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.

 

United States has, unbeknownst to America, detonated Nuclear Weapons in the Middle East

page: 1
66
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+27 more 
posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I am an American. And I am ashamed....

It has been revealed that the United States has been using Tactical Nuclear Weapons against 'Targets of Interest', since the original Gulf War under President George H.W. Bush and continues even today, in the 'War of Terror' (pun intended).


"The BLU-82 and the MOAB are, in fact, much larger and more powerful weapons even than an FAE. They are based on a mix of ammonium nitrate and powdered aluminium in an aqueous suspension or slurry, with a binding agent to hold the materials together before detonation. The effect of the BLU-82 is astonishing, and rare film shows a detonation, shock wave and subsequent mushroom cloud very similar to a small nuclear weapon, even if it is actually a conventional bomb."

After sending these musings to some friends, and people on my lists, one of them wrote me back saying:

"Hi,

My brother is an ex-Marine (I know - no such thing). He told me months ago (rather casually, I'm afraid) - when we were arguing over the phone about Bush possibly using nukes on Iraq - that these were just low-grade depleted uranium nukes they were talking about using - NOT the mushroom-cloud generating nukes that we traditionally think of when we talk about nukes - e.g., the ones that were used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki... Besides, he told me - the US had ALREADY used many of these low-grade depleted uranium nukes in Iraq, during the FIRST Persian Gulf war, back in the early 90's. He seemed to believe that this was common knowledge amongst the military, and most ex-military personnel. He said the only difference between Bush I and Bush II was that Bush II was being straight up front about the use of these weapons."

To which I replied:

"Thank you for sharing with us this insight of a man on the spot. Please thank your brother too. I am quite certain that your brother has had solid information that nuclear weapons were used, especially in the landings on the Kuwaiti shore. However, I believe your brother was referring to a LOW-YIELD Nuclear Weapon, rather than a LOW-GRADE weapon? It is almost impossible to get a fission reaction going with U-238 except under immense neutron flux, it being, under normal conditions, a FISSIONABLE material, but NOT a FISSILE material, the latter class being capable of spontaneous fission under certain quantitative and kinetic material density increases and other considerations, as is possible with the traditional U-235 and Plutonium-239. However, U-238 or so-called "Depleted Uranium", i.e., U-238 fairly leached of its fissile U-235 content, IS fissionable under heavy neutron flux, which jumps it up into Plutonium 239 when it is deliberately used for the casing on the FUSION aggregate of a thermonulear weapon (Hydrogen Bomb)."

"What I believe your brother meant, are LOW-YIELD nuclear weapons, i.e., of (relatively) low energy output, (between a few tons' and a few hundred tons' TNT-equivalent) which, due to clever design, such as the use of Red Mercury or Mercuric-Stibic Heptoxide (Hg2Sb2O7) as carrier and tamper for Pu-239 incorporated into its crystalline structure, combined with electromagnetic implosion using heavy fields generated by FCGs (Flux-Compression (explosive) Generators), can make even relatively miniscule amounts of Pu-239 fission, and are also much more efficient in the percentage of fissile material they manage to fission when they are initiated, so fallout is low, and the "Neutron Bomb" which is something like a very small nuke, produces a high-density neutron flux which can penetrate armor and also underground facilities and killed, most likely, the Iraqi soldiers in their dugouts in Kuwait, before they were bulldozed over."


As the 'War on Terror' began, a plan for the use of Tactical, Low Grade Nuclear Weapons became an established agenda... With the implimentation of the Lucom Plan !


The Lucom Plan: Use the Neutron Bomb
Wilson C. Lucom
Wednesday, Oct. 3, 2001
Here is the Lucom Plan to save the United States from being destroyed as a great nation by worldwide terrorism. It could also save your life if the terrorists struck in your neighborhood.
President Bush and Congress must realize the very survival of the United States as a great nation is now at stake. The United States will not survive unless President Bush and Congress take action now before there is another terrorist strike. This could be one of the last strikes against the U.S.

