not rush laws. They did not define what exactly a Thermobaric weapon was, and ergo were able to circumvent the law by renaming it. Hopefully, this incident will force UN treaties to be better defined to prevent those sort of things from happening.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:27 PM

Originally posted by ObamaMomma
reply to post by InSanE1
I've said this before and I'll say it again a thousand times.
As long as what the goverment does is to kill bad guys and protect the good 'ol US of A and our allies so be it!

So when you do it, it's ok? But when they do it they're the "bad guys"? Look yourself in the mirror.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:42 PM
reply to post by onlyhurtsu

Oh yeah... the thread.
Government uses loopholes ...
OK, these geniuses used our tax money to break or circumvent the law- hold the presses !
The thing is, you give these guys a bomb that does the job- and they want millions of them and pretty soon they're shredding the internal organs and crushing the bodies of all sorts of people.
If you know much about BDA's, then you know that we're still not worth a damn at dropping bombs... at least not if killing someone dangerous and not killing completely non dangerous people is any benchmark.

As for the Taliban- they can ******* go to ****. The destruction of humanities relics and statements in the form of carved stone, was absolutely unforgiveably stupid and truly barbaric. The murders and terror is partly the West's responsibility, but- so what, now?
I dig your post onlyhurtsu... have you read the Treaty of Paris, where the victorious Americans said things like, 'please, your Highness, might we fish off the Carolinas... ?
The British are the ones at the head, I'm now sure of it. They now own it all and you and me in a sense.
They don't want money-they've been printng it for centuries.
George III got good advice: make a deal, let those bozos fight for it and develop it, and we'll get a smaller cut... but little in expenses.
Everything big I think, originates in London by now.
They've had kindly looking women as figureheads since the 19th century, but I don't think George VI quit over a woman ( cute story ) and I think big-ear Charles is there now. Too bad about Dianna, she looks so good on coins...
The British renamed Russia again in the early 90's... they're on the team thugh they may play spoiler.
The Chinese will bend to the will, if they haven't already. They know communism is a hoax and so commercialism isn't a problem for them.
This cycle of exploitment will end, probably with china being renamed, again.
The people are being told to fear the Chinese, I notice- but it seems subtle so far.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:45 PM
it's funny people believe there are legal and illegal weapons.

remember the first gases they used during WWI ?
no one declared them illegal until the victors decided so in 1919.

Anyway, mattifikation was right. Blowing the crap out of the talibans is surely gonna be a good retaliation for a lot of kids and women blown out by the long-beards

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 08:06 PM
reply to post by altered_states

I'd be more offended except,
1. I was just kidding, I actually like you Brits because you always do what we tell you. ;-)
2. If somebody from the SAS was about to kick my ass, I'd probably eat a bullet out of my own gun just to avoid the pain, and finally;
3. Being called "stuipid" was almost a highlight for this day... thanks!

reply to post by Anonymous ATS

Would I say it's okay? No. They're on my side, and I hope they all come back safely. But there's a difference between "okay" and "legal," and frankly, I can't believe so many people aren't smart enough to see the difference. Actually, I think a lot of you are, but you're completely unwilling to let another great excuse go by to hate Americans. ATS - Exemplify Ignorance!

The fact remains that it's still a bomb, and only a complete and utter idiot would think outlawing bombs in a war would ever be a feasible concept. Maybe in an absolut world, we can all fight with frickin pillows. Until then, we're stuck using bombs. Unless you know some secret that can bring about world peace by sundown tonight, I don't think you know of any ACTUAL, FEASIBLE ALTERNATIVE that there's any hope of accomplishing. Go ahead, feed me some crap about "everyone throw away their guns and just start getting along!"

reply to post by smans

Might I humbly suggest you say something on topic, or start a new thread, which I can skip reading entirely because I've already read fifty other threads from you people that are exactly like it? But we've got enough "gripe about America" threads, so around here you can put it away and talk about the legality of thermobarics, okay?

reply to post by die_another_day

Yes, we use them whenever we want. After ending a world war that would have otherwise ended with an indefinite occupation against an unwielding and imperceptible force (sound a lot like something you clowns rail against daily around here, doesn't it?) with the first two, we sure did go on to nuke the crap out of soooo many other people. Durr!!

reply to post by carole9999

If you want, you can open up a thread about the CIA/Drug Trade connection somewhere and I can glance over it while I continue to rail on you anti-american sheep over here in this one.

For the record, I'd hate watching my family be burned, blown up, shot, stabbed, or hit with an airplane. I'm not sure I understand your point, unless you are ACTUALLY loopy enough to try to make the point that only the people fighting AGAINST the U.S. should be allowed to kill people in a war.

Oh, and at last I come to the end of this long winded, slightly ironic, and highly humorous post. There certainly are a lot of you people, I can't help but wonder when you found the time to get so deeply brainwashed. At least I'm willing to admit, repeatedly, that the U.S. is not without its faults.

You lot sound like you could have a blast over in that turban guy's thread about the evil U.S., I'm pretty sure that's the one you want to be spewing most of this crap out in. This one's about the evil Britain, in case you missed it, and no, I'm not from there (Ironic that I've been sticking up for the British and was called "stuipid" by one of them for doing so, huh?)

I'm not just being self-righteous here. I know I'm not the best debator but I do know blind hatred when I see it. You know what sort of people spew blind hatred at other entire countries? Evil ones, who are brainwashed and too lazy to ever go meet people and make informed opinions about them. And if that's the sort of people you all are, I can't help but wonder why you think you've got any business criticizing anyone else...

