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: 7
18
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by open_eyeballs
 




The chemical toxicity of depleted uranium is about a million times greater in vivo than its radiological hazard.[70] Health effects of DU are determined by factors such as the extent of exposure and whether it was internal or external. Three main pathways exist by which internalization of uranium may occur: inhalation, ingestion, and embedded fragments or shrapnel contamination. Properties such as phase (e.g. particulate or gaseous), oxidation state (e.g. metallic or ceramic), and the solubility of uranium and its compounds influence their absorption, distribution, translocation, elimination and the resulting toxicity. For example, metallic uranium is relatively non-toxic compared to hexavalent uranium(VI) uranyl compounds such as uranium trioxide.[71][72]

en.wikipedia.org...




posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You obviously struggle with english, so I repeat that I said "if true". I do not have to present any facts when I have stated that I am expressing an opinion based of this.
edit on 5-12-2010 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by open_eyeballs
 




The chemical toxicity of depleted uranium is about a million times greater in vivo than its radiological hazard.[70] Health effects of DU are determined by factors such as the extent of exposure and whether it was internal or external. Three main pathways exist by which internalization of uranium may occur: inhalation, ingestion, and embedded fragments or shrapnel contamination. Properties such as phase (e.g. particulate or gaseous), oxidation state (e.g. metallic or ceramic), and the solubility of uranium and its compounds influence their absorption, distribution, translocation, elimination and the resulting toxicity. For example, metallic uranium is relatively non-toxic compared to hexavalent uranium(VI) uranyl compounds such as uranium trioxide.[71][72]

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



We didnt test the nuke on Japan

Please, read posts more carefully, then to reply




Since the US had no contact with German scientists until after the war, you are once again proving your lack of knowledge.

you know Just official version of history. & let me to make a little-humble conjecture, you dost not & cannot know Entire-Real-History
+many scientists of MP was from where???
www.nndb.com...
--------------------------------
P.S.
simple suggestion: mate, don't let your arrogance to kill you



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:09 PM
link   
might as well have nuked the area would have been a swifter death for those affected i dont see how DU can be used as a viable weapon when we have access to the most advanced weaponry.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



And you have provided no evidence to support the claims you are making. So until you post your sources, we will just asume you are making it up, which most likely is the case here.

well, for example, what is advantages to control narcoTraffic?
1. to weakify potential enemy (Russia).
2. to get money.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism

FOR THOSE WHO STILL ASKING FOR EVIDENCE OR CRYING BECAUSE THE SOURCE IS TEHRAN TIMES



You really should read the entire report yourself, and stop cherrypicking the facts you want to use.

First off the article specifically states that NDU is possibly the responsible party. The US used Depleted Uranium. The testing done on the afghans were in a few select areas chosen using a few criteria - areas that showed people going to the Hospital for radiation like illness, bomb craters in the area (non definable IE they cant say 100% its from US or Taliban / Al-Queida weapons).

The weapons testing you and others have invoked says absolutely nothing about them being used in Afghanistan. The report cites DOD information that the weapons were under development, and time tables were pushed up for possible use in Iraq. The weapons you refer to are designed for deep penetration of Nuclear chemical or biological storage facilities.

You have made a correlation between illenss and Iraq, including our forces. Funny thing is there are no reported cases from our 2nd Iraqi war. Whats the differene between the first gulf war and the second you ask? During GW1 Iraq had a large active WMD program that were bombed back into the stone age. However, you missed a part when you made the correlation:


UMRC’s preliminary radiological measurements and analysis of Afghan civilians who live and/or work adjacent to Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) bombsites are notably different from the Gulf War veterans’ findings:


Iraq illness contained high levels of DU - Afghanistan illness is still assigned to NDU per the report you cite.


How does my last comment work with Afghanistan?


Under Part 6 - Reason for testing
In the early stages of OEF, the Afghan government reported publicly, radiological illnesses amongst the civilian population. The White House reported finding uranium-alloyed warheads in local arsenals. UK intelligence and the Pentagon reported that there is evidence from captured Taliban strongholds that uranium dispersion and dirty-bombs were being developed in Afghanistan.


Since this is in the report, it must be true the taliban were developing dirty bombs. The article suggests this could be a possible source of the populations illneses.

