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: 5
66
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 




i will summarise this thread [ and others like it ]
a gaggle of walts who have no idea whow fission / fusion weapons really work have misrepresented the use of other weapons to portary a fantasy that " nukes were used " they create a word salad to prop up thier fatasies - my favourite , from this thread = " neutron thermobaric weapon " .
lastly the blindingly obvious abcence of evidence , which precludes the use of atomic munitions in the situations claimed is `spun ` as evidence of fantasy " magic nukes " that fullfill thier fantsisies , physics be dammed


Whether it is a real fission/fusion "nuke" or a "dirty bomb" it does not matter. The effect of radiation to all life is the same. Uranium-238 (DU) in the form that has been released because of high-impact and burning (aerosolizing) during military campaigns, causes cancers on a large scale. 4.5 billion year half-life, blowing in the winds.
See U-238 decay product (source)
See source of GI cancers

It is reprehensible that a minimum of a couple of thousand tons of DU (U-238) were incinerated and therefore aerosolized during Gulf war I & II, and the Balkans wars. Way more than Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs of WWII.

In long-term mortality of civilians and our own soldiers of whom many did not know the dangers, it is equally as bad or worse. It can be spread to wives and offspring, because of the micron size of the aerosolized particles, blowing in the dusty winds. So, it comes home to US in the soldiers, and passed along in bodily fluids. Even if people don't care about the innocents living in the areas (countries) that we contaminated with our DU projectiles, it still comes home to roost!

edit: If any of you military or neo-con types need any help with the science jargon in the links I provided, let me know.

[edit on 27-3-2010 by 1SawSomeThings]




posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by DarkspARCS
 



What Is Red Mercury? The answer to this question depends largely on whom you ask. Is red mercury real? Absolutely, but definitions vary.


This is a bit like saying "Santa Claus" is real, but some people think he's a magic elf while others believe he's a piece of plywood. I'm impressed that a chemist has given this so much thought, but please note it is all conjecture based on rumors. The phrase originated as a buzzword for a nuclear "Magguffin."



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
BS, We are not going to radiate an airport and then station our troops their. I have seen the videos of the troops rolling into the airport and taking fire from Iraqis so this whole story is BS.

Last but not least, The AGM-114 is a hellfire anti-tank missile shot from a Helicopter.

This is Arab propaganda at its best and ATS needs to remove it. Nothing in the OP is true.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by DarkspARCS
 


You forgot the "IRREFUTABLE" proof you promised?

Instead you presented a persons suggestions as opinion, a blog, Al Jazeera and a Communist propaganda site.

U2U me when you have the "irrefutable proof" posted. Thanks.

Sadly, some will not read anything and just agree out of emotion. But then, that is your intent. To fool the fool-able.

This all your idea, or did somebody, some group, put you up to this?

Use the name George Bush, accuse the US of something, you get 50 flags. Cool plan.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sky watcher
BS, We are not going to radiate an airport and then station our troops their.


You do realize a lot of troops have come home both from these most recent wars and the first Gulf War with illnesses resulting from radiation exposure because of DU, right? One just posted in this thread.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I remeber seeing a ATS thread about the US dropping nuclear bombs at Iran



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sky watcher
BS, We are not going to radiate an airport and then station our troops their. I have seen the videos of the troops rolling into the airport and taking fire from Iraqis so this whole story is BS.

Last but not least, The AGM-114 is a hellfire anti-tank missile shot from a Helicopter.

This is Arab propaganda at its best and ATS needs to remove it. Nothing in the OP is true.


Then prove it. Provide some links.

He may have weaved a heck of a tale, but since he is able to support some of what he says it gives it credibility. To "debunk" means offering something other than opinion.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarkspARCS
ONE post was from Al Jazeera, which obviously insulted your racist intelligence zionist.

GO BACK TO ISRAEL, TELL THEM YOU FAILED.....


Call him a racist, then start with the BS about Israel and Zionists?

Pot, meet kettle.




posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Excellent point.

OP, don't roll in the mud with anyone. You will only get dirty. You put up a good OP, with some evidence and some second hand, word of mouth stuff. It stands as is, and requires some believability factor for some.

There are many out there who will bury there . in the sand, just as there are an equal amount that will buy anything. You aren't trying to, and won't affect these two groups. Ignore them when they respond. Focus, instead, on the logical and rational people, and allow them to improve your mind as you (hopefully) improve theirs.

