It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by avatar01
Radiation from depleted uranium ammunition is much more deadly than radiation from a few nukes.
Originally posted by tweak0413
I'm sorry if there is anyone offended by my following statement: There is no such thing as war crimes. War is a chaotic mess of cruelty and death. It is not an orderly and controlled situation, please do not treat it as such. On the topic at hand though I do not believe that a nuclear weapon was used. There simply isnt enough evidence to support that conclusion.
Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by 31Bravo
No finding of non depleted uranium have been endorsed by peer reviewed papers.. The Uranium Medical Research Centre (UMRC) is stating that non depleted uranium was used and it is being found in residents..
1. Unanticipated outcomes of the 2002 Afghan civilian studies Radiological measurements of the uranium concentrations in Afghan civilians’ urine samples indicate abnormally high levels of non-depleted uranium. Radiological measurements of Afghan civilians’ have high concentrations of uranium in a range beginning at 4 X’s and reaching to over 20 X’s normal populations. This is 400% to 2000% higher than the study controls and normal population baselines of the concentrations of nanograms of uranium per liter of urine in a 24-hour sample. UMRC has
Depleted uranium shells can cause birth defects and serious illness, including cancer, scientists at a conference on depleted uranium and cancers in Iraq claimed yesterday, warning that radioactivity from DU ammunition could cause health problems in Kosovo.
Mr Coghill, a biologist who runs a research centre in Gwent, Wales, said smoke and dust from the impact of the rounds could carry radioactive particles hundreds of yards into the air and several hundred miles downwind.
"fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity"
yea I was deployed to Afghanistan and spent a lot of time there.. in fact the COB I was stationed at was a uranium processing plant left over from the Russian invasion that still leaks uranium.
The article is a hoax.
My brother is an ex-Marine (I know - no such thing). He told me months ago (rather casually, I'm afraid) - when we were arguing over the phone about Bush possibly using nukes on Iraq - that these were just low-grade depleted uranium nukes they were talking about using - NOT the mushroom-cloud generating nukes that we traditionally think of when we talk about nukes - e.g., the ones that were used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki... Besides, he told me - the US had ALREADY used many of these low-grade depleted uranium nukes in Iraq, during the FIRST Persian Gulf war, back in the early 90's. He seemed to believe that this was common knowledge amongst the military, and most ex-military personnel. He said the only difference between Bush I and Bush II was that Bush II was being straight up front about the use of these weapons."
Originally posted by Freakshow
No Nukes were used in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Acording to Dr. Busby it was a new device made in colaboration between the US and the UK.
Also, there is a good amount of information in regards to the twin towers coming down and how
this secret weapon was used to acomplish that as well. It is a long read but pretty interesting.
Towino I think posted a video (pg.2) about this and i believe is right on the money.
Thank you for your reply. Your link puts a different angle on events. It will take me a while to look through it and digest it. But it looks like what it is saying is that cold fusion devices were used..