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

reply to post by DarkspARCS


You actually think the US did that to those people?

Bound their hands and killed them?

Even if we were that cold, why would we waste time binding their hands?

Bad form. I am deleting this thread from my "Recent Threads" list...there is no use even participating in what will only end up as a flame war.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by DarkspARCS

 

You actually think the US did that to those people?

Bound their hands and killed them?

Even if we were that cold, why would we waste time binding their hands?

Bad form. I am deleting this thread from my "Recent Threads" list...there is no use even participating in what will only end up as a flame war.

my quote pertaining to that post:

Now these may possibly be victims of tribal genocide, at least the ones showing their hands tied behind their backs

I stated these mass graves were created during the U.S. Occupation, and not the Saddam Regime.

To hide evidence that those bodies were a direct result of a massive killing event - such as a nuke - then yes, I will say that American soldiers have strong incentive - and even stronger potential - to do this.

Here's the mentality to prove it:

The Video the United States Military Doesn't Want You To See

[edit on 29-3-2010 by DarkspARCS]

Now actually prove this nuke you keep saying is there... do the home work and post it here for all of us...

this tribal killing field was not done by americans.... the hands are bound in a traditional manner not conducive to anything americans do... besides we use plastic wire ties... and that is because of all those nit wits that say we torture...

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by DarkspARCS
really lil wolf? can you prove it wasn't?

as a matter of fact, there isn't a shred of blue in the flag contribution level under your avatar. Nothing to contribute for the last four years huh? Oh, with the exception of running your mouth that is, right?

Besides trolling from thread to thread BASHING PEOPLE, What exactly is it that you do on ATS? A MEMBER FOR 4 YEARS, WITH NO CONTRIBUTING EVIDENCE? I know, you must be the Domain Aggitant... should have known it.

When you put some blue in your contributing character lil guy, then I might feel obligated to acknowledge your little words. Until then all you seem to be doing is yap and bite at my ankles... with no teeth.

Nukes were deployed to Iraq, and there are people who have accused America of Using them. I've done nothing but provide the information, and a whole lot of it points towards a potential in the use of thermonuclear weapons. I've posted my proof, you evidently can't read. watch the video instead. lots of great pictures of stuff you like.

personal attacks get you nothing at all...except your ass looking about as ignorant as a turd in a punch bowl...

now there were one and only one 15,000 pound daisy cutter used in Tora Bora....

Next we had no nukes on the mainland of Iraq...and that is a fact... off shore perhaps and on ships ...you bet... however not one nuke was in Iraq...and if you say there was i insist you actually prove that one as well... thus far you have proved nothing except that you listend to the left ass hats spout off... they got nothing and neither do you...

You have failed to produce a single shred of actual evidence that supports your assumption...

you have posted a febricated lie on here...and i say you are a liar and a fake... now either prove your allegations son or bow out... because there is no substance to anything you have posted... not an ounce...

I also did not think that you rated people on how many little blue flags they had... that also shows a certain type of ignorance and immaturity on your part... now if you can produce something that substantiates your claims I am all to happy to listen and would respond accordingly... however you have posted nothing except assumptions, lies, slanderous and false accusations all across this thread...

you have a lot to learn about backing up your allegations... and you have failed and failed badly.... go change yourself little one... you stink

Originally posted by DarkspARCS
really lil wolf? can you prove it wasn't?

Can you prove it was? Like a tracer round, it points both ways.

Originally posted by DarkspARCS
as a matter of fact, there isn't a shred of blue in the flag contribution level under your avatar. Nothing to contribute for the last four years huh? Oh, with the exception of running your mouth that is, right?

When you put some blue in your contributing character lil guy, then I might feel obligated to acknowledge your little words. Until then all you seem to be doing is yap and bite at my ankles... with no teeth.

So he doesn't have any "flag" stuff. Big deal. If you think that makes his posts less than yours,or using it as an excuse not to respond to him is pretty freakin' lame.

Originally posted by DarkspARCS
Nukes were deployed to Iraq, and there are people who have accused America of Using them. I've done nothing but provide the information, and a whole lot of it points towards a potential in the use of thermonuclear weapons. I've posted my proof, you evidently can't read. watch the video instead. lots of great pictures of stuff you like.

The US has been accused of alot, but the proof is pretty lacking. I'm sorry, that Al-Jazeera link sounded like a child's whiny excuse about why he lost. "We wouldna whooped the US had they not used a nuke!"

Leatherneck.com? Sure, it's a Marine site, but it's not something that's official USMC. Who's to say the guy that posted that info wasn't some guy just lying? Or a real Marine who's a moonbat?

reply to post by DarkspARCS


Instead of addressing his points you insult that is the last resort for an individual losing an argument for lack of proof. By the way as far as contributions of starting threads i believe you proved starting a thread means nothing as this one quickly deteriorated into crap.

