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.

 

U.S. using chemical weapons in Afghanistan: report

page: 11
18
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


don't you think taliban would have the least chance against pentagon, if pentagon really was charged to waste'em???
that's Just simple Matter of Truth: you have no chance to win war w/o adequate techs. pentagon lost Vietnam because of CCCP, CCCP lost Afghan due to pentagon. but, now, who backs taliban so much that they have been capable to stand against pentagon??? what is their source to get money, weapon & information???




posted on Dec, 8 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by SarK0Y
reply to post by oozyism
 


don't you think taliban would have the least chance against pentagon, if pentagon really was charged to waste'em???
that's Just simple Matter of Truth: you have no chance to win war w/o adequate techs. pentagon lost Vietnam because of CCCP, CCCP lost Afghan due to pentagon. but, now, who backs taliban so much that they have been capable to stand against pentagon??? what is their source to get money, weapon & information???


ISI the sworn enemy of US?

Pakistan has been playing a double face game with US, similar to USSR.

All funding for Taliban goes through Pakistan, many countries in the world is supporting resistance against US, you seem to think US has no enemies



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:56 AM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


I have no problems answering your question, but there is a breakdown in what you are asking and the translation into English. I honetly am not understanding what you are trying to ask me.

@Ooozy I see we have moved from your article to more mundane areas, like drug trade and invoking the CIA. Afghanistan was the worlds supplier of poppy long before the accusations being made. I do find it humerous though how they will grow and convert into drugs while claiming they are morally ok for doing so, even though it contradicts doctrine.
edit on 9-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 



All funding for Taliban goes through Pakistan, many countries in the world is supporting resistance against US, you seem to think US has no enemies


no matter, what i think about USA rivals, but Matter of Fact, pentagon has done Nothing to really waste taliban: Just read that clownish statistics www.informationclearinghouse.info...


reply to post by Xcathdra
 



I have no problems answering your question, but there is a breakdown in what you are asking and the translation into English. I honetly am not understanding what you are trying to ask me.

bad Question == bad English



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
reply to post by SarK0Y
 


uhmm ok

Wanna try to ask your question again? Use babelfish or some other translation program. Your conversational ability when using English is rough. Thats not meant to cause offense or anything like that. I would like to answer the question, but I have no idea what you were asking.
edit on 9-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 

oh, well, i rewrite my question
why does cia say to us about future terroristic assaults???



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by Soshh
 


OK let's make it simple, when did they lie in front of everyone face?


They lie to people’s faces every day. Unless you want to put yourself at a disadvantage by not doing so and fight some ethical crusade which the Taliban clearly aren’t, then it is a totally normal thing to do. They want support from the civilian population just as much as ISAF does and they will lie to get it, it’s as simple as that.

Regarding things like press releases, they have no other reason to make press releases than for the purpose of propaganda and that will influence everything within those press releases. They aren't accurate.


When they kill the innocent, they admit it.


Innocent in whose opinion? They kill people who many would regard as being innocent when they clearly thought that they were guilty of something. Does the movement of discussion away from the OP indicate that you have realised that the article was terrible?



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 


Actually you and your buddy troll the thread towards Taliban not me.

And

I asked you to show me some instances where Taliban have lied in front of everyone's face, you've failed to bring me an instance. Ask me to bring some instances of US lying in front of people's face, I can bring you hundreds.

Anyways, the OP has already been proven with immense amount of evidence.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Depleted uranium(DU) the libs scream about as Nuclear weapons! Are not "nuclear weapons".
Depleted uranium is used in projectiles because it is denser than steel; hence it penetrates armor. the A-10 tankbuster is famous for its gau 8: 30mmm cannon armor piercing rounds.So I laugh at these kind of scare headlines":
"Its an evil force using nuclear bio and chem weapons".

edit on 9-12-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
Depleted uranium(DU) the libs scream about as Nuclear weapons! Are not "nuclear weapons".
Depleted uranium is used in projectiles because it is denser than steel; hence it penetrates armor. the A-10 tankbuster is famous for its gau 8: 30mmm cannon armor piercing rounds.So I laugh at these kind of scare headlines":
"Its an evil force using nuclear bio and chem weapons".

edit on 9-12-2010 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)


DU and NDU being used as weapon is regarded as Chemical weapons.