ESPECIALLY for using something as unthinkable as figuring out how to make bombs go boom louder in a war!!

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 08:38 PM
Implode them, explode them, it's all the same thing. Dead is dead. The whole argument otherwise is just silly rhetoric by people who think protecting murderous thugs is more important than protecting their innocent victims. In other words, sympathizing with some of the most evil bastards to ever walk the earth.

Every time one of these Monsters lives to kill another day because of this, those who cause them to survive with this nonsense are partially guilty for each innocent person killed by them. I'm sure the victims families would be thrilled to know that because they were imploded, instead of exploded, that they should have been allowed to live to kill other innocent people. This is WAR, not a video game or hypothetical in a university classroom being taught by an Ivy Leaguer who flies to John Hopkins for a hangnail.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 10:56 PM
reply to post by Mad_Hatter

If it were up to me we would have nuked them. I bet you would change your mind with those bastards standing on you while sawing your head off. I hope they suffer, and I hope death comes slow for them. Nobody cares what weapon is used on the Taliban. As long as it kills them.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 11:15 PM
folks i seem to be just a trifle bit confused on this matter. according to the post one would get the impression that these weapons were illegal in some manner. what international law is it exactly that they break. fuel air bombs ( which these are, only more advaneced
) have been around for years in one form or another. these just have a fancy new name. so i suspect that unless one of you fine folk can locate such a law i am going to have to guess that the intrepid reporter got confused about the difference between "controversial" and "illegal

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 11:44 PM
Not sure about the UK, but the United States is not a party to the international rule in question - which is "Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons: Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons".

Again, the United States is not a party to this protocol - it is therefore NOT illegal if the US uses thermobaric weapons.


End of Story.

May they use them well.

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:21 AM
Idiots. "They killed us", so let's kill them back! When does the killing ever end? When do humans stop acting like arrogant children fighting in the playground sandbox? It doesn't if things such as this and far worse are allowed to happen.

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:50 AM
reply to post by Mad_Hatter

“We call it an enhanced blast weapon.”

What's with adding "enhanced" to everything illegal? Can I "enchanced not pay my taxes," because I say it's legal now?

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:02 AM

Originally posted by bios
Not sure about the UK, but the United States is not a party to the international rule in question - which is "Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons: Protocol on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons".

Again, the United States is not a party to this protocol - it is therefore NOT illegal if the US uses thermobaric weapons.


End of Story.

May they use them well.

Problem is, it was the UK who used them.

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 01:23 AM
Sounds like a great weapon to use on them

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:22 AM
reply to post by Torsten

Are you INSANE! You have to be one a coward, or two crazy as hell. What are we suppose to do when we get attacked???? Send them a dozen roses and a card saying "sorry for making you kill us". Cowards like you will never understand what it takes to go to war or what war is like. Nothing macho about it, no chest thumping when that whizzzzzzzzzz POP goes by your head. There are groups of people out there that want to kill us. Thank God we have young men and woman NOT like you who are willing to kill to protect freedom and our way of life. Maybe someday those same kids fighting in wars for us will come home and help us fight for more freedom here at home.

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 04:54 AM

Originally posted by mattifikation
The sad truth is, it's a war over there. The winner will be the one that isn't bound by the rules, every time, without fail. Why? Because it's not a board game or the evening sports, it's a war.

Exactly. There's too many laws about what you can't do to beat the enemy in a WAR. It's down to where we can't even shoot an armed enemy (even if he's holding an RPG) with a mounted .50 cal on a vehicle because it's "inhumane". Who cares? The guy is going to die and not suffer, so why does it matter?

If we weren't bound by all these laws/rules then we'd be a lot farther than we are now over there. I think we should get more Blackwater guys over there since they have the balls to do what's needed. I know I'm gonna get people all whiney about that... but I don't really care. It's a war and we are supposed to do whatever it is to win. To Agit8dChop, if having the same mindset of ObamaMomma about doing whatever it takes means I'm taking the Nazi's position or if it makes me a Nazi... well then I guess I'm a Nazi for wanting terrorists/enemies dead by any means. I AM mostly German so, maybe that's some of my Hitler heritage coming out.

About the OP, if in fact the government did find a loophole and made the weapon no longer illegal... then what's the problem? Maybe whoever created the rule should ratify it so that we can't use the loophole, simple as that. Personally though I think it's an awesome weapon and applaud it's use.

If you don't agree with my views, I really don't care. Call me a Nazi, call me ignorant, call me a terrorist (for playing by their rules), call me whatever. I just know that I'm right and that's all that matters.

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:21 PM
Loophole eh?

Let's not forget one of the most important pieces of the jigsaw here:

The UK is one of the biggest arms dealers in the world - it's all about the money.

As usual.

Nothing to do with anything except that.

You can almost hear the corporate drones "we've tested the new weapons system in afghanistan, and it's worked really well. We've also got around those annoying regulations by calling it something else.

Now Mr Gaddaffi, how many would you like, now that you're back on our friends list"

Makes me sick

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:25 PM
a stupid law to begin with. since when does anyone recognize international law anyway?!?!?!?!

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:52 PM
reply to post by Torsten

you can try saying something like that when one of these barbaric a-holes blow himself up with you famile standing right in front of him (not wishing that on you, or anyone for that matter, just trying to throw some perspective into the mix.) killing is bad, but there are times when killing is the only way, if we don't kill them, they WILL stop at nothing to kill as many of us as possible. as was shown in the attacks on 9/11/01

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in