Part 1 of Lucom Plan

Instead of being "politically correct," President Bush must be like the great Harry Truman, who was "politically incorrect" in having the courage to drop the atomic bomb on Japan, immediately ending World War II and saving thousands of American soldiers' lives. President Bush must immediately drop the neutron bomb, ending the terrorist war immediately. He must drop the neutron bomb instead of allowing the war to continue, which would keep his high approval ratings but let hundreds of thousands of American soldiers be killed unnecessarily.

Psychologically, the threat of an action is almost as effective as the action itself. Bush should at least threaten to use the neutron bomb to isolate the nations that protect terrorism from the nations that support the United States.

President Bush has to have foresight, or the U.S. is lost forever. He has to choose to be a great president like Harry Truman and drop the neutron bomb, saving thousands of American soldiers' lives. He must not waste more precious time trying to build a weak coalition of those nations that support the United States in name only. They do not support the U.S. with their military forces, which means they will strongly oppose attacking any nations that harbor terrorists.

President Bush does not need the consent of the U.N. or any Arab nations in a coalition to defend the U.S. against terrorist attack. President Bush must defend the U.S. first before any more terrorist attacks can occur. This is why the Lucom Plan must be used. The more Bush delays, attempting to build the tenuous coalition, the more time he gives the terrorists for more attacks on the U.S. It is believed that the State Department is giving Bush bad advice, not the Department of Defense.

CONTINUED.....


[edit on 26-3-2010 by DarkspARCS]




posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:08 PM
link   

How can you stop this terrorism? Join our movement to get President Bush and Congress to use the Lucom Plan. The Lucom Plan would put an end to terrorism not just in one country but wherever it exists. Neutron-bomb them first – before they attack the U.S. again. Otherwise the war against terrorism could continue for 10 years at great cost to the United States in huge war taxes and the loss of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers' lives. This must be avoided. It is hoped Bush wants to save these soldiers' lives. Truman did!

To exist, terrorism needs a country from which it can operate and in which it can be protected. This delay gives the terrorists enough time to kill millions of Americans and eventually destroy the United States. President Bush must first hold a public war trial in the United States, charging all terrorists, either by name or as John and Jane Doe, as being evil and condemning them to death. The terrorists, after all, condemned to death without a trial over 6.000 Americans in the Twin Towers terrorist attack. If another terrorist attack appears imminent, Bush must use the neutron bomb without waiting for the trial to end.

President Bush must tell any country harboring and protecting the terrorists that they are condemned to death and the U.S. demands their immediate extradition to carry out the death sentence. Otherwise, the terrorists will strike again. Bush must tell any harboring country that if it refuses to turn over the terrorists it is collaterally guilty with the terrorists, and the United States will immediately drop the neutron bomb on it until it no longer exists as a nation. This is what Harry Truman would have done. This takes leadership in the best interest of the U.S., not the followership of the Arab nations.

The United States will drop the neutron bomb on all nations that harbor terrorists. It is far cheaper and will cost far fewer lives of American troops than a ground war. Not one American soldier would be killed. The harboring country would be bombed as Japan was bombed. If Iraq or another terrorist-supporting country was bombed, the other harboring countries would get the message and oust all terrorists, leaving them nowhere to go. They would be turned over to the U.S. for carrying out the death sentence or cease to operate. Even if not turned over, they would have no home base to gather and plan future attacks, so they would be out of business. The Lucom Plan is the most competent, efficient way to end terrorism in a short time – wherever it exists.

Part 2 of Lucom Plan

If President Bush wants to simultaneously try a nonviolent plan (because Gen. Powell said war is evil and all nonviolent ways must first be tried), here is the Worldwide Organized Voters Ending War Nonviolent Plan.