But pulling out terms like "zionist" is the same as calling someone a "Nazi". It is a one way ticket to a lost reputation.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 07:42 PM
link   
www.amazon.com...

I read this book soon after it was published. Doesn't mention anything about nukes.

I was in orbit around Baghdad when this was all going on. No NOTAMs or any other warnings were passed on to us that even mentioned something weird might happen (other than the usual "Hey, you're flying in a warzone" sort of things).

Cool info on Hellfire missiles:

en.wikipedia.org...

Yep, it's Wikipedia, but there are some decent links, too.

The Al-Jazeera link sounds like sour grapes to me. "We would've whipped the American's asses if they didn't fight dirty and use a nuke."



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by 1SawSomeThings
 


and the PTB are such ignorant phsycopathic scum, yes, the neo con zionist mongrels and their butt lickers, that they will breath the same microscopic dust into their lungs whilst they spread global contamination.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by DarkspARCS
 



The BLU82 and MOAB are not capable of being made or used as a "nuke" While the explosion is huge it is not designed nor has it ever been designed for that capacity...
Now on that note the only one that was designed for it.. was BLU118 and it was not used at all..and it also has not been fully perfected, inherent problems with guidance as well as fusing upon impact...
Next... MOAB is not designed for this either... and it is a brush cutter of sorts. remarkable job of eliminating your enemy but it is clearly not a LY nuke and cannot be made into one... designing is all wrong for what the allegations are.

Next the useage of bunker buster that the US currently possesses are earth-penetrating weapons with a limited capacity to burrow into the ground before detonation. The laser-guided GBU-28 and the GPS-guided GBU-27 are 5,000-pound bombs designed to be dropped from the air and to burrow up to six metres into concrete or 30 metres into earth before exploding. The more advanced BLU-118/B uses a thermobaric explosive to deliver sustained shock waves after penetrating the ground. Still, none of these weapons systems has the burrowing capacity to destroy the deeply buried and hardened strategic underground installations thought to be in use all over the world.

the Pentagon did want a more robust nuclear earth penetrator (RNEP) to address this underground problem. The argument is that a nuclear explosion would eliminate any potentially harmful biological and chemical agents stored in such bunkers, and with effective penetrating technology, fallout would be limited. The B61-11, a 1,200-pound gravity bomb with a selectable yield, is being considered for modification as a nuclear earth penetrator with increased weight to enhance its penetrating capacity, and thus its damage to the target, but there are inherent problems with the design , and they cannot perfect the type of fusing required to detonate...

having that being my MOS in the army for 30 years I can say right now not a single nuke was used... plenty of DU but no low yield nukes... I was in that God forsaken place for 90 days prior to the entire fiasco , and I would be the first to piss and holer if any LY nukes had been used... and there were not..

Now you folks can take that or leave it... but for the 255 of us that were there before it all kicked off... no joy is what i am calling this... sorry to rain on the ops parade, but had it been used i damn sure would have talked about it, penalties be damned...



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 09:48 PM
link   
reply to post by DarkspARCS
 



The one link there talks about B61-11 and it being used at ToraBora... I would challenge that officers accuracy... this has not been perfected to the point that your link or the officer alledges...

I am going to call this nothing more than another BS thread of banging on Bush...i did not like the guy , but people gotta get real... nukes flat out were never used there either...

I am going to say that your so called sources are a pack of liars straight up... you call it what you want, but I say Bull shat



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 10:01 PM
link   
AGM-114N Metal Augmented Charge (MAC) Thermobaric Hellfire
The improved, Metal Augmented Charge (MAC) thermobaric war. for the AGM-114 Hellfire missile dramatically increased effectiveness against enclosed targets. The chemical mix selected for the AGM-114N Thermobaric Hellfire war. fill is substantially more effective in attacks against enclosed structures than the current Hellfire blast and fragment variants. The thermobaric Hellfire missile can take out the first floor of a building without damaging the floors above, and is capable of reaching around corners, striking enemy forces that hide in caves or bunkers and hardened multi-room complexes. Coalition military planners use a sophisticated computer model to determine the precise direction, the angle of attack, and the type of weapon needed to destroy desired targets, while sparing nearby civilian facilities.

The effects of the Hellfire MAC war. are formidable. Unlike conventional war.s, which have a sharp pressure spike that decays rapidly, the MAC has a sustained pressure wave. That pressure propagates throughout a structure to extend the lethal effects of the war. detonation.