Whats in the report you are leaving out in an effort to support your ridiculous claim?


Section 8
UMRC’s Field Trip Report’s conclusions as to the origin of the Afghan civilians’ uranium internal contamination is preliminary, based on (1) a follow-up field investigation to identify the origins and (2) radiological analysis of bomb-crater debris taken from the sites adjacent to the contaminated population and survivors from the blasts. The reader is invited to review UMRC’s Afghan Field Report excerpts: “Precise Destruction-Indiscriminate Effects” found on this web-site.

“The abnormally high levels of uranium found in Afghan civilians are exaggerated and needlessly alarm troops, veterans and civilians in Operations Enduring Freedom”:


I will post the entire 10 section since you apparently did not read it.


Section 10
Irrespective of the source of the uranium contaminant resulting in the Afghan results, abnormally high concentrations of uranium are medically significant. The Non-depleted Uranium in the subjects’ urine has warranted further investigation to expand the scope of the research, corroborate the biological and geological results and broaden the study populations.

UMRC’s continues to investigate all possible origins of this uranium contamination.

UMRC’s follow-up and on-going research results will be reported in future, peer reviewed studies. A discussion of the possible origins or this contamination can be found in the Field Trip #2 Report: “Precise Destruction – Indiscriminate Effects”. To date, there is no evidence of geological or other conditions that might explain the contamination. Significantly, the on-set of acute, uranium internal contamination symptoms coincide with the dates of Operations Enduring Freedom’s bombing campaign and match bomb-crater and target site samples.

Other possible origins investigated include geological sources, agricultural sources (fertilizers), local military uses, and possibly other foreign technological and military sources. To date, all postulated alternatives pertain to a variety of other types of uranium (signified by different arrays of isotopic ratios): Naturally occurring Uranium (NU), Depleted Uranium (DU), Low Enriched Uranium (LEU), Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU), dirty uranium (spent fuel products, reactor and weapons’ development or manufacturing waste and re-mixed military grade and reactor oxides); local uranium mining, milling and processing; agricultural use or other commercial phosphates; Soviet fission weapons disassembly; and, natural uranium ore products released and aerosolized by the kinetic and high explosive impacts of conventional, deep-penetrator ordnance.

With the exception of Natural Uranium, alternative explanations are attributable to radio-isotopic signatures (ratios of isotopes of uranium) not substantiated by the laboratory results of Afghan civilians and bombsites. The isotopic measurements are objectively reliable and cannot be misrepresented other than by intentional adulteration of the specimens or intentional efforts to contaminate the population to mask the origins of contamination. Notably, the results of the analysis of biological specimens (urine) and the bomb-crater samples are compatible.

The possibility of Natural Uranium remains under investigation. Local geological samples and controls do not substantiate a source other than the OEF bombing. There are no geological, commercial and agricultural phenomena or activities and uses in the environs of the contaminated populations that might explain the contamination. UMRC invites reasonable explanations and continues to investigate alternatives or evidence that might explain origins other than uranium-alloyed and composite uranium-high-explosive ordnance deployed by Operation Enduring Freedom.


The report you linked, which is teh basis of the Scientists "study" in the article, says nothing about proof of DU weapons causing this issue. They note that the US was working on newer weapons, with an increase in speed of the program to be used possibly in Iraq, however, Iraq occured after OEF, which means the weapons you claim, were not deployabe in Afghanistan at the time of these tests.

The article ends by stating the investigation is ongoing because they cannot find the source of the NDU that the villagers are exposed to. They have not ruled out gelogical possibilities, foreign military equipment, or a Taliban project to make their dirty bombs.


Now, since this article does not support your OP article, which means the article was misleading because it used information to support facts not in evidence, it leads to the conclusion that the entire study in the OP is invalid. It bases its reports and finding on the report you are yelling at people to read.

We read it, it does not support your argument, it does not support the scientists claims in the op.

Game over man.... game over.




edit on 5-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


If you didnt understand the first time I will say it again. Depleted uranium is not a chemical weapon. Therefore your headline is wrong. And nothing in the OP talks about depleted uranium.