Everyone now knows what your agenda is make the military look bad by lying and unproven allegations.Lets throw enough stuff out there hope something sticks. Id have to say youve destroyed your reputation here on ATS because i know this thread is going to come back to haunt you mark my words.

PS you can disagree with the war i do but the men and women out there risking there lives trying to piece back together a country we tore apart deserves your respect. As in any organization there are bad apples to say that is indicative of all military personnel is a sad comment on your morals.
I wont be in this thread again you are not worth my time any further.

Just a reminder to keep the discussion on topic. Please refrain from personal insults.

Thank you.

The source in the OP refers to 'low-grade' 'depleted uranium nukes'. Natural Uranium is mostly composed of two isotopes, about 0.7% Uranium-235, and 99% Uranium-238. Uranium-235 is a fissile material which can be used in a Nuclear weapon, and Uranium-238 is not a fissile material, so it cannot be in a nuclear weapon. Therefore, to use Uranium as fuel (or in a weapon), it must be enriched so it has a higher concentration (or grade) of Uranium-235. The kind of enriched uranium that is used in nuclear weapons is usually referred to as 'weapons-grade' as it is 'Highly enriched uranium'. Lower grades of Uranium, with lower concentrations are Uranium-235, cannot be made into Nuclear Weapons, thus the possibility of a 'low grade' nuclear weapon suggested in the OP is exactly zero. Anyway, the remaining Uranium-238 is discarded as Depleted Uranium; it is depleted because it cannot be used in most nuclear reactors, and cannot be used in nuclear weapons. Thus the statement that they used 'depleted uranium nukes' is simply not possible as DU is not fissile. Uranium itself is very heavy, so it is an ideal penetrator, and we know that it is used as a penetrator in ammunition used in Iraq. Therefore, this story is highly likely to simply be a communication error, as ammunition using depleted nuclear material has probably been mistaken for nuclear weapons.

The OP then continues, talking about a weapon called the AGM-114N and states that it was a neutron bomb. DarkspARCS's own source contradicts this, stating, 'Like many thermobarics, the AGM-114N used finely powdered aluminum', aluminium is not a fissile material, thus it has nothing to do with nuclear weapons. A quick search revels the AGM-114N is a variant of the Hellfire missile, which carries a warhead that is 9 kilograms. Thus another impossibility arises - the minimum amount of pure Uranium-235 required for a critical mass, something that can create a nuclear explosion, is 52 kilograms. The fact is, the AGM-114N is a simple thermobaric weapon, that has absolutely nothing to do with anything nuclear. A thermobaric weapon is pretty much a 'fuel-air bomb', where the bomb uses oxygen in the air as the oxidant. The bomb pre-detonates, scattering fuel droplets into the air, and then ignites, essentially creating a massive shockwave and fireball. The effect can be demonstrated with a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion.



Then DarkspARCS refers to a 'Neutron Thermobaric Weapon'. This is an impossibility as nuclear weapons rely on a nuclear chain reaction to create an explosion through the fissioning of fissile material such as Uranium-235. As previously explained, a thermobaric weapon relies on oxygen from the surrounding air to create an explosion. Nuclear weapons do not need oxygen. The OP then uses a boy who had severe radiation burns proof of a 'nuclear thermobaric weapon'. It must be understood that the term 'radiation' does not just refer to radiation emitted from unstable isotopes, but also heat-radiation also, such as those created by thermobaric weapons such as the AGM-114N. None of the radiation burns in the OP indicate anything other than heat radiation burns which could easily be caused by a thermobaric weapon. The OP is thus deliberately using a tragedy to mislead the reader into believing that a nuclear weapon did this, even though it clearly could of been anything that causes heat.

Lastly, the OP copies a big slab of text about the dangers of using depleted Uranium as ammunition, and attempts to use it as evidence for nuclear weapons. We know the US has been using DU ammunitions, and finding DU is indicative of DU munitions rather than non-DU nuclear weapons; the difference is likely easily observable on a mass spectrometer. The OP is therefore plain BS and every single part of the OP is laden with half-truths, lies and deliberately misinterpreting the facts. And I haven't even read beyond page one yet. The worst part is that DarkspARCS uses his amount of flags to attack people who disagree with him. Look - if people wanted to grab bits of unrelated, irrelevant, misleading data, without a whole lot of new material to create sensationalism, then they would do that. This thread is nothing more than speculation, let's not confuse it with facts.

[edit on 30/3/2010 by C0bzz]