President Bush and Congress should offer $1 billion for the capture of Osama bin Laden and any other terrorist leaders. A protracted war could cost up to $500 billion. World War II, at today's prices, cost $486 billion, with over 1 million American soldiers killed and injured. What a horrible cost! Compared to $486 billion, this billion-dollar reward is minute. It is a very small amount to the U.S. government, whose 2001 annual budget is $1.3 trillion. The U. S. government can easily offer this billion-dollar reward for the capture of terrorists. Even if five terrorist leaders were caught, it is still a minute amount to pay out compared to $500 billion a protracted war could cost.

President Bush, Vice President Cheney and Congress are absolutely against offering such a large reward, but they are very wrong. Such a huge reward would shorten any war considerably, saving hundreds of thousands of American soldiers' lives. President Bush and Congress must try to save the lives of American soldiers by offering the billion-dollar reward.

Osama bin Laden has laid a clever trap for President Bush. He wants Bush to use American troops. This is pitting Christian non-Muslim infidels against Muslin troops, uniting the Muslim countries against the United States and probably starting World War III. Bush can evade this bin Laden trap by hiring or else supplying Muslim troops like Afghanistan's Northern Military Alliance. He should supply them with guns, ammunition, Stingers and other war equipment to defeat the Taliban. Thus, Bush will have evaded the bin Laden trap by having Muslims fighting against Muslims. The $1 billion reward would really motivate them.

It is reported there are over 200,000 Iranian soldiers on the border of Afghanistan because Iran worries that Afghanistan might use the guided missiles it is developing against Iran. If the billion-dollar reward were also offered to these Iranian troops, Osama bin Laden and other terrorists would soon be caught.

In this nonviolent way, up to 1 million American soldiers will not be killed or injured. This is why the nonviolent Plan should be tried simultaneously with the violent Plan. Either way, under the Lucom Plan the United States ends the terrorist war soon.

If Bush delays too long consulting the U.N. and possible future Arab enemies by trying to build a tenuous coalition, kiss the United States goodbye as a great nation. President Bush has been reacting instead of vigorously, determinedly acting in the best interest of the United States. Terrorism must be stopped before it can again attack the United States. The Lucom Plan does this. Voters should contact their senators and congressmen urging the adoption of the Lucom Plan, including the billion-dollar reward offered by the president.

Wilson C. Lucom is a former assistant to U.S. Secretary of State Stentenius.


It Appears that Bush listened... :

US accused of using neutron bombs in Iraq

CONTINUED....

[edit on 26-3-2010 by DarkspARCS]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:11 PM
link   

The former commander of Iraq's Republican Guard has accused the US of using non-conventional weapons in its war against the Middle East country.
Saifeddin Fulayh Hassan Taha al-Rawi told Al Jazeera that US forces used neutron and phosphorus bombs during their assault on Baghdad airport before

the April 9 capture of the Iraqi capital. Al-Rawi is one of the most wanted associates of Saddam Hussein, the deposed Iraqi leader, still on the run.

"The enemy used neutron and phosphorus weapons against Baghdad airport... there were bodies burnt to their bones," he said. "The bombs annihilated soldiers but left the buildings and infrastructure at the airport intact, he added."

A neutron bomb is a thermonuclear weapon that produces minimal blast and heat but releases large amounts of lethal radiation that can penetrate armour and is especially destructive to human tissue. About 2,000 elite Republican Guard troops "fought until they were martyred", according to al-Rawi. He said the Iraqi military command was surprised by the speed of the US land offensive, expecting air bombardment to last much longer. "We had not expected the enemy to launch its land offensive from the very first or second day. We expected the air raids to last at least a month," he said.

