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.

 

'US used nukes on Iraq, Afghanistan'

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by boymonkey74
Iam sorry but if they had the Russians and Chinese would have detected this with their satellites and they would have told the world so.
Dis info to me


Anybody told you about his nuke ?





edit on 1-12-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-12-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:04 PM
link   
OK, here's the deal:

why do you keep posting articles (which don't even look too credible) mentioning DU, whereas the title of the thread is an actual nuke? It's a different ballpark.

And... Diplomatic and political costs of deploying a nuke are beyond imagination. There is also monetary cost involved. I can't imagine any half-sane person to make such a decision, especially when there are proven bunker-busters that don't involve a nuclear warhead. It's just hogwash.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:07 PM
link   
From Peter Eyre's blog page:


With the compliments of the United States of America they have developed one of the most lucrative exports in the world…….that of military weapons and hardware. They have blasted Afghanistan with nuclear weapons since the start of the war and continue to do so.


followed by:


Finally to put things into perspective the west has released into the atmosphere, up to the current time (and continue to do so), the global catastrophic impact of radiation equivalent to hundreds of thousands of Nagasaki bombs. This radiation has been released into the atmosphere from depleted uranium weapons in the Balkans, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon and Gaza with additional possible usage of 4th generation nuclear weapons in Lebanon and Gaza.


How much "radiation" is actually released by DU?? well for starters DU is primarily an emitter of Alpha radiation - this stuff is stopped by paper, your skin, or a few centimeters of air. Alpha radiationis actually a particle the size of a Helium 4 nucleus - 2 neutrons and 2 protons - an Alpha Particle- quiet a large particle in radiation terms.

These are extremely energetic, and becomes a problem if ingested and lodged inside organs - then the particles can do considerable damage in their immediate area. Fortunately DU is actually a very weak emitter - with a "half life" of its components measured in billions and hundreds of millions of years.

Uranium in the body has a half life of about 15 days - ie we excrete half of it every 2 weeks or so - so it diesn't emit a great deal of radiation in that short time....but what it does emit is extremely dangerous.

compare with the Polonium 210 that was used to kill that Russian chap in the UK a couple of eyars ago - with a half life of about 140 days it is massively more dangerous than DU - it releases many more particles in any given time period - 4 thousand times more than Radon 226 for example, with a HL of 1600 years.

so handling DU is no great problem at all - not even as a toxic heavy metal.

But if you are in an area where it has been used to attack armoured vehicles then there is a fairly good chance there will be some of it (or a lot of it) vapourised or broken down into dust, which can then be easily inhaled. And then you stand to get a double whammy - it is a toxic heavy metal when ingested, plus the alpha radiation can do a lot of harm.

apparently this DU is what Eyre and others are refering as a "nuclear weapon", and I wonder if it is what he is refering to in this "new" accusation - trying to sensationalise it up for sales??

Personally I think it is extremely dishonest "reporting" - as bad as any disinfo you think the MSM may be putting out.

DU is certainly a health hazard when reduced to dust or vapour - but it is about as "nuclear" as concrete!

AFAIK DU is used for armour piercing penetrators.

I'm sure the Taliban had some tanks that were KO'ed by such weapons - anyone got any idea how many? Were A-10's used in Afghanistan, or any of hte land combat systems that use DU - M1 MBT's, Bradleys, etc?



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 


Sorry fella If that was a nuke Iam the Queen of England.....
The camera crew would have been toast.
Looks like a big explosion Yes but no way a nuke.
This is the smallest nuke I can find and it looks nothing like your explosion
www.youtube.com...
edit on 1-12-2011 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by xavi1000
[Anybody told you about his nuke ?






It's not a nuke FFS - it's an explosion at a fireworks factory!!!



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


Ok ..sorry ...but it looks like a nuke for me at first view
edit on 1-12-2011 by xavi1000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Radiation Levels, Cancer & Birth Defect Rates all Higher in IRAQ than even HIROSHIMA Nukings. Why? cumulative DU levels surpass one nuke.

www.wsws.org...





^ Fallujah Fallouth WORSE than Hiroshima.

edit on 1-12-2011 by ignant because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by xavi1000
 

LOL ok just check my last post and look at the Davy Crockett Battlefield Nuke



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
These are extremely energetic, and becomes a problem if ingested and lodged inside organs - then the particles can do considerable damage in their immediate area.


Just wanted to add precision here: "extremely energetic" is a very relative term in particle physics. Most alpha emitters are in the MeV range, U238 emits alphas at 4.2 MeV, sort of typical. You and I get irradiated by cosmic rays of much higher energy. Of course, U238 can provide a much larger exposure depending on quantity, and what's more important is Z=2 of the particle. Ionization loss per unit length goes as square of charge, so it's 4 times larger, and then there is a sharp dependence of actual damage to the cell, on dE/dx. And that's what makes alphas nasty.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignant
so US amassed DU into essentially, a 'dirty' makeshift nuke as far as latent radiation,

Well, no. DU will kill you via heavy metal poisoning long before it kills you with radiation. Even if the radiation was a major factor, that wouldn't make it a nuke, dirty or otherwise. No nuclear reactions are occurring, other than natural decays. One might call it a radiological weapon, but not a nuclear weapon.


and we see evidence of that in all the mutated, deformed births/miscarriages, and the sick kids

Plenty of mutated, deformed births/miscarriages in the third world before foreigners with cameras showed up and started taking pictures of them. Might have something to do with the poor nutrition, lack of prenatal care, atrocious environmental regulations, consanguineous marriages, etc.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   
www.naturalnews.com...

