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: 6
19
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by buddhasystem
 


Well of course it wasn't. The very definition of tactical is use of whatever at the battlefront.




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
No nukes at all. It would have created an international incident.

I don't think ANYONE has the cojones to use any nukes, tactical or not.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Theprimevoyager
 


I overheard once they were actually very close to using it when Iraq wanted to get in on the Israel bashing. Israel was ready to drop a nuke, and the US knew these nukes were a crap-ton less clean than US ones. They knew that the radiation from their nukes would bounce back and spray all over the Mediterranean and screw up everyone. So the US frankly told Iraq that if they don't back down, they are going to have to drop nukes to prevent the dirty ones Israel has from poisoning the Earth.

Of course this was something I half-heard at a dinner event. Haven't got a clue about the context; when and why. But you should realize that the US apparently has no problem doing it if it means the crap-quality nukes of other countries don't fly.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
highly doubt it, where did the radiation go to?



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 09:46 PM
link   
Thats a HUGE claim to make but were is the evidence?



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   
This is incorrect. if there was such nukes dropped in Iraq or Afghanistan the radiation would be too much for our deployed troops which we have thousands across both regions.

I believe we have many other weapons that were tested , and still mostly held under the radar, thus a silence on the press before the initial attack shortly after Afghanistan.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


I doubt they used Tactical Nuclear Weapons in the area, but maybe it could of been cause by the 30000 lbs bunker-buster bombs. The MOP or massive ordnance penetrator is known as the biggest bunker-buster bomb in the world. Manufactured by Boeing to fit the B-52 and B-2 Bombers, I bet these bombs would be able to create seismic activity.

www.foxnews.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   
The sources of the story are not credible, there is no smoking gun, no evidence whatsoever.
Ask youselves, could any nation on this small planet let off a nuke and not be immediately noticed?
MSM are controlled, but somebody would have still run the story.

Pics of mushroom clouds or it didn't happen.




posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Comment from some UK researcher:



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Those who orchestrated 9/'11 could have possibly used nukes...It's no conspiracy that depleted uranium has been used and civilians and US soldiers were needlessly exposed.

Why can't we fight wars like true warriors, face to face with the enemy...forged swords, shields...Ah the good old days when war was bloody and glorious.



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 11:04 PM
link   
check this out LINK

dont worry world american government will pay for their crimes, karma never fails



posted on Dec, 1 2011 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


How or why should we bother "debunking" something that is just some dude making a claim with no solid evidence to back it up? "Debunk" my claim that I have blonde hair or that furry monsters live 1000 feet below your house. I said so, so it must be true and if you can't "prove" it's not then it's automatically true?

We detect nukes going off underground in north korea solely with satellites not to mention the fallout that would occur if a "nuke" was used. I'm sure if the USA was setting off nukes in Iraq and Afghanistan plenty of other countries would notice and I doubt they'd keep quiet about it.

Waste of time to have to "debunk" this, the one making outlandish claims is responsible for presenting evidence to be taken seriously, not the other way around.


edit on 1-12-2011 by darkest4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 12:04 AM
link   
We used MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Burst) bombs in both conflicts if I remember correctly and they both produce mushroom clouds, ofcourse no giant fireball...

I find it hard to believe we used nukes like another poster said, it would've been discovered by other nations keeping an eye on us.



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 02:48 AM
link   
Doubtfull they used conventional Nukes or even smal yeild nukes, as stated earlier, this would NOT go un noticed by the World.

Thought i do not doubt, radioactive weapons have been used, the key word here is Conventional



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   

edit on 2-12-2011 by blueberrywaffles because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by spirit_horse
As far as I know, and this from watching commentary on the conflict, the US used Thermobaric bombs on the caves at tora bora. They are a type of FAE (Fuel Air Explosive) that sucks all the air out of a cave for example and the enemy inside dies of lack of oxygen.

Thermobaric Bomb Wikipedia

I would like to see proof of a nuke, but there is often claims of nukes used because people find Depleted Uranium dust everywhere and somehow think it came from a nuclear weapon. DU is used to defeat armor and is used in a few different munitions.


You got it, Bro! I looked into all this some time ago and came to same conclusion as you, Sir.

I think the nuke thing is just chinese whispers related to the depleted uranium. Thanks.



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 04:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Revolution9
 


Did you read any of the reports I linked.. They found NO TRACES of depleted uranium when testing. So you can think its DU that has caused this but the The Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC) is saying different.




Critics suspect new weapons were used in Afghanistan He said they had the same symptoms as some veterans of the 1991 Gulf war. But he found no trace of the depleted uranium (DU) some scientists believe is implicated in Gulf War syndrome.



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 



The analyst went on to say that the use of such lethal weapons by US military, which is a gross violation of the Geneva Convention,


The use of nuclear weapons is not in violation of the Geneva Convention, therefore this "analyst" does not know what he is talking about. The Geneva convention only outlaws the use of such weapons against civilian targets. On the other hand, the Geneva Convention does specify that combatants wear uniforms. Combatants who do not wear uniforms are considered "partisans," and are not protected by the same rights as uniformed troops.



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   
reply to post by DJW001
 


Yes but under the Geneva convention you are not meant to target civilians and make sure they arenot subject to attack..
Now then if I drop a nuclear device in an area it is very likely to have an adverse atack on civilians... It sounds to me like it is you that does not know what you are talking about here... Not the analyst..


edit on 2-12-2011 by purplemer because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 05:06 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 



Yes but under the Geneva convention you are not meant to target civilians and make sure they arenot subject to attack..


What's the population density of Tora Bora?



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join