The DoD Combating Terrorism Technology Task Force (CTTTF) has been structured to continually strive to derive new capabilities from S&T programs, as well as attempt to anticipate future capabilities needs. The original CTTTF model was conceived within a week of the attacks of September 11, 2001, when the Department established CTTTF. In Phase II, the CTTTF reacted to a broad set of operational issues that emerged leading up to and including support for Operation Iraqi Freedom. Technologies were accelerated to fielding for several specialized, unique weapons which focused on specific, anticipated threats.

Notable among the CTTTF efforts was the AGM-114N Thermobaric Hellfire which built upon previous efforts supported by the CTTTF in development of thermobaric weapons which were employed in Afghanistan in Operation Enduring Freedom. DTRA worked in coordination with the Army and Navy, on the AGM-114N Hellfire development effort. Several candidate thermobaric war. fills were tested and assessed during final development. In FY 2003 DTRA delivered 65 Hellfire AGM-114N missiles with improved war.s for increased blast lethality for US Marine Corps Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT).

In 2002, the DTRA tasked NAVAIR to develop a new Hellfire war.. The requirements had been established by the Marine Corps Department of Aviation (APW-72) to make the Hellfire more suitable for Military Operations in Urban Terrain. The number one requirement was that the new war. increase the probability of personnel lethality or incapacitation. Additionally, the war. had to maintain lethality equivalent to the AGM-114M against the remainder of the Marine Corps target set, possess the same flight performance and accuracy as the 114M, keep the same interfaces with the Hellfire missile system and be compatible with the Hellfire logistical cycle.

The MAC technology used in the new war. has its roots at China Lake where, as early as the 1960s, Navy scientists were conducting basic research into fuel-air explosives (FAEs). China Lake scientists and engineers subsequently developed these concepts into tactical weapons: surface-launched FAE (SLU-FAE) and the CBU-55/72 FAE family.

In the 1990s, the Energetics Materials and Ordnance Components Branch worked with China Lake and others to develop nonliquid FAEs containing aluminum particles. The goal was a solid FAE with a greater impulse (pressure over time) than conventional explosives. They were successful in developing a class of explosives that demonstrated greater impulse than non-augmented explosives. The work received a classified US Patent and was the basis for the MAC war..

The new war. contains a fluorinated aluminum powder layered between the war. casing and the PBXN-112 explosive fill. When the PBXN-112 detonates, the aluminum mixture is dispersed and rapidly burns. The resultant sustained high pressure is extremely effective against enemy personnel and structures.

NAVAIR managed the MAC war. project through its first two phases. Six war.-fill candidates were considered in phase 1, and the top three were selected to proceed into phase 2, where the down-select process was completed. The war. design was finalized in September 2002, and the PBXN-112/MAC war. proceeded into phase 3, qualification testing.

It went from development to deployment in less than one year. The demonstration program developed weapons in approximately one year with an initial delivery of approximately 60 residual assets. An urgent request was received from the Marine Corps to begin immediate fabrication of 65 war.s. Five of these were to be used for a Quick Reaction Assessment (QRA). The balance would be destined for field use by Marine Corps operational units.

The 65 war.s were built and integrated into the armament sections at NAVAIR WD. The sections were then shipped to Redstone Technical Test Center, Ala., where Army personnel used them to replace the armament sections of 65 AGM-114Ks. The QRA was conducted in January 2003. It involved tests against a bunker and cave on China Lake's Land Range and against a multi-room structure at White Sands Missile Range. COMOPTEVFOR directed the QRA, and VX-9 provided the helicopters and crews who did the shooting. All tests were completed successfully, verifying the performance of the MAC war..

Multiple missiles were deployed and successfully employed in the opening of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Since that time, the Department has invested additional funds in the AM-114N and will deliver over 100 units to USMC and SOCOM by June 2005. The AGM-114N transitioned to production with a significant increase in fielded units planned over the following two years.

It was revealed in mid-May 2003, by US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that US forces had for the first time used a new thermobaric variant of the Hellfire missile during the conflict in Iraq. No additional details were revealed as to how and where the weapon had been used. DefSec Rumsfeld cited this weapon as a case of high-speed research and development executed to meet a critical battlefield need, with the project going from development to deployment in less than one year.