"The land offensive came at the same time as the air offensive. That was a situation we did not expect," he told Al Jazeera. Al-Rawi, who carries a $1m US bounty on his .,

was also the jack of clubs on the deck of cards of 55 most wanted Iraqis distributed by the Pentagon before the invasion in 2003


Encyclopaedia Britannica: Neutron Bomb

"Tactical neutron bombs are primarily intended to kill soldiers who are protected by armor. Armored vehicles are very resistant to blast and heat produced by nuclear weapons, but steel armor can reduce neutron radiation only by a modest amount so the lethal range from neutrons greatly exceeds that of other weapon effects. The lethal range for tactical neutron bombs can exceed the lethal range for blast and heat even for unprotected troops. Armor can absorb neutrons and neutron energy, thus reducing the neutron radiation to which the tank crew is exposed, but this offset to some extent by the fact that armor can also react harmfully with neutrons. Alloy steels for example can develop induced radioactivity that remains dangerous for some time. When fast neutrons are slowed down, the energy lost can show up as x-rays. Some types of armor, like that of the M-1 tank, employ depleted uranium which can undergo fast fission, generating additional neutrons and becoming radioactive. Special neutron absorbing armor techniques have also been developed, such as armors containing boronated plastics and the use of vehicle fuel as a shield."

"Also called ENHANCED RADIATION WARHEAD, specialized type of small thermonuclear weapon that produces minimal blast and heat but which releases large amounts of lethal radiation. The neutron bomb delivers blast and heat effects that are confined to an area of only a few hundred yards in radius. But within a somewhat larger area it throws off a massive wave of neutron and gamma radiation, which can penetrate armour or several feet of earth. This radiation is extremely destructive to living tissue. Because of its short-range destructiveness and the absence of long-range effect, the neutron bomb would be highly effective against tank and infantry formations on the battlefield but would not endanger cities or other population centres only a few miles away. It can be carried in a Lance missile or delivered by an 8-inch (200-millimetre) howitzer, or possibly by attack aircraft.

In strategic terms, the neutron bomb has a theoretical deterrent effect: discouraging an armoured ground assault by arousing the fear of neutron bomb counterattack. The bomb would disable enemy tank crews in minutes, and those exposed would die within days. U.S. production of the bomb was postponed in 1978 and resumed in 1981."

Neutron Bomb Historicity:

Sam Cohen is considered the father of the neutron bomb. In the summer of 1958 he began investigating the possibility of large thermonuclear weapons. In his research, Cohen argued that if the uranium casing of a hydrogen bomb were removed, the neutrons released would travel great distances, penetrating even well-shielded structures with lethal doses of radiation and harming anyone inside. The idea of the neutron war. has been hotly debated since its inception. At the time of its introduction, some felt that its relatively small initial blast and fallout was ideal for use in densely populated areas, like Europe. Other proponents argued that deployment of the neutron war. could be used as a bargaining chip against the Soviet SS-20 missile which was viewed as a threat to NATO forces in Europe. Opponents of the weapon argued that the neutron bomb made the idea of using nuclear weapons in war more conceivable. Because the neutron bomb would devastate the whole of a target, military planners might not be as hesitant to use the neutron bomb as they would a standard fission bomb.

From the Lab to the Battlefield? Nanotechnology and Fourth-Generation Nuclear Weapons

Quote from ATS thread on 4th Generation Nuclear Weapons:


Fourth-Generation Nuclear Weapons

First- and second-generation nuclear weapons are atomic and hydrogen bombs developed during the 1940s and 1950s, while third-generation weapons comprise a number of concepts developed between the 1960s and 1980s, e.g. the neutron bomb, which never found a permanent place in the military arsenals. Fourth-generation nuclear weapons are new types of nuclear explosives that can be developed in full compliance with the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) using inertial confinement fusion (ICF) facilities such as the NIF in the US, and other advanced technologies which are under active development in all the major nuclear-weapon states - and in major industrial powers such as Germany and Japan.11


CONTINUED...