It clearly has the Characteristics of a Chemical Weapon.

Funny Afghanistan has no armors, unless you are talking about caves, where many residents around the mountains are contaminated and children are being born deformed.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


When the Taliban took over Afghanistan, they lied to the people when they enforced their interpretation of Islam and Sharia Law. From comments you have made in other threads, educating women is permissable, where the Taliban refused it after the age of 8 for females.

The family is given the option on sparring the life of someone. This has been ignored by Taliban leaders, removing the pardoned individual, taking them to the middle of a soccer field and executing them anyways, in violation of the Quran.

The taliban have ordered people not to smoke because it is against the Quran, while their own members moke, as well as do drugs, which is also against the Quran.

So yeah.. Here are a few examples of where the Taliban have lied to peoples faces. This info might be more widely known had the Taliban not killed them for failing to follow their lies.

You also need to look up the term denial. Your entire post was debunked from top to bottom. You then claim you have been proven. This is how you think you win arguments, by ignoring the fact that you are wrong. Why do you even bother posting or engaging people in debate when you ignore evidence?

By the way, that is the true definition of propoganda.. Ignoring facts to spin your own version of events.
edit on 9-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You posted non-confirm-able claims.

I told you that you would evidently get my achievement.

Let's see where this goes lol.

Where's the sources, how credible are the sources, do the sources have any motive, any agenda... blablabla, do you work.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism reply to post by Soshh
 


Actually you and your buddy troll the thread towards Taliban not me.


Piss off, my first post here blasted the article and you didn’t respond to it, the second was a response to your ridiculous statement of “at least the Taliban don’t lie in front of everyone’s face”, found within an off-topic post about how a couple of US politicians are liars. I fail to see how it was me and not you that was trolling and/or steering the thread away from the article.


I asked you to show me some instances where Taliban have lied in front of everyone's face, you've failed to bring me an instance.


I thought that a bit of basic theory would be enough, from the above post I’m assuming that you want me to give you an instance that is "confirm-able" i.e. something that has been sourced from the Internet and something unlike "at least the Taliban don't lie in front of everyone's face", a statement that you are asking others to do the legwork debunking rather than substantiating that claim yourself in the first place.

I can't find anything from PressTV or some of your other favourite state-run news publications unfortunately, but this is a PDF showing how Taliban statements detailing their victories over Canadian soldiers translate into reality: www.scribd.com...

How many instances there?


Anyways, the OP has already been proven with immense amount of evidence.


That evidence had better be found somewhere other than the article, considering that there is no evidence there whatsoever that the US had used biological weapons and the weapons themselves aren't even named. The article that the TT article points to as proof of biological weapons having being used provides pictures found in a report written by Dr. Mohammad Daud Miraki and according to him the deformities were caused by DU and not biological weapons. That the US has used DU and WP is already widely known, except perhaps to some of the mongoloids that read the Tehran Times, so I guess they are referring to other unnamed "poisonous" weapons that they similarly have no evidence of the US having used.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 


Nope, non of them are confirmable, it seems you have failed completely.

Did you check the sources of the source?

At least read through your source


And

When did you blast the OP hahahahaha..



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


What are you talking about? If you are unsatisfied, do what you should have done in the first place and back up the statement you made by listing every single Taliban press release and every single thing they have ever said to anyone along with a decent analysis explaining how there are no lies within. Choppy chop.

I blasted the article in my first post and above and you responded to neither, I think that speaks volumes don't you? You can now provide this supposedly immense amount of evidence of the article's validity, if you like and if it actually exists of course.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soshh
reply to post by oozyism
 


What are you talking about? If you are unsatisfied, do what you should have done in the first place and back up the statement you made by listing every single Taliban press release and every single thing they have ever said to anyone along with a decent analysis explaining how there are no lies within. Choppy chop.

Unsatisfied


So you admit you can't prove Taliban lied intentionally in the face of the world like US which has done it hundreds of times over and over again, knowingly and intentionally, to deceive its own population (you), and the world population (me).