Navy JAG (Code 10) JAO commented in late 2002 on a legal review of the Hellfire PBXN-112/MAC war. missile. The missile provides increased effectiveness against targets typically encountered in Military Operations in Urban Terrain (MOUT) by creating increased blast over-pressure and impulse to defeat multi-room structures. The missile is also effective against caves, light armor, trucks, radar vans, buildings, light bunkers, command and control sites, patrol boats, light ships, the superstructure of heavy ships, deck mounted weapons systems and troop concentrations. Based on JAO comments, Navy JAG revised the review to include discussion of the BLU-118 and the thermobaric SMAW, two weapons systems already in the inventory which also rely on over-pressure as the killing mechanism.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
These Thermobaric Weapons are NOT nutron bombs and are not any kind of nuclear weapon. It is a load of propaganda to be used against our military and country.

Complete BS



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 10:27 PM
link   
And BTW, just because we develop a weapon, like an EMP weapon, or even various nuclear weapons, which are in the stockpile, does NOT mean they are used. There was no need for them in Iraq or Afghanistan. I can go on for hours about different types of ordinance, but that doesn't mean any of them were used. If you think Al-Jazera isn't a propaganda machine for the terrorists, who happen to be on the receiving end of our conventional arsenal, you are delusional. You should be ashamed to call yourself an American and spew a bunch of propaganda put out by the enemies of this country. And all the name calling (trolls, etc) doesn't help your cause either. Maybe you should have done more research and talked to the soldiers who were there and using the weapons before spouting off about conjecture and descriptions of weapons in the stockpile that were never used in any of the theaters of operation. This is a ridiculous deceptive allegation by those that have no knowledge of what was actually happening in country.


And with that...CUL8TR!



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Proving it is from an army field manual first thing thats done is NBC equipment is set up once an area is taken (see fm 3-4, FM 3-7, FM 3-11.4 which explains how to set up monitoring stations and when protectice measures need to be taken). So if there was radioactive material used it would be known by all military personnel in the area and would be marked to warn any military in the area. As far as his claims of seeing burned bodies just shows you how little he understands nuetron bombs.People dont burn in fact for first day or 2 you wouldnt even know you were exposed unles you had NBC detection gear. Your first clue would be 2 or 3 days later when you starting feeling dizzy and nauseous and by thenm its to late your a walking dead man.

As far as depleted uranium having personally handled it as well i can tell you that a person gets more radiation from the sun. It is used for penetrating rounds used to pierce armor. Now the only time these rounds could be harmful is when they penetrate steel DU-tipped armament explodes the uranium can be rendered as very fine dust.If this dust is breathed there may be long term effects (no studies have provided any proof but again wouldnt surprise me very few things you breath in a battlefield is good for you!). But more to the point if an aircraft is firing these at you i would not expect you to be worrying about having kids with birth defects or long term disease because your dead or dying.



posted on Mar, 27 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
What are my sources? Well, the only facts I've stated are regarding the definition and explanation of various weapon technologies, so I guess my sources for that would be...

Thermobaric Bomb

Neutron Bomb

Nuclear Bunker Buster

Other than that, my posts pretty much just boil down to "Sorry, but your evidence is too weak for me." A statement like that is a statement of opinion, not fact, and therefor calling for me to prove it is like me asking you to prove that you think ice cream is yummy, or you asking me to prove that I like bright, sunny days.

Somebody else already pointed out that most of your sources are downright silly. Yeah, you use decent sources when you're just looking up definitions (which you need to do more often,) but when you're trying to provide evidence of the actual use of nuclear weapons your sources fall far short of being convincing. A nuclear weapon being used would create FAR more evidence than you've provided so far.

Other than that, I'm not sure what proof you're asking me for. Are you asking me to prove that there weren't nuclear weapons set off? Sorry, I wasn't there. Can't help you. But that doesn't mean I can't state that I haven't seen any credible evidence that nuclear weapons were used.

If I start a thread stating "Nuclear weapons have NOT been used in the Middle East," then the burden of proof would be on me to prove it. I have no such proof, I've started no such thread. You, on the other hand, want to prove that nuclear weapons WERE used. So go on, prove it.

Until you have the evidence I asked for in my last post, I'm not going to believe you. Don't take it personally, it's just that you're making a huge claim. Big claims require big proof, not the opinions of a few dubious commentators and anti-U.S. propaganda web sites.



new topics

top topics



 
66
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join