Monster (NUCLEAR) Babies in Iraq

I beg you to question yourself whether there actually were "Weapons of Mass Destruction" already in Iraq" Fallujah in this case, and that we actually just blew them up creating these Uranium deposits in certain locations. Maybe we accidently blew them up and it's better to cover that up by saying... "sorry we found nothing" than... "sorry we blew them up".

Just something to think about.

EDIT:... on a side note but slightly related, I was diagnosed with a lung disease of unknown etiology after returning from Iraq in 2005. Went through extensