U.S. using chemical weapons in Afghanistan: report

what chemical. oh i guess you forgot that.

radioactive rounds your guys are loons... wait i think i hear my tv talking to me. bye

reply to post by oozyism

America can do wrong

Please, dost not mix usual people with clans, in particular dollar clans

reply to post by Xcathdra

good work however, we cannot exclude above-mentioned articles were induced by pentagon to conceal real situation with false-flag method

reply to post by Xcathdra


well the A-10 Warthogs allso fires large depleted uranium armor-piercing shells at about 3900 rounds a min. prddy shure there were a few of them over there........ pll
eas correct me if im wrong

reply to post by oozyism


Really? Your using the Tehran times as a source.

Id imagine there would be plenty of UN based organizations that would love to nail the US if they even had a shred of evidence indicating an ounce of truth in this. And I personally think your an a**hole for suggesting something so absurd.

For what reason or purpose would the US have any reason to use chemical weapons against a people they are trying to reign in and get control over? Try having some critical thinking skills.

reply to post by open_eyeballs

For what reason or purpose would the US have any reason to use chemical weapons against a people they are trying to reign in and get control over? Try having some critical thinking skills.

warZone always has been nice place to test something new + most reason to pentagon in Afghan has been to control narcoTraffic

reply to post by oozyism


Ooz,

Out of curiousity, what country do you live in?

I was under the impression that you lived in the US?

Propaganda is crap no matter what the source. Hell, I'm not too sure what do believe nowadays. My usual comments are

1. "Well, no kidding"

2. "Oh, horse crap"

or 3.

"Really?"

I have to go with one of the posters here. If they had any idea of an NBC device used, they would have some sort of guess regardless. If it were something "new" they would say "chemical /biological X seems to be such and such but behaves as Y".

The other thing to consider are the living conditions in many areas. India has some AMAZING things that happen to their children and I dont think any NBC devices are currently used there.

I need to get my shortwave cranked up again. Get some more outside news.

I hate to say it but I'm kinda liking the Russia Today newcast. Might be some bs but alot checks out.

reply to post by SarK0Y


What does controlling drug traffic have anything to do with using chemical weapons?

Im not even sure the US has chemical weapons in its arsenal. In fact id be willing to wager that we dont.

Theres no need for them. It makes no sense for us to use them in anyway. This isnt WW2 where blanketing fields with mustard gas is an effective strategy. They are battling insurgents over there on a very localized level. I guarantee if there were any hint of chemical weapons being used the world would know about it and this would be all over msm channels.

reply to post by open_eyeballs

What does controlling drug traffic have anything to do with using chemical weapons?

first & foremost, to control narcoTtraffic is strong weapon per se; to test new drugs, based upon new GMO, are useful moment too i don't assert something with 100%, but i just observe possible secret activities there

Im not even sure the US has chemical weapons in its arsenal. In fact id be willing to wager that we dont.

do you wanna say chemical weapon is useless???

I guarantee if there were any hint of chemical weapons being used the world would know about it and this would be all over msm channels.

msm has been under control & they have issued just lovely sh!t for their owners. in fact, term "tv news" is overfilled of bitter Irony: there're so a bit of real news, but many disinfo & moronic crap. why situation of GOM has not been Top News for many months or, for example, that info www.ksl.com... too. the World has had many Real Problems, but it's too worthless to be Top News

Originally posted by open_eyeballs
reply to post by oozyism

 

Really? Your using the Tehran times as a source.

Id imagine there would be plenty of UN based organizations that would love to nail the US if they even had a shred of evidence indicating an ounce of truth in this. And I personally think your an a**hole for suggesting something so absurd.

For what reason or purpose would the US have any reason to use chemical weapons against a people they are trying to reign in and get control over? Try having some critical thinking skills.

I think you need to read the sources before opening your mouth, what gives you the right to open your mouth before even reading the content of the source?

I even read FOX news, I even ask my self why? Then I answer myself, DUUUH, it is about the content of the source, not the source.

