Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Monster (NUCLEAR) Babies in Iraq

page: 4
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Just wanted to post a link to a website that has consolidated every known news report about the DU used by the NATO forces...

www.thewe.cc...

Scary, scary stuff....




posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by M1FST91
 


A biopsy of your liver cancer tested in an independant lab would tell you exactly if the cancer is caused by US weaponry.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


These Iraqi families should get a top international lawyer and sue the USA



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by bluemirage5
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


These Iraqi families should get a top international lawyer and sue the USA


I suppose "The Hague" should get started on a few million individual "wrongful death claims" too?

" Charging someone with "murder"; here is like handing out speeding ticket at the Indy 500!"
From the dialogue(narration) of capt. Williard in Coppola's vietnam war epic movie: Apocalypse now"

Yup ... War is not a "nice" thing...Sometimes it becomes necessary.
edit on 3-1-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-1-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by EmperorXyn
How would you not know if someone is using nuclear bombs???


My understanding is that new technologies cause the bombs to detonate much more efficiently that the Hiroshima days so they can be considerably smaller, with a bigger punch, and less have less fallout. I think it's feasible. Great test base anyway. Who would know?



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by wrkn4livn

Originally posted by EmperorXyn
How would you not know if someone is using nuclear bombs???


My understanding is that new technologies cause the bombs to detonate much more efficiently that the Hiroshima days so they can be considerably smaller, with a bigger punch, and less have less fallout. I think it's feasible. Great test base anyway. Who would know?


Yes, the modern generation of thermonuclear weapons in the U.S. arsenal are smaller, have a significantly higher yield and are much cleaner than the early fission weapons.

There is still absolutely no disguising a nuclear detonation.

The pretext of this entire thread is dependent on a good bit of general naivety on the part of the casual reader not understanding the mechanics of the subject matter.

The hyperbole and misinformation being offered to the reader under the guise of impartial medical studies would be laughable if so many didn't fall for it.

Edit: ATS poster M1FST91 is obviously not being truthful. Take it for what you will.

edit on 3-1-2012 by Drunkenparrot because: syntax



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
What uses DU?

the Kinetic penetrators of anti-tank munitions on the M1 series of Main Battle Tank.

The 25mm cannon on the Bradley and LAV type weapon systems.

The 30mm Cannon on the A-10 Close Air Support aircraft and Apache Attack Helicopter.

Assault rifles, Mortars or Artillery do NOT have DU penetrators.

While there would still have been a significant amount of DU contamination on the battlefield, it's not as severe as some of the posters as suggested.

Depleted Uranium is PRIMARILLY used against armor, Post invasion Iraq had almost NIL armor and the Bradlies and LAVs would PRIMARILLY have used High Explosive ammunition, NOT DU.

The A-10 may have still used some DU ammo since of it still being in storage but as soon as the 30mm belts of ammo containing DU would've been removed since it wasn't required in the mission (Airforce personnel correct me if i'm wrong).

M1 tanks also would've used HEAT rounds (High Explosive Anti-Tank) against urban targets, there is no need for DU Sabot rounds or APFSDS (Armor Piercing Fin Stablized Discaring Sabot) unless they were using it against hardened targets.

If these types of ammunitions WERE authorized it would be on the Commanding Officers that alloyed it, otherwise it would be on the commanders of these vehicles or pilots of those aircraft.

as for one of the poster that flew Raptors....Sir, are you atleast a MAJ or above? did you fly the F-22A Raptor above Iraq? have you handled or been around DU ammunition? if so...why?



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:24 PM
link   
My neice was in Iraq and worked with radiation while serving in the military. She wasn't working with it long before she started getting a bloody nose. She has had one foot of her intestines removed because of cancer along with an ovary. Her latest medical scare is a 2cm brain tumor that is pressing on her optical nerve which is affecting her vision. Tomorrow she is seeing a second specialist about the tumor. She had a spinal tap which came back cloudy. After the tap her head felt a little better because some of the pressure was relieved.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
This was predicted on ATS when the Fukushima nuclear chain reaction happened. Score 1 for ATS predicting the future.

I'm confused that it hasn't happened in the US and other countries though. Probably just the nuclear clouds were moved over to Afghanistan by the HAARP weather control programme.

I'd be interested to hear what the Mayan elders predicted about this. They clearly knew about it because it is now 2012 and I read they had a lot to say about 2012.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by EmperorXyn
How would you not know if someone is using nuclear bombs???


Because the bombs are small and not huge ones like those used in ww2...

How would you sneak poison into somebody's drink? would you just haul in a huge jug of rat poison in front of everyone to see?

And using nuclear weapons is poisoning



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


Bless them babies. I hope one day to live in a world were the soldiers and authorities that committed these crimes are held to account.. Do not forget the Nazies and the Nuremberg trials. Soliders can be held to account for there actions when someone has a bigger stick...



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
"You people"(and you know who you are) are still implying we (U.S) used "high order nuclear detonations in Iraq?



Why?



Why?


Why would we "need" to do that? We could've put an "old technology" tv guided maverick missile in a particular _ Newer tech JDAMs and sea launched cruise missiles through a particular window pane in any weather day or night.

We (still) are the biggest kid in the sandbox;and our daddy is "rich".

Why use a high order nuclear device?

If we wanted to "poison " people we could use "chemicals"

Other than common "mopp level" (NBC training) I have absolutely no knowledge of our chemical capabilities. ( I never trained or handled chemical munitions: Though I have been physically up to my elbows inside: w-69's, B-28'and B-61's ..

Tell me what a nuclear detonation accomplishes that we couldn't do with modern smart conventional ordinance?
If you read any military association periodicals: That(accurate "smart" &"conventional") is a big direction for weapons development and procurement contracts;

I.e. the more precise and accurate the weapon; the smaller the ordinance has to be.the cheaper it is and the less collateral damage it causes.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jim Scott
Depleted uranium is less radioactive than natural uranium by a factor of 40%. As a kid, I had uranium in my chemistry set. No ill effects. You probably have radium on your watch hands, if you have watch hands. You breathe radon gas. You are exposed to solar radiation. You get an xray once in awhile. www.gulflink.osd.mil...

More than likely, the birth defects are a result of incest in the region, or poor living conditions during warfare. As you know, we try to keep our women as healthy as possible whenever they are pregnant.
edit on 1/3/2012 by Jim Scott because: reference


Once again someone not reading the posts/links...

Instances of deformities INCREASED dramatically FROM 2004, after the BOMBINGS...nothing to bloody do with INCEST!

Hair samples show high levels of RADIOACTIVITY, stemming from 2004 invasion timeline.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
The military uses many toxic metals in its equipment for various properties:

"Berylium" is another one I remember; its dust is toxic when handled/machined (heated). Depleted Uranium is another metal it is molded and machined into projectiles to penetrate armor; not "dipped" or "tipped" as mentioned above.

O.p.You still haven't addressed my dispute of your: raptor pilot/"MOS" comment...
All your sources are typical hysterical liberal anti-war/environmentalist "types". You are spreading wild speculation.


Sorry, am on a different time-zone to you.

You appear to be very much in DENIAL.

Regarding the MOS comment, you've got your wires crossed. I was ONLY replying to someone who had asked what MOS stood for (something that was discussed in a post by someone ELSE). I wasn't commenting on whether the person who mentioned it, was correct in its use in his post.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpaceJockey1

Originally posted by 46ACE
The military uses many toxic metals in its equipment for various properties:

"Berylium" is another one I remember; its dust is toxic when handled/machined (heated). Depleted Uranium is another metal it is molded and machined into projectiles to penetrate armor; not "dipped" or "tipped" as mentioned above.

O.p.You still haven't addressed my dispute of your: raptor pilot/"MOS" comment...
All your sources are typical hysterical liberal anti-war/environmentalist "types". You are spreading wild speculation.


Sorry, am on a different time-zone to you.

You appear to be very much in DENIAL.

Regarding the MOS comment, you've got your wires crossed. I was ONLY replying to someone who had asked what MOS stood for (something that was discussed in a post by someone ELSE). I wasn't commenting on whether the person who mentioned it, was correct in its use in his post.

HMMMM:
Rechecking I see you are correct. I got screwed up and connected you two; The original quote is indeed from this other poster:

Originally posted by M1FST91
I really don't want to comment much on this due to my families well being but after serving and coming home a year or so later I was diagnosed with liver cancer and I know of at least 5 others that are close friends of mine have the same thing. I'm not saying its from my deploy but what are the odds.... Oh and my mos is a fighter pilot raptors. Just my experience... Read betw----------------.


I do apologize; it was late when my head exploded reading that last night...
Sorry; he's full of b.s. though
"Denial" not so much I straddled many agm-69A warheads installing ejector racks on (now obsolete) Boeing SRAM missiles. In 2011 I lost my prostate to Cancer... Connection?(or just years of contact with various solvents and mercury?) possibly who knows? no one...


Thank you for setting me straight...
edit on 3-1-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-1-2012 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Why are you denighers discussing NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS in this thread, so as to derail it???

NEVER said anything about dropping NUKES!

We're talking about DU being added to CONVENTIONAL WEAPONARY, that VAPORIZES on impact and creates a TOXIC RADIOACTIVE CLOUD.

Handling DU is supposedly quite safe, but once exploded it's highly toxic and dangerous.

Causing ongoing deaths after a war breaks many international conventions. There have been WAR CRIMES committed.

“Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” — Henry Kissinger, quoted in “Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW’s in Vietnam.”

Vietnam was a chemical war for oil, permanently contaminating large regions and countries downriver with Agent Orange, and environmentally the most devastating war in world history. But since 1991, the U.S. has staged four nuclear wars using depleted uranium weaponry, which, like Agent Orange, meets the U.S. government definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Vast regions in the Middle East and Central Asia have been permanently contaminated with radiation.

And what about our soldiers? Terry Jemison of the Department of Veterans Affairs reported this week to the American Free Press that “Gulf-era veterans” now on medical disability since 1991 number 518,739, with only 7,035 reported wounded in Iraq in that same 14-year period.

The American Free Press dropped a “dirty bomb” on the Pentagon by reporting that eight out of 20 men who served in one unit in the 2003 U.S. military offensive in Iraq now have malignancies. That means that 40 percent of the soldiers in that unit have developed malignancies in just 16 months.

Since these soldiers were exposed to vaccines and depleted uranium (DU) only, this is strong evidence for researchers and scientists working on this issue, that DU is the definitive cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Vaccines are not known to cause cancer. One of the first published researchers on Gulf War Syndrome, who also served in 1991 in Iraq, Dr. Andras Korényi — Both, is in agreement with Barbara Goodno from the Department of Defense’s Deployment Health Support Directorate, that in this war soldiers were not exposed to chemicals, pesticides, bioagents or other suspect causes this time to confuse the issue.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Thanks for your apology...it's easy to read & misinterpret a post that sets your blood boiling



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
I wonder where we HIDE the evidence about returned servicemen that have had their SPERM affected by radiation while serving, where DU has been used?

Blowing holes in the cover-up

This powerful new evidence is blowing holes in the cover-up perpetrated by the Pentagon and three presidential administrations ever since DU was first used in 1991 in the Persian Gulf War. Fourteen years after the introduction of DU on the battlefield in 1991, the long-term effects have revealed that DU is a death sentence and very nasty stuff.

Scientists studying the biological effects of uranium in the 1960s reported that it targets the DNA. Marion Fulk, a nuclear physical chemist retired from the Livermore Nuclear Weapons Lab and formerly involved with the Manhattan Project, interprets the new and rapid malignancies in soldiers from the 2003 war as “spectacular ... and a matter of concern.”


This evidence shows that of the three effects which DU has on biological systems — radiation, chemical and particulate — the particulate effect from nano-size particles is the most dominant one immediately after exposure and targets the Master Code in the DNA. This is bad news, but it explains why DU causes a myriad of diseases which are difficult to define.

In simple words, DU “trashes the body.” When asked if the main purpose for using it was for destroying things and killing people, Fulk was more specific: “I would say that it is the perfect weapon for killing lots of people.”