In fact your OP specifically mentions biological weapons. They are liars, and you apparently don't understand your own argument.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by byteshertz
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You obviously struggle with english, so I repeat that I said "if true". I do not have to present any facts when I have stated that I am expressing an opinion based of this.
edit on 5-12-2010 by byteshertz because: (no reason given)


Uhm no.. I stand by what I said. This is what you said


Originally posted by byteshertz
This is discusting if true -


This is correct, if true


Originally posted by byteshertz
any of you defending the use of chemical weapons by the USA are sick. There is no need for chemical weapons, why should people have to suffer a slow painful death, why should their children and future generations have to suffer. Think how easily chemical weapons can devistate more lives than the initial targets lives.

YOU CLAIM TO BE BETTER - SO ACT LIKE IT.

This is a crime against humanity - one of those morals you are supposed to uphold.

I SPIT on anyone who tries to justify doing this


Then you spin into your blame. Since you suggested English, maybe you should think about learning how to use it in terms of proper tenses, proper verb usage just to name a few.

The If true comment is followed up by your rant and accusations with some colorful flare and drama added for effect.

Facts work much better.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by SarK0Y
Please, read posts more carefully, then to reply


I did.. You should probably check your comments a little bit better, and maybe understand the comments you make. That way you won't be surprised when you are wrong. Here is a recap for you


Originally posted by SarK0Y
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



Naieve and ignorant on history.

naive???
most reason to bomb Japan was to test nuclear explosion for real environment




In addition to the US, Germany and Japan also had nuke programs. In this case, we beat them to the punch

some rumors have said pentagon got nuke thanks to german specialists
i don't wanna dispute it -- Just a remark



Originally posted by SarK0Y
you know Just official version of history. & let me to make a little-humble conjecture, you dost not & cannot know Entire-Real-History
+many scientists of MP was from where???
www.nndb.com...


For the US is was called Operation Paperclip. We smuggled german Scientists out and they went to work in our Space and weapons programs. I am not sure what the British or Russians codenamed their operations to snag german scientists, you will need to look that up.



Originally posted by SarK0Y
P.S.
simple suggestion: mate, don't let your arrogance to kill you


I think I would rather be killed by my arrogance, rather than your ignorance.
edit on 5-12-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SarK0Y
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



And you have provided no evidence to support the claims you are making. So until you post your sources, we will just asume you are making it up, which most likely is the case here.

well, for example, what is advantages to control narcoTraffic?
1. to weakify potential enemy (Russia).
2. to get money.


WooOOot!!! An Ozzy tactic.. We have nothing to do with the Opium trade in Afghanistan, aside from trying to destroy it. The Russians are even helping us out with that. We have programs in place to assist farmers in transitioning from their opium crops to food crops.

The reason Kharzi and the taliban are doing what they are doing with the drug trade is to fund themselves.

I thought the use of drugs was prohibited under Islam?



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:42 PM
link   
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, 5 2010 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




The article ends by stating the investigation is ongoing because they cannot find the source of the NDU that the villagers are exposed to. They have not ruled out gelogical possibilities, foreign military equipment, or a Taliban project to make their dirty bombs.


And that is when they guide you to their next research paper, they went twice remember?

The first time it was small, the second time they go to Kabul also.

In that report they rule out all geological and natural contamination, because obviously DUUUHISHLY scientists can distinguish between natural contamination and un-natural.

I provide the evidence in the above post.

Read their second report please



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by open_eyeballs
reply to post by oozyism
 


If you didnt understand the first time I will say it again. Depleted uranium is not a chemical weapon. Therefore your headline is wrong. And nothing in the OP talks about depleted uranium.

In fact your OP specifically mentions biological weapons. They are liars, and you apparently don't understand your own argument.



Tell us what a Chemical weapon is then?

Don't play word games here, I already provided information regarding how DU could be classified as Chemical weapons.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
said stuff to ignore facts when his own report was destroyed and you were called out


Its simple as my post and just about everyone elses claims. You wanted people to read the report you claim as fact. I did, and posted the sections you decided to leave out because they dont support your argument. Now you are spinning the rest of the study, which is debunked on its face since the report used was cherrypicked to support the claims being made against the US.

Read your articles that you post, before posting them. Research them and all aspects of it. It will save you embarrasment in the long run by not having to be schooled using 7 pages.