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:13 PM
link   

In a nutshell, the defining technical characteristic of fourth-generation nuclear weapons is the triggering - by some advanced technology such as a superlaser, magnetic compression, antimatter, etc. - of a relatively small thermonuclear explosion in which a deuterium-tritium mixture is burnt in a device whose weight and size are not much larger than a few kilograms and litres. Since the yield of these war.s could go from a fraction of a ton to many tens of tons of high-explosive equivalent, their delivery by precision-guided munitions or other means will dramatically increase the fire-power of those who possess them - without crossing the threshold of using kiloton-to-megaton nuclear weapons, and therefore without breaking the taboo against the first-use of weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, since these new weapons will use no (or very little) fissionable materials, they will produce virtually no radioactive fallout. Their proponents will define them as "clean" nuclear weapons - and possibly draw a parallel between their battlefield use and the consequences of the expenditure of depleted uranium ammunition.12

In practice, since the controlled release of thermonuclear energy in the form of laboratory scale explosions (i.e., equivalent to a few kilograms of high-explosives) at ICF facilities like NIF is likely to succeed in the next 10 to 15 years, the main arms control question is how to prevent this know-how being used to manufacture fourth-generation nuclear weapons. As we have already seen, nanotechnology and micromechanical engineering are integral parts of ICF pellet construction. But this is also the case with ICF drivers and diagnostic devices, and even more so with all the hardware that will have to be miniaturised and 'ruggedised' to the extreme in order to produce a compact, robust, and cost-effective weapon.

A thorough discussion of the potential of nanotechnology and microelectromechanical engineering in relation to the emergence of fourth-generation nuclear weapons is therefore of the utmost importance. It is likely that this discussion will be difficult, not just because of secrecy and other restrictions, but mainly because the military usefulness and usability of these weapons is likely to remain very high as long as precision-guided delivery systems dominate the battlefield. It is therefore important to realise that the technological hurdles that have to be overcome in order for laboratory scale thermonuclear explosions to be turned into weapons may be the only remaining significant barrier against the introduction and proliferation of fourth-generation nuclear weapons. For this reason alone - and there are many others, beyond the scope of this paper - very serious consideration should be given to the possibility of promoting an 'Inner Space Treaty' to prohibit the military development and application of nanotechnological devices and techniques.


The accusation from the Iraqi Commander of the Republican Guard has been substantiated by both Military Analysist David Hambling, as a weapon known as the AGM - 114N, and by Retired U.S. Army Captain Eric May, a former intelligence and public affairs officer, who believes that the U.S. military did use neutron weapons in the Battle of Baghdad.


While no major U.S. media have reported on the neutron bomb charge, David Hambling, author of “Weapons Grade: How Modern Warfare Gave Birth to Our High-Tech World,” says there’s something to it. Hambling notes that the U.S. has already admitted to the use of phosphorus weapons in the Iraq invasion.

Writing on April 13 for the Danger Room blog at Wired, Hambling says that from the description al-Rawi gives in the Al Jazeera interview of a series of explosions that killed the occupants of buildings without destroying the structures, “Interestingly, there is a weapon in the U.S. arsenal designed to do exactly that. ... The AGM-114N.”

Hambling continues, “On May 15th, 2003, just a few weeks after the action at Baghdad airport, Donald Rumsfeld praised the new weapon. ... Although officially described as ‘metal augmented’ or even ‘hyperbaric,’ the new war. is not distinguishable from thermobaric weapons which produce the same sort of enhanced blast with a lower overpressure and longer duration for more destructive effects. Like many thermobarics, the AGM-114N used finely powdered aluminum. The military are generally quiet about thermobarics because they have received such bad press. Human Rights Watch criticized them because they ‘kill and injure in a particularly brutal manner over a wide area.’



Captain May says, "I think the Battle of Baghdad was emblematic of the whole misadventure in the Middle East. There is nothing that I thought then that I don’t think now has been validated by time. The American public still doesn’t know that there was a Battle of Baghdad because the media-military apparatus constructed the Private Jessica Lynch mess to hold attention."

May continues: "The best evidence that I have from international sources, scientific sources, is that our position was becoming untenable at the Baghdad airport and we used a neutron war., at least one. That is the big secret of Baghdad airport. If one looks into international data, there are reportings of enhanced radiation of some livestock, and of human metabolic effects—death and disease. It explains why, after the Battle of Baghdad, we got fragmentary stories of things like truckloads of dirt being moved out and moved in. It made no particular sense at the time, until one puts it into perspective, as a decontamination operation. Again, that part of the Battle of Baghdad, the fact that we went nuclear, explains a lot of things that came out afterwards and also explains why it is that it had to be covered up."