By the way, why doesn't the US want an independent death probe?


A spokesman for the Taliban has offered to set up a joint committee with the United Nations and Nato to study civilian casualties in Afghanistan


What did the US do? LOL



I blasted the article in my first post and above and you responded to neither, I think that speaks volumes don't you? You can now provide this supposedly immense amount of evidence of the article's validity, if you like and if it actually exists of course.

 

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Once again, you have provided nothing to this thread, rather showed that you actually do have the "America can't do no wrong" disease.

Let's make this simple shall we.

Evidence supporting US use of DU in Afghanistan



Depleted Uranium Ammunition in Afghan War: New Evidence



During the operation “Enduring Freedom” in support of the Northern Alliance against the Taliban-Regime, US-aircraft used, amongst others, armour-piercing incendiary munitions with a DU-core. Because of its pyrophoric character, when this type of munition is used against hard targets (e.g. tanks, cars) the uranium burns. During the combustion, toxic dusts can be deposited, particularly at and around the targets, which can then be re-suspended easily.


The above is from "German Bundeswehr Manual".

Afghan 'health link' to uranium



Some scientists say the rise is linked to use of weapons containing depleted uranium (DU) by the US-led coalition that invaded the country in 2001.


--------



Doctors in Kabul and Kandahar showed data indicating that the incidence of a number of health conditions, including birth defects, has doubled in under two years.


Funny, ignore the connection. Afghanistan is bombed -> within a year or two health issues revolving around DU contamination. WOW, that is so hard to decipher, it must be something else, it just couldn't be those bombs that were dropped.



Asaf Durakovic, URMC's president and a former US army adviser, believes that exposure to DU weapons may have brought a rise in birth defects as well as "symptoms of muscular-skeletal pains, immune system disorders, lung disease, and eventually cancer".


Just so you say that naaaa, it can't be DU, it might be natural:


Depleted uranium and natural uranium contain different ratios of two isotopes of the metal.
So scientists can tell whether a person has been exposed to the natural form, or to DU.

DU is used in armour-piercing shells because its density means it can penetrate further than other metals.
Dr Durakovic said his research showed that in Afghanistan, coalition forces had also used DU in "bunker buster" bombs, which can penetrate tens of metres into the soil.

"In Afghanistan it has to be... a weapon that destroys not only bunkers or caves, but also penetrates through the soil and through the fragile environment of the mountains."


Naaa, it couldn't be American bombs, they just can't do anything wrong. It must have been the damn terrorists who bombed there own caves and then we see symptoms of DU contamination:

The Pentagon Steps Up its Use of Radioactive Munitions by Marc W. Herold Departments of Economics and Women's Studies Whittemore School of Business & Economics University of New Hampshire



Ever since the first Gulf War the U.S. military has increasingly used radioactive Depleted Uranium (DU) munitions. Against Iraq in 1991 they proved very effective at penetrating enemy armor (tanks). More recently in the Afghan campaign they were used extensively for destroying underground facilities and caves. The following table summarizes estimated usage of radioactive DU in three of America's recent wars. All these weapons will be almost certainly be heavily used should Gulf War II take place.


The amount of DU use in Afghanistan: 500-600 tons.



Intensely bombed hard target zones like Tora Bora and Shah-i-Kot may now be heavily contaminated with DU oxide. During the battle of Shah-i-Kot, A-10s were heavily used, flying up to eight hours every day from an unnamed base outside Afghanistan. The potential health risks to U.S. and Afghan troops being sent to check out bombed cave systems are horrendous unless they are using full nuclear, chemical and biological (NBC) protection. But even more serious are the risks in densely populated target zones like Kabul - where DU oxide is likely to contaminate soil, buildings and water and be suspended in the Kabul "haze" seen in several media reports.


The claim above that Tora Bora and Shah-i-Kot might be heavily contaminated was proven to be true after UMRC investigation to the matter. They went to Afghanistan investigated to see whether there was any contamination, turned out to be true.