Everything I added was relevant.. The only reason you make the claims you do is because you were once again proven wrong, and you jsut cant stand that. So you resort back to the nothing to add comments etc, the typical response you give, as I cited a page back.

Predicatable and sad all at the same time.

I told you before, many time now... You make good points and find decent articles, but your zeal and hatred for the US is where your argument comes off the tracks.

There is nothing more to this thread.. ITs debunked, the info does not support the OP or your arguments now. I know you dont have it in Afghanistan, but since you are in a Western Country you really should understand the concept of a free press, challenging Government actions, and using your noggin to research.

Your posts are done in a manner that feels like we are in Iran. The Government posts a study and no one is to question it, and doing so can get you killed.

Learn, listen, read.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
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

Yes lets make it easy.. The first report you cited is attributing the issues Afghans have to NDU - NON DEPLETED URANIUM. We do not use NDU, we use DP. You are attempting to change your argument, in addition to the evidence used in the report you are thrwing at us.

The study cites NDU. The German report you are attempting to use covers DP. They are not interchangeable, and this is nothing but a wild attempt to salvage your argument, which has sunk.



Originally posted by oozyism
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.


Which has nothing to do with the report you psoted in the first page, nor is it supported by the Candian report you demand we read. Simply citing "Afghan doctors" and defects does not mean anything, other than defects were there. This is no different than your congenital defect citation in the article. It says the cause of Congential defects is caused by munitions use. The problem is Congenital is hereditary...


Originally posted by oozyism
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.


And the studies you cited and used, which you are now dropping for german info, is wrong. The illeness is attributed to NDU, and the report does not have a source for it. It does suggest a possible new weapon DOD is making, but it was not used in Afghanistan because it was done.. It was in research stage still.

The report cites Taliban was working on dirty bombs, and they might be a cause, yet you never bothered to point it out, once again om,itting ifno to paint another hate filled anti American thread based on ignorance and naievity.

I read your report, I cited you the parts you are ignoring. Thinking, suggesting, studying, find causes are all phrases you need to learn. It does not say its confirmed.

Please take your hate filled, anti american, ignorant threads somewhere else. Everytime you make a post, I willbe in there to rip it to shreds and debunk it for the garbage it is.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




The article ends by stating the investigation is ongoing because they cannot find the source of the NDU that the villagers are exposed to. They have not ruled out gelogical possibilities, foreign military equipment, or a Taliban project to make their dirty bombs.


And that is when they guide you to their next research paper, they went twice remember?

The first time it was small, the second time they go to Kabul also.

In that report they rule out all geological and natural contamination, because obviously DUUUHISHLY scientists can distinguish between natural contamination and un-natural.

I provide the evidence in the above post.

Read their second report please


It cites NDU as a cause, and not DU - Stop thinking they are interchangable, as they are not. Your post is debunked. There is nothing left to argue. You can post as much other crap as you want if you think it will make a differnce, but it wont.

I am done in this thread.. Time to move onto something wroth while that is not propoganda.

See you in other threads.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra


Yes lets make it easy.. The first report you cited is attributing the issues Afghans have to NDU - NON DEPLETED URANIUM. We do not use NDU, we use DP. You are attempting to change your argument, in addition to the evidence used in the report you are thrwing at us.

The study cites NDU. The German report you are attempting to use covers DP. They are not interchangeable, and this is nothing but a wild attempt to salvage your argument, which has sunk.




Radiological assessments of Afghan civilians show the presence of a distinctly different form or type of uranium. The Afghan civilians’ urine, studied to date, does not contain Depleted Uranium. It contains abnormally high levels of Non-depleted Uranium.

Then it goes on to say:


UMRC’s continued research in Afghanistan may or may not identify DU. This will depend upon the munitions deployed, the bombsites inspected and results of further urine studies of populations that may have been exposed to DU.


I provided evidence both for DU and NDU. They both harm people





Which has nothing to do with the report you psoted in the first page, nor is it supported by the Candian report you demand we read. Simply citing "Afghan doctors" and defects does not mean anything, other than defects were there. This is no different than your congenital defect citation in the article. It says the cause of Congential defects is caused by munitions use. The problem is Congenital is hereditary...