CONTINUED...



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   
Another report indicates that the Baghdad Airport wasn't the only location in Iraq Neutron bombs were used. A report from 2008 Describing the burns sustained by a 12 year old little boy shows that they could only have been substantiated through the use of a Neutron Thermobaric Weapon.


Ten days into Operation Iraqi Freedom, 12 year Ali Abbas’ family was burned alive. He, himself, sustained bizarre non-contact heat burns across his torso and his forearms which were both incinerated. The village where this horrifying crime was committed was 30 miles from Baghdad. Ten members of Ali’s family turned into dust and the only evidence of this crime that we have is Ali’s burned body. But these burns, while they result in the same disabilities and liabilities to survivability as if they were contact burns, are not, in fact, contact burns. These are radiation burns. Anyone who has watched what happens to organic material that cooks too long inside of a microwave oven will attest, the substance in the oven burns from the inside, out.

But beyond the nature of the burns there is the rectangular area of Ali’s burns: Ali’s . and legs are left intact, suggesting that whatever ionizing radiation struck near his family’s home in March, 2003, that radiation was readily deflected by the everyday building materials available in a Baghdad suburb in 2003. Only neutron radiation can be deflected by common household building materials. Provided that the blast is far enough away from the building to leave it standing, a tactical neutron bomb can readily incinerate human bodies unprotected by distance (from the blast), or common materials (such as graphite) that can readily absorb excess neutrons.


More reports have trickled out of various regions where the U.S. has infiltrated about additional Nuclear Weapons being used in Afghanistan as well. Dr. Mohammed Daud Miraki, MA, MA, PhD exposes this quite frankly:

WARNING: CONTAINS GRAPHIC IMAGES !!




However, the form that is exercised currently is the indiscriminate use of the Weapons of Mass Destruction, namely the usage of uranium based weapons. This mode of the perpetual death lives up to its name because it continues to foster deaths of thousands silently and indiscriminately. In fact, the usage of the Weapons of Mass Destruction alters the texture of the ecosystem wherein the victims reside. This ultimately condemns the people living there and future generations to death, and deprives them of their fundamental human right, the right to live.

The perpetrators of this horrible crime are the governments of the United States and that of the United Kingdom. The US and the UK are the only two countries used these horrible weapons indiscriminately in Iraq during the Gulf War and Balkans in the 1990s and in Afghanistan from October 7th, 2001 onward. Meanwhile, based on past experiences with victims of the US-UK bombing in Iraq and the Balkans, every informed source suspected to have similar situation in Afghanistan. Tragically, the US-UK armed forces have used three times more uranium based weapons in Afghanistan than they did in Iraq or in the Balkans. In fact, the types of Weapons of Mass Destruction used in Afghanistan are more potent than those used in Iraq.

This became evident with the recent report by the Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC), establishing the presence of a mysterious metal in Afghan soil samples and urine samples of victims. The investigation carried out by the two teams of experts, one concentrated on the city of Jalal Abad while the other on the capital Kabul. The two teams gathered data and established the use of uranium-based weapons there. They discovered symptoms in population of illnesses associated with exposure to depleted uranium contamination similar to that in Iraq and Balkans. This added to the curiosity of the investigators and collected soil samples from impact sites to investigate them here in the US. The investigators were also surprised to find high concentration of uranium in the urine of subjects from Jala Abad. In fact, the level of uranium was 400% to 2000%, the highest level of uranium ever recorded in civilian population. Incidentally, the uranium discovered in the urine samples from subjects in Jala-Abad exhibited characteristics more potent than depleted uranium. The report said the following in regards to the impact of the uranium-based weapons:

"Dr. Asaf Durakovic, a professor of nuclear medicine and radiology and a former science adviser to the US military, who set-up the independent UMRC, has been testing US, British, and Canadian troops and civilians for DU and uranium poisoning over the past few years. His findings confirm significant amounts in the subjects' urine as much as nine years after exposure."