If the content of the source says Palestinians used Chemical weapons against Israel, then I will investigate that, I will go check what evidence is FOX news basing.

If you read the Tehran Times article, you would have seen that they didn't do the investigation themselves, the investigation was done by a real research group, whose mission is to discover contaminated place, and to find out the reasons behind contamination.

I can swear people are getting dumber and dumber.

It is an absurdity to claim Tehran Times is making the claim, Tehran Times is reporting the claim (which is a huge difference), go investigate who is making the claim, what evidence etc.

And

Regarding UN, ha ha haaaa haaaa..

Are you kidding me?

UN organizations want to nail US?

UN was created with the help of US. Get it? To keep the insane US at leash, by giving it what ever it wants so that it might not start a nuclear holocaust with its other paranoid insane buddies (Russia, China etc...)

You get what I mean?

When was the last time US got sanctioned for any of its wrong doings?

Ohh wait, some people have the "America can't do no wrong" disease, or at least the "America can't do no wrong intentionally disease".

reply to post by oozyism

UN organizations want to nail US?

agreed un has been only puppy of dollar clans

that it might not start a nuclear holocaust with its other paranoid insane buddies (Russia, China etc...)

buddy, why you call Ruthenia paranoid insane??? for example, no Ruthenia applied nuclear bombs to Japan, but pentagon did

Originally posted by solidshot
Depleted uranium weaponry and chemical weapons are two totally different things. DU weaponry was used in Iraq as well so it's hardly a new thing or a first.

And that makes it ok??????

They cannot possibly now claim they make every attempt not to cause harm to innocent civilians.

This is so sickening, those poor, poor people.

second

Originally posted by SarK0Y
reply to post by open_eyeballs

 

What does controlling drug traffic have anything to do with using chemical weapons?

first & foremost, to control narcoTtraffic is strong weapon per se; to test new drugs, based upon new GMO, are useful moment too

i don't assert something with 100%, but i just observe possible secret activities there

Im not even sure the US has chemical weapons in its arsenal. In fact id be willing to wager that we dont.

do you wanna say chemical weapon is useless???

I guarantee if there were any hint of chemical weapons being used the world would know about it and this would be all over msm channels.

msm has been under control & they have issued just lovely sh!t for their owners. in fact, term "tv news" is overfilled of bitter Irony: there're so a bit of real news, but many disinfo & moronic crap. why situation of GOM has not been Top News for many months or, for example, that info www.ksl.com... too. the World has had many Real Problems, but it's too worthless to be Top News

edit on 5-12-2010 by SarK0Y because: (no reason given)

In one of the wikileaked cables Israel is seen to have chemical and biological weapons - so it's very likely that US has them too.

Originally posted by oozyism

Proof!!

1. An Afghan investigative research scholar, Dr. Mohammad Daud Miraki conducted a field research in the southern provinces of the country. He accumulated enough empirical evidence regarding the use of poisonous weapons in the area.

2. In 2002, a research team of Canadian Medical Research Center visited southern provinces of Afghanistan and found that the magnitude of uranium isotopes in the inhabitants was soaring between 300 and 2000 nanograms while the accepted limit is 10 nanograms.

3. Iran’s Arabic language channel al-Alam TV website has posted a video report about newly-born infants suffering from deformities and abnormal body parts caused by the usage of biological weapons. See http:www.alalam.ir/node/307570.

4. A Senior official of the Kabul Regime’s Ministry of Health told media some times ago that they had obtained evidences, indicating that the Americans had used depleted uranium munitions and phosphorus bombs in Tora bora in east Afghanistan in 2001. Deformed infants have been born in the area or some have deformed body parts or suffering from weightlessness or mental retardation. Diseases like leukemia (blood white cells disease) is widespread in the area. Sperms “infertility” malfunction in males have been noticed. Many persons have died without an open wound.

This is terrorism at its best.

Terrorism at its worst is desperate weak forces trying to fight powerful world corporations and armies.

The US has always used any means necessary to win wars which they started in the first place, it makes me sick, there is a reason why so many are starting to call the US the Khardijad.