That's called evidence, that there is contamination in Afghanistan, get it?



Other possible origins investigated include geological sources, agricultural sources (fertilizers), local military uses, and possibly other foreign technological and military sources. To date, all postulated alternatives pertain to a variety of other types of uranium (signified by different arrays of isotopic ratios): Naturally occurring Uranium (NU), Depleted Uranium (DU), Low Enriched Uranium (LEU), Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU), dirty uranium (spent fuel products, reactor and weapons’ development or manufacturing waste and re-mixed military grade and reactor oxides); local uranium mining, milling and processing; agricultural use or other commercial phosphates; Soviet fission weapons disassembly; and, natural uranium ore products released and aerosolized by the kinetic and high explosive impacts of conventional, deep-penetrator ordnance.

All of the above have been investigated and ruled out




With the exception of Natural Uranium, alternative explanations are attributable to radio-isotopic signatures (ratios of isotopes of uranium) not substantiated by the laboratory results of Afghan civilians and bombsites. The isotopic measurements are objectively reliable and cannot be misrepresented other than by intentional adulteration of the specimens or intentional efforts to contaminate the population to mask the origins of contamination. Notably, the results of the analysis of biological specimens (urine) and the bomb-crater samples are compatible.

See the connection? Urine abd bomb-craters lol..



And the studies you cited and used, which you are now dropping for german info, is wrong. The illeness is attributed to NDU, and the report does not have a source for it. It does suggest a possible new weapon DOD is making, but it was not used in Afghanistan because it was done.. It was in research stage still.

Do you know why one is called NDU and the other DU?



The report cites Taliban was working on dirty bombs, and they might be a cause, yet you never bothered to point it out, once again om,itting ifno to paint another hate filled anti American thread based on ignorance and naievity.

You mean reported by US without any evidence? A thief saying another thief took all the jewelery from the same house he was robbing doesn't sound very convincing.



I read your report, I cited you the parts you are ignoring. Thinking, suggesting, studying, find causes are all phrases you need to learn. It does not say its confirmed.

I didn't ignore any part, you just forgot to read the second report which investigates all other potential causes for such contamination, but rules them out because DUUUH evidence connects two dots together:
Bombs----Contamination



Please take your hate filled, anti american, ignorant threads somewhere else. Everytime you make a post, I willbe in there to rip it to shreds and debunk it for the garbage it is.

It is OK to live in your little Universe and wrap the "America can't do no wrong" sheet around your eyes and hope it will all go away. It is all just a bad dream, you will wake up from it soon, don't worry.



posted on Dec, 5 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra


It cites NDU as a cause, and not DU - Stop thinking they are interchangable, as they are not. Your post is debunked. There is nothing left to argue. You can post as much other crap as you want if you think it will make a differnce, but it wont.

I am done in this thread.. Time to move onto something wroth while that is not propoganda.

See you in other threads.


When did I deny the cause being NDU?

Infact two pages back you will clearly see that I specifically said the report claims NDU was the cause.

I provided evidence supporting the contamination being directly connected to the bombs
\

Anyone who reads the report will see that.

It kinda sux that me and you had to do all the hard work for the other lazy bums who just denied or sucked it in without any further detail.




posted on Dec, 6 2010 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


Im not playing word games man. The accusations you are laying out on the table should not be taken lightly. And you shouldn't make them unless you have it clear what it is you are talking about.

There is a difference, a large difference between DU and chemical/ biological weapons.

Im not saying du is better. If there is any evidence that those are being used it should be looked into with forthright investigation. I cant imagine anyone trying to cover that up for the US. There are to many watchdogs out there that dont just let that stuff slide. I also dont see a reason to be using it when we have conventional weaponry that easily handles the needs and fullfills the purpose the US military uses them for. So what would it accomplish to use weapons of that nature? Nothing that I can see.

Nevertheless, your OP talks about biological and chemical weapons. For at least the last two pages (I have not read through the entire thread) you have changed that to mean du weapons. I gave you the definition of chemical weapons per wikipedia. The wiki article also goes into the different treaties the US is apart of in banning the use of those weapons in all circumstances.

I refuse to believe without due dilligence carried out by a proper investigative team that we would arbitrarily break those treaties for no reason at all.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join