Then UMRC sent a second team of investigators to find the factors behind the contamination, guess what:



Background – the discovery of a new type of uranium weapon



Mass spectrometric analysis conducted by the NERC Geoscience Laboratory of the 8 urine specimens taken from selected subjects in the Jalalabad area, Nangarhar Province, May/June 2002, showed abnormally high concentrations of Uranium. Unlike UMRC’s previous research into radiological and heavy metal contamination of NATO conflict zones, which found Depleted Uranium (DU) in the urine of Operation Desert Storm soldiers, the Jalalabad subjects have abnormally high concentrations of Non-depleted Uranium (NU).

The concentrations of Non-depleted Uranium in the Jalalabad community subjects are 400% to 2000% higher than normal populations. This concentration of radioisotopes is not known to have occurred before in civilian populations.

The results of the analysis of the Jalalabad area specimens rule out contamination by depleted uranium, enriched uranium and/or uranium recycled from the nuclear reactor waste stream. The Jalalabad area subjects’ uranium signature cannot be explained by the any known geological or other features in the area. These anomalous research findings pose an unexpected investigative challenge to UMRC and NERC. One of the main objectives of Trip #2 was to investigate the variables that could explain these findings.

(UMRC report regarding Afghanistan)

Are ground troops and civilians at risk in "hard target" smart bomb and cruise missile target zones?


Reports from the Center for Defence information suggest that at least 500 tons of smart bombs and cruise
missiles have been used in the first three weeks of the Afghan war. They are most likely to have been used on
"high value targets" e.g. Taliban and Al-Qaeda command centres, airfields and other military installations.


 



Evidence to support that no DU weapons were used



Afghan 'health link' to uranium


The US military rejects claims that it used DU-containing bunker busters in Afghanistan.


Depleted Uranium


both the United Kingdom and U.S. governments denied using DU in Afghanistan

.....

 


Conclusion



There is clear cut evidence suggesting DU weapons were used in Afghanistan.

Go try to foul someone else, ATS denies ignorance, even if IGNORANCE IS A BLESS.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

By the way, that is the true definition of propoganda.. Ignoring facts to spin your own version of events.


You're exactly right. You're spinning everything against the Taliban, when the fact is that they were the group of Afghan nationalists that managed to form an effective government after years of chaos and warlords. They had to commit to a goal, and had to dirty their hands in order to create a solid basis for a united Afghanistan.

Then the Americans came in and attacked the Taliban until they had to abandon the government. This destabilised Afghanistan once again, throwing the control into anarchy and regional warlords assumed the most power once again. This was part of the American "shock and awe" strategy, and is proven by the fact that the American government was throwing money at warlords in late 2001 in order to buy their support over the Taliban's national government.

No amount of American propaganda can hide the fact that the Taliban reigned in Afghanistan all on its own. You claim the Taliban was some small radical group who take over through brutality, but they wouldn't have gained control of the majority of 26.8 million Afghans if this were the case. In reality, the only tyrannical governments that come into power are those instilled by foreign powers, just like what the US has a history of doing in many different countries.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
There is clear cut evidence suggesting DU weapons were used in Afghanistan.


I know, I have already said that twice. I'm looking for evidence of the biological weapons and chemical weapons other than WP, which would make the article qualify as news.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


LOLOLOLOL Effective? If by effective you are referring to control of Khandahar and 2 other cities while rulking the people through their own interprestations of Islam that run contrary to the Quran.

Ooozzzy asked a question about the Taliban lLying to peoples faces, and I gave him some examples. I didnt bring them into this, he did in his attempt to continue making an argument for a conversation and topic he lost.

When the report is biased and employs non scientific methods, it cannot be taken seriously. Is there something else going on wiht you 2 where you completely ignore that fact? Do we really need anohter 8 pages of back and forth over issues that have been stated and debunked? We can if you guys want, but it wont solve the problem, and only makes your arguments look that much more desperate.



posted on Dec, 9 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
abcnews.go.com... old, but very funny news
yet another instance how pentagon has fighted hard & inexorably versus taliban


reply to post by Xcathdra
 

oh, my cursedly rough English
you have wanted to ans me so much, but no one can [under/with]stand my Deviliciously coarse En



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join