They used Chemical weapons in Vietnam, nuked Japan, used disgusting war tactics against USSR etc etc.

What is US up to?

Does it really think Karma will not come back to haunt it? It will eventually pay for everyone of its crimes, and who will suffer for it.

My finger points at the screen, towards the Americans who are still supporting their government like good'ol patriots.

Grow up and WAKE UP!!!

Thoughts

oz

www.tehrantimes.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Oozyism, I wish you would learn the difference between 'proof' and 'evidence which suggests' - it might be chemical weapons, it might be DU. They are not the same, even though both are horrendous.

DU is used in several munitions and a spokesman for Gen McKiernan said in 2009 that WP was used as a weapon in Afghanistan: “In the case of white phosphorus it is used on the battlefield in certain applications ... It is used as an incendiary to destroy bunkers and enemy equipment; it's used for illumination.”

This is widely known, that’s not to say that it is fine, but the article also attributes the use of other weapons to the US. The “proof” that they offer suggests only that "poisonous/biological weapons" were used by someone and it doesn’t even name the weapons themselves. That’s pretty irresponsible and unprofessional reporting, it’s almost as if the news agency is biased or something.

reply to post by Soshh


I was wrong in terms of the use of white phosphorus. Its not illegal nor banned under UN rules. The article below is what you were referring to. Its 3 pages, and disputes the claim made by the girsl family, saying the phosphorous round would come from Artillery stationed in the area, and at the date and time of the attack, there was no artillery action.

Not to say it didnt happen... The story refers to NAtO as well as Taliban using white Phosphorous.

Afghanistan's Young Victims of Chemical Strikes

Source - ABC News May 2009

reply to post by oozyism


The source is an important part of the equation there guy. Especially when theres such strong anti US rhetoric constantly being spewed from it.

As far as your assertion that Im in camp "US can do no harm", you couldn't be more wrong. Ive made my stance on the huge mistakes we have made that have cost thousands of lives, the torture and much of the horrendous and even criminal, in some cases, wars we are currently in abundantly clear through hundreds of postings on ATS.

And to group someone who calls your post bs (because that is what it is) into such a category because you don't like my comments is clear of a personal bias you apparently have.

Just think about it. The US has zero reason to deploy chemical weapons in Afhganistan. It would accomplish nothing. Its against pretty much every treaty and convention the US is apart of. Why would the politicians, generals and officers (who are all educated and understand the ethics of that are supposed to guide their actions in wartime scenarios) risk their lives, careers and morals to what? Creat deformities in babies? Its a stupid assertion and it should be recognized as such. Like I said, try using some critical thinking.

A couple other things. The UN is hardly in the US's pocket. Just because we helped create it decades ago doesnt mean anything. Your ignorance in the topics are highlighting your bias.

And to the narcotics guy Sark0y or whatever that is trying to make this idiotic correlation that "they want to test new weapons to help control drug trafficking"..you didnt answer the question.

How is deploying chemical weapons going to help the military in this supposed drug trafficking?

To both of you. If you feel like finding something the US is guilty of, I can assure you there is plenty. Try focusing on the realities instead of bias rhetoric that has no real merit and doesn't make any sense. Otherwise your not helping your cause.

reply to post by oozyism


I would fully support your news, but you really need to learn how to present things in a more unbiased manner. Whatever chip you may have against the U.S downplays your news with a lot of supporters because included in your presentation of it is filled with Anti-American attacks on our CITIZENS. Leave us out of it. We didn't drop the bomb, we didn't do this and that.

None of us CHOSE to be born here. Our Government and corporations are a terrible representation of our citizens. The corporate government military industrial complex took us over. Once upon a time this was a decent place to be.

I ask you to please show a little respect and not lump every citizen in with the war crazed zealots that oppress us.

Originally posted by SarK0Y
buddy, why you call Ruthenia paranoid insane???

for example, no Ruthenia applied nuclear bombs to Japan, but pentagon did

Then maybe they should not have attacked the United States. Dont pick a fight you wont win.. Even Adm. Yamamoto warned against going to war with the US.