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.

 

US nuked Iraq in 1991

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kryties
The fact is the U.S. has killed more people and committed other such atrocities, in more countries than any other country on Earth since WW2.

Stop trying to imply that I do not recognise that other countries, including my own, have also committed atrocities. I have already covered that in previous posts and it only serves to drag this argument down.
[edit on 25/10/2008 by Kryties]


Ok, you recognize other countries, but then turn around and claim that the US supposedly killing 15-20 million from Korea to the 2nd Gulf War is by far the worst since WWII. Let's look at a few numbers shall we?

Post WWII German Expulsion:
Killed 2,100,000

Chinese Civil War (1945-1949):
Killed 6,194,000

Mao Zedong's Regime (1949-1975):
Median estimates are between 45.75 to 52.5 million killed, total number unknown for certain.

Rwanda and Burundi (1959-1995):
Medians are 1.2M
Range is 0.7-1.7M

Ethiopia (1962-1992):
Killed 1,400,000

Kinshasa Congo (1998-)
Killed 3,800,000

I think that this proves that the US is hardly the most dangerous nation out there. Many of these have NOTHING to do with US involvment, and all are post WWII. The US does NOT have a lock on atrocities around the world.




posted on Oct, 25 2008 @ 11:06 PM
link   
I don't think anyone doubts the U.S has commited atrocities. However, to say that atrocities point to nuclear use is preposterous. Ask yourself this.

  • 1. What would the U.S gain from Nuking Iraq of all places?
  • 2. What would the U.S LOOSE from Nuking Iraq of all places?


I'll tell you the answers. 1. Nothing - The Iraq military was so inferior to the U.S that nuking would acheive nothing over conventional use, infact if it were on the last day of the war, what is the point? There would be no military left to destroy. Hell, claim your existing bombs were inferior then give a big assed government contract to Military Industrial Complex, as per usual. 2. Everything - satellites in space are designed to detect Nuclear explosions, the Chinese and Russians would string the U.S up if they found out.

Furthermore, was there any EMP? No. Was there any recorded over pressure, OR Was there any big assed crater in the ground? No, and No.

There was no nuke. Get over it.

[edit on 25/10/2008 by C0bzz]



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by schism85
reply to post by Kryties
 


Iam saying I will no longer feed the troll and his thread. Can you read!! I have said that over and over, and you still don't get it.

That dude suffers from aggravated cretenism -- a transparent case. If this DNA gets passed around real quick through genetic inheritance, then it's back to caves in the next millennium -- unless the USA recognizes the danger and kills the carriers.



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 02:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ergoli
 


My husband was in Iraq at that time, and I promise you there was no nuclear attack. None. Where ever this snippet originated it is garbage, probably some al jazeera propagada tv station.



posted on Oct, 26 2008 @ 02:27 AM
link   
As pointed out, this is a duplicate thread that was well debated HERE

...feel free to add any addition thoughts to that one. As per procedure this thread will be locked.

As a side note - waaaaay too much personal attacks happening in this thread...please debate the POST not the POSTER people.


Cheers.



new topics

top topics
 
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join