This is a comprehensive report, based upon an ATS thread posted in 2007significantly hinting at this possibility.

The facts have been told people. IRREFUTABLE evidence that the United States has implemented Weapons of Mass Destruction in the form of Low Yield Tactical Nuclear Bombs, on top of the depleted uranium shells and grenades already exposed as being used, and this folks, is a crime we will have to answer for as a Nation.

I simply CANNOT believe it.


[edit on 26-3-2010 by DarkspARCS]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   
wow,
all I can say is wow
kinda make u think twice about their use at ground zero
in NY on 9/11.

lots of material to cover here so I'll be back

S&F 4U



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Can we have a summary of this extremely lengthy post. My attention span is about that of a gold fish. It looks like you did an excellent job gathering information on the subject.
I will read it and try to digest all this info.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:53 PM
link   
I am emailing all Main Stream Media outlets with this info. so far I've sent this to the Associated Press and MSNBC. more to follow... Including any replies from them that I get...



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:54 PM
link   
I will wait pending further clarification. However i find it amazing that the use of a battlefield tech nuke would not be noticed - either in effect or residual fall out.

Maybe the op is confusing the use of DP (depleted uranium) shells against armour instead of the release of conventional (battlefield) nukes.


+12 more 
posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silk
Maybe the op is confusing the use of DP (depleted uranium) shells against armour instead of the release of conventional (battlefield) nukes.


That's what I'm thinking.

Because I'm raising the BS Flag on this one.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpaDe_
Can we have a summary of this extremely lengthy post. My attention span is about that of a gold fish. It looks like you did an excellent job gathering information on the subject.
I will read it and try to digest all this info.


I agree. I started scrolling like crazy after about 45 seconds.

Back in the day, I knew a guy who was in the first gulf war, and when he got back, he was telling us that he witnessed nukes being used there. We didn't really know whether to believe him at the time. I wonder if all the press about the MOAB years ago was a little propaganda piece to cover their butts about some really big explosions?



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Miniatures nuclear bombs, that is plausible! Cheap and effective!



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
I too have to seriously question the use of "low yield" weapons. I think the "depleted uranium" reference gives it away here.

No fusion...no fission...but lots of very heavy depleted uranium.

Sometimes people hear uranium...and jump to conclusions. I am in no way suggesting the OP mis-lead anyone, but that maybe his sources were confused.

But a s&f flag for a well done post! Fantastic info and a good read...thanks!

[edit on 3/26/2010 by rotorwing]

[edit on 3/26/2010 by rotorwing]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
It makes sense. The depleted uranium shells are just the cover story for all the radiation related illnesses and injuries being reported in Iraq and even on our own soldiers. If this gets out the whole world will turn against us in a very profound manner. his just sickens me and shows just how evil those in power really are.

The brings another question what about those in our military who are implementing these things do they not know what they are implementing or just don't give a damn? Maybe this accounts for the high rate of suicide in our military. Either they are offing themselves when they realize fully what they are doing or they are being made to appear as if they are offing themselves when their conscience forces them to threaten to blow the whistle?

This also has serious implications if civil war breaks out in America and they use these weapons here... This might just be why they do not seem to fear American patriots when the should... These arrogant bastards make me sick!

Disgusting all the way around!



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkspARCS
The accusation from the Iraqi Commander of the Republican Guard has been substantiated by both Military Analysist David Hambling, as a weapon known as the AGM - 114N, and by Retired U.S. Army Captain Eric May, a former intelligence and public affairs officer, who believes that the U.S. military did use neutron weapons in the Battle of Baghdad.



Funny. I was at the Battle of Bagdad. I was in an aircraft orbiting just west of the city. I think they would have told us something.

