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: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Freeborn
 


Ordinarily I'd disagree with that sentiment. But if, and it's a big if, this were to be true, I'd be totally behind that.




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:34 PM
link   
so its bad enuf US used something worse than NUKES on Iraq & Afghanistan...

www.naturalnews.com...

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

Learn more: www.naturalnews.com...

but as far as the topic title, where is the evidence they used Nukes? or is it a problem of terminology. DU is a radiological weapon, not nuclear?

if even more than 1 nuke was used on the Taliban or elsewhere in the region though, that makes the title legit. but we need proof.. of nukeS .. otherwise the topic just undermines the even worse effects of DU, since people are arguing that DU was not nukes instead of discussin the evidence (what evidence?) of nukes (actual nukes) being used...




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   

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


No it hasn't.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignant
^ 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"


It takes a brain-dead person to suggest that the US would seed a desert like Tora Bora mountains with DU in an attempt to replicate the action of a nuke, and specifically to "commit a genocide". It's just as stone cold stupid as saying that the US has placed a pint of cyanide solution in the middle of Sahara with the goal of poisoning global water supply.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 

He is right they are not illegal..
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   
well, i provided the article and quoted it.

you didnt provide any reference, though.

heres another..

www.commondreams.org...

US Forces' Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons is 'Illegal'



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Biased website is biased.


But let me shock you.

I would have used nukes.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by ignant
^ 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"


It takes a brain-dead person to suggest that the US would seed a desert like Tora Bora mountains with DU in an attempt to replicate the action of a nuke, and specifically to "commit a genocide". It's just as stone cold stupid as saying that the US has placed a pint of cyanide solution in the middle of Sahara with the goal of poisoning global water supply.



actually heres another instance of another water supply being targeted by USA with DU:

www.project.nsearch.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ignant
 


Not sure I'd classify depleted uranium as "worse" than an actual nuke exploding...

DU is an insidious poison, but its effects are localized for the most part. A nukes effects? If large enough? Global. Rather a large difference.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
I would have used nukes.


I wouldn't, but if I had to, the remote desert location is ideal from the point of view of not contaminating a densely populated area.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 


A bit off topic but i though DU was illegal too...




The United Nations in 1996 passed a resolution that depleted uranium weapons are weapons of mass destruction, and they are illegal under all international laws and treaties.
In 2001, the European Parliament passed a resolution on DU. What happened is that the NATO forces went into Yugoslavia in 1998 and ’99 and flew 39,000 bombing runs and completely bombed Yugoslavia into radioactive rubble.
Germany and the U.S. made the most money on the destruction of Yugoslavia, and they made sure that countries that didn’t know about the DU, that the peacekeepers from those countries like from Italy and Portugal, were sent to the most contaminated regions in Yugoslavia. Germans and Americans didn’t send their own troops into those areas.They were in the least contaminated areas. These poor soldiers from other countries came back and died within weeks or in a couple of days or months. The parents in Portugal and Italy are furious and went to the Parliament and media, and there was just a huge media storm of articles about DU.


www.thewe.cc...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


it seems like that could be highly likely...and it wouldn't surprise me. but, without more information like dates etc, then i'm not too sure of how legit it is. but mb...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
oops bad link
dlete mods if you can

edit on 1-12-2011 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Did the US drop tactical nuclear weapons on Iraq/Afghanistan – You bet!

www.paltelegraph.com...

"So now we will leave the topic of depleted uranium and discuss the fact that the US have and will continue to use Tactical Nuclear Weapons in the battlefields of Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere as required to fulfill their economic greed."

"IF they used DU warheads in all these missiles, they would have released the equivalent number of radioactive atoms (atomicity) as would be released by 72,625 Nagasaki bombs. Some of them however had nuclear warheads."



^ please read article, it's chock full of evidence US used NUCLEAR WARHEADS on Iraq, Afghanistan!



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Except for the whole fall out thing. But, yeah, an isolated area is a, relatively speaking, better place to use them. But the caves in that region would be, unless the weapon was very accurate, be impervious to the effects of the explosion itself. If deep enough. ...and from what I understand, some were very deep indeed.

Using a nuke would seem counter-productive.

My humble opinion, of course.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Soshh
 


A bit off topic but i though DU was illegal too...




The United Nations in 1996 passed a resolution that depleted uranium weapons are weapons of mass destruction, and they are illegal under all international laws and treaties.
In 2001, the European Parliament passed a resolution on DU. What happened is that the NATO forces went into Yugoslavia in 1998 and ’99 and flew 39,000 bombing runs and completely bombed Yugoslavia into radioactive rubble.
Germany and the U.S. made the most money on the destruction of Yugoslavia, and they made sure that countries that didn’t know about the DU, that the peacekeepers from those countries like from Italy and Portugal, were sent to the most contaminated regions in Yugoslavia. Germans and Americans didn’t send their own troops into those areas.They were in the least contaminated areas. These poor soldiers from other countries came back and died within weeks or in a couple of days or months. The parents in Portugal and Italy are furious and went to the Parliament and media, and there was just a huge media storm of articles about DU.


www.thewe.cc...


You may have thought that, but it is still incorrect.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 





But let me shock you.

I would have used nukes.


It does not shock me and it is to be expected. There are many that are willing to the NWO..... But remember they do not have you interests at heart.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
more regarding DU illegality..

prop1.org...

Depleted uranium (DU) weaponry meets the definition of weapon of mass destruction in two out of three categories under U.S. Federal Code Title 50 Chapter 40 Section 2302.

DU weaponry violates all international treaties and agreements, Hague and Geneva war conventions, the 1925 Geneva gas protocol, U.S. laws and U.S. military law.

Since 1991, the U.S. has released the radioactive atomicity equivalent of at least 400,000 Nagasaki bombs into the global atmosphere. That is 10 times the amount released during atmospheric testing which was the equivalent of 40,000 Hiroshima bombs. The U.S. has permanently contaminated the global atmosphere with radioactive pollution having a half-life of 2.5 billion years.

The U.S. has illegally conducted four nuclear wars in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and twice in Iraq since 1991, calling DU "conventional" weapons when in fact they are nuclear weapons.
DU on the battlefield has three effects on living systems: it is a heavy metal "chemical" poison, a "radioactive" poison and has a "particulate" effect due to the very tiny size of the particles that are 0.1 microns and smaller.
The blueprint for DU weaponry is a 1943 Manhattan Project memo to Gen. L. Groves that recommended development of radioactive materials as poison gas weapons - dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets.

DU weapons are very effective kinetic energy penetrators, but even more effective bioweapons since uranium has a strong chemical affinity for phosphate structures concentrated in DNA.

DU is the Trojan Horse of nuclear war - it keeps giving and keeps killing. There is no way to clean it up, and no way to turn it off because it continues to decay into other radioactive isotopes in over 20 steps.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Soshh
 


Please explain further, I thought the use of DU was illegal. After I have seen what it can do I am in no doubt that it should be..



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


desert like mountains eh? that makes about as much sense as your name and tag under it...



fact is unless one of you naysayers goes into these MOUNTAINS with some radiation tool how can you say Nukes were not used, since everything online is so biased and false>?




top topics



 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join