Soldiers developing malignancies so quickly since 2003 can be expected to develop multiple cancers from independent causes. This phenomenon has been reported by doctors in hospitals treating civilians following NATO bombing with DU in Yugoslavia in 1998-1999 and the U.S. military invasion of Iraq using DU for the first time in 1991. Medical experts report that this phenomenon of multiple malignancies from unrelated causes has been unknown until now and is a new syndrome associated with internal DU exposure.

Just 467 U.S. personnel were wounded in the three-week Persian Gulf War in 1990-1991. Out of 580,400 soldiers who served in Gulf War I, 11,000 are dead, and by 2000 there were 325,000 on permanent medical disability. This astounding number of disabled vets means that a decade later, 56 percent of those soldiers who served now have medical problems.

The number of disabled vets reported up to 2000 has been increasing by 43,000 every year. Brad Flohr of the Department of Veterans Affairs told American Free Press that he believes there are more disabled vets now than even after World War II.

They brought it home

Not only were soldiers exposed to DU on and off the battlefields, but they brought it home. DU in the semen of soldiers internally contaminated their wives, partners and girlfriends. Tragically, some women in their 20s and 30s who were sexual partners of exposed soldiers developed endometriosis and were forced to have hysterectomies because of health problems.

In a group of 251 soldiers from a study group in Mississippi who had all had normal babies before the Gulf War, 67 percent of their post-war babies were born with severe birth defects. They were born with missing legs, arms, organs or eyes or had immune system and blood diseases. In some veterans’ families now, the only normal or healthy members of the family are the children born before the war.

The Department of Veterans Affairs has stated that they do not keep records of birth defects occurring in families of veterans.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by SpaceJockey1
 


So the babies that result from possible nuclear/radiological exposure are "monsters". The people running the US government are "monsters". Doesn't that seem like you are saying they are one and the same? Wouldn't you like to distinguish between those that are helplessly deformed and those that essentially caused the deformation? Or is it safe to lump them into one monstrosity of a group?

I think calling the kids monsters is very unsensitive. I can't imagine you would call your own child a monster if it was born minus a limb would you?



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpaceJockey1
Why are you denighers discussing NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS in this thread, so as to derail it???

NEVER said anything about dropping NUKES!

We're talking about DU being added to CONVENTIONAL WEAPONARY, that VAPORIZES on impact and creates a TOXIC RADIOACTIVE CLOUD.

Handling DU is supposedly quite safe, but once exploded it's highly toxic and dangerous.

Causing ongoing deaths after a war breaks many international conventions. There have been WAR CRIMES committed.

“Military men are just dumb stupid animals to be used as pawns in foreign policy.” — Henry Kissinger, quoted in “Kiss the Boys Goodbye: How the United States Betrayed Its Own POW’s in Vietnam.”

Vietnam was a chemical war for oil, permanently contaminating large regions and countries downriver with Agent Orange, and environmentally the most devastating war in world history. But since 1991, the U.S. has staged four nuclear wars using depleted uranium weaponry, which, like Agent Orange, meets the U.S. government definition of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Vast regions in the Middle East and Central Asia have been permanently contaminated with radiation.

And what about our soldiers? Terry Jemison of the Department of Veterans Affairs reported this week to the American Free Press that “Gulf-era veterans” now on medical disability since 1991 number 518,739, with only 7,035 reported wounded in Iraq in that same 14-year period.

The American Free Press dropped a “dirty bomb” on the Pentagon by reporting that eight out of 20 men who served in one unit in the 2003 U.S. military offensive in Iraq now have malignancies. That means that 40 percent of the soldiers in that unit have developed malignancies in just 16 months.

Since these soldiers were exposed to vaccines and depleted uranium (DU) only, this is strong evidence for researchers and scientists working on this issue, that DU is the definitive cause of Gulf War Syndrome. Vaccines are not known to cause cancer. One of the first published researchers on Gulf War Syndrome, who also served in 1991 in Iraq, Dr. Andras Korényi — Both, is in agreement with Barbara Goodno from the Department of Defense’s Deployment Health Support Directorate, that in this war soldiers were not exposed to chemicals, pesticides, bioagents or other suspect causes this time to confuse the issue.


Uh, because the first sentence in your post asks if the USA "deployed nuclear weapons."????

There is a distinct difference between a nuclear weapon and DU weapons.





new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join