"Depleted Uranium Shells Used by U.S. Military Worse Than Nuclear Weapons"

Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...

looks like US has found something worse than Nukes and has been using them on Iraq and Afghanistan

all the while UN ruled it was an illegal Weapon of Mass destruction -- the sheer IRONY of it all


edit on 1-12-2011 by ignant because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Soshh
 


Its not just about peter eyre... The Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC) is claiming that something different to depleted uranium was being used...




It says: "Without exception, every person donating urine specimens tested positive for uranium internal contamination. "The results were astounding: the donors presented concentrations of toxic and radioactive uranium isotopes between 100 and 400 times greater than in the Gulf veterans tested in 1999.

"If UMRC's Nangarhar findings are corroborated in other communities across Afghanistan, the country faces a severe public health disaster... Every subsequent generation is at risk."


www.siliconinvestor.com...


I'm not getting at you, but you say "the UMRC is claiming" as if this is new information. The thread essentially revolves around Peter Eyre because he is the nutter that has produced the claims in the OP.


Originally posted by ignant
"Depleted Uranium Shells Used by U.S. Military Worse Than Nuclear Weapons"


What?!

edit on 1/12/11 by Soshh because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:20 PM
link   
DU is a waste product of uranium enrichment, containing approximately one-third the radioactive isotopes of naturally occurring uranium. Because of its high density, it is used in armor- or tank-piercing ammunition. It has been fired by the U.S. and British militaries in the two Iraq wars and in Afghanistan, as well as by NATO forces in Kosovo and the Israeli military in Lebanon and Palestine.

Inhaled or ingested DU particles are highly toxic, and *******DU has been classified as an illegal weapon of mass destruction by the United Nations*********

Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


See my avatar... BS..



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by ignant
so US amassed DU into essentially, a 'dirty' makeshift nuke as far as latent radiation,

Well, no. DU will kill you via heavy metal poisoning long before it kills you with radiation. Even if the radiation was a major factor, that wouldn't make it a nuke, dirty or otherwise. No nuclear reactions are occurring, other than natural decays. One might call it a radiological weapon, but not a nuclear weapon.


and we see evidence of that in all the mutated, deformed births/miscarriages, and the sick kids

Plenty of mutated, deformed births/miscarriages in the third world before foreigners with cameras showed up and started taking pictures of them. Might have something to do with the poor nutrition, lack of prenatal care, atrocious environmental regulations, consanguineous marriages, etc.


Defects occur everywhere. You should do a bit of research on he RISE in said defects since the first gulf war. It'll make the hair on your neck stand up.

www.guardian.co.uk...
www.eurasiareview.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Well, this is rubbish. Even the US are not that silly to deploy nukes.

As soon as I saw the links to PressTV (the Iranian regime’s mouthpiece) I knew this was rubbish.

But who is this Middle East Consultant (Peter Eyre) who is the originator of this revelation? Is he someone who has a foot in the US military and privy to insider information, or is he some in situ investigative journalist? No, he is a man who (according to his blog, if you care to look him up) thinks world politics are controlled by Christian and Jewish Zionist Bankers. Yawn. He’s made it up.

Regards



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignant
perhaps DU is the new affordable NUCLEAR WEAPON alt? considering US is broke and all, yet still needs to carry out genocides.


I'm trying really hard to be nice here, and that's the only reason I will sound polite:

you are not making an iota of sense.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by paraphi
 





f you care to look him up) thinks world politics are controlled by Christian and Jewish Zionist Bankers. Yawn. He’s made it up.



Well he is right on that front have a look at who owns the central banks in the world... Try the Rockfellas, the Rothchilds and the Morgans.....



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
^ no biggie if i'm not making sense,

this article does, quoting again:

www.naturalnews.com...

"Depleted Uranium Shells Used by U.S. Military Worse Than Nuclear Weapons"

Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...

looks like US has found something worse than Nukes and has been using them on Iraq and Afghanistan

all the while UN ruled it was an illegal Weapon of Mass destruction -- the sheer IRONY of it all


edit on 1-12-2011 by ignant because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Pirateofpsychonautics
Is it not a plausible theory that the weapons used have never been seen before or the knowledge of, has been kept in complete secrecy?

Everybody seems to be scratching their heads on it, think of the billions of dollars poured in to military research and what modern technology is capable of.


This is something I like to point out as often as I can....we are 60 years removed from nuclear weaponry being used.....do people really think we havent developed beyond them?


Yep, my point exactly. Who in Hiroshima, Japan or the Japanese military was notified of the U.S's technical capability in warfare?

The element of surprise, confusion and panic works best when nobody knows what to expect or what the enemy is capable of.




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join