And I wouldn't imagine "The Worker" having any sort of agenda......


The AGM-114N is another varient of the Hellfire. Made to take out a single floor of a building.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Here are 3 vidz about missiles:









[edit on 26-3-2010 by St-Patrick]

[edit on 26-3-2010 by St-Patrick]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:38 PM
link   
Originally posted by jerico65
Originally posted by DarkspARCS

The accusation from the Iraqi Commander of the Republican Guard has been substantiated by both Military Analysist David Hambling, as a weapon known as the AGM - 114N, and by Retired U.S. Army Captain Eric May, a former intelligence and public affairs officer, who believes that the U.S. military did use neutron weapons in the Battle of Baghdad.




Funny. I was at the Battle of Bagdad. I was in an aircraft orbiting just west of the city. I think they would have told us something.


I can't believe I am hearing this from a military man. The military is notorious for only telling things on a need to know basis. And if this was to be covert then why in the world would they tell you or anyone something?


And I wouldn't imagine "The Worker" having any sort of agenda......


What worker are you talking about?



[edit on 26-3-2010 by hawkiye]



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
lol. Well I can firmly tell you, without your permission, that I whole heartedly believe the account of Retired U.S. Army Captain Eric May, a former intelligence and public affairs officer, who believes that the U.S. military did use neutron weapons.

Anyway, these are the news entities that I've sent this to lol...

If I disappear, please remember me, and my efforts to be an American, and to do so with humanity. I will be leaving behind a loving wife, and faithful dog if it happens. MAY GOD HELP US ALL.



MSNBC:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the first news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to report on, but nuclear warfare is not...
It would be nice if America reported this, and NOT Russia, for a change....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
www.msnbc.msn.com...

ASSOCIATED PRESS:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the second news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to report about, but nuclear warfare is not...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
www.ap.org...

CNN:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the third news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to report on, but nuclear warfare is not...
It would be nice if America reported this, and NOT Russia, for a change....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
www.cnn.com...

CBS:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the fourth news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to report about, but nuclear warfare is not...
It would be nice if America reported this, and NOT Russia, for a change....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
www.cbsnews.com...

ABC:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts. You are the fifth news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out.
It would be nice if America reported this, and NOT Russia, for a change....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
abcnews.go.com...

REUTERS:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the sixth news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to inform others about, but nuclear warfare is not...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
reuters-en.custhelp.com... ts=&p_hidden_prods=&p_new_search=1&p_prod_lvl1=&p_mast.=us&p_pv=2.47&p_prods=19%2C47&prod_lvl1=19&prod_lvl2=47

TIMES UK:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the seventh news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to report about, but nuclear warfare is not...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
news@timesonline.co.uk


NEW YORK TIMES:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the eighth news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to report about, but nuclear warfare is not...
It would be nice if America reported this, and NOT Russia, for a change....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
public@nytimes.com

LOS ANGELES TIMES:
Greetings!

Please find enclose a report I've compiled revealing the context of this email's title. It provides all the links and the facts.
You are the ninth news entity I've sent this to. Be the first to get it out, because it's going to get out. Show integrity instead of complicity, as this is now on record as being sent to you...
Torture and waterboarding are nice to report about, but nuclear warfare is not...
It would be nice if America reported this, and NOT Russia, for a change....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I am an American. And I am ashamed....
www.latimes.com...



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
I don't know. I don't believe there is anyway the military would use even low grade nukes without presidential authorization. I could see Bush and Cheney authorizing it. I can also see it remaining highly classified. Although I can't really see the point of using them in light of the political risk if it became public. I don't think the military would ask to use them in such a limited low intensity conflict such as Iraq.

Now if DPRK invades the south, you can bet the fireworks will start.



posted on Mar, 26 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   
These are quite the claims in with quite a bit of effort and sources to back it up. I have read most of it and if this indeed does get out and turns out to be true, then we are looking at some big stuff.

Great job on the research and info OP.

S&F!



new topics

top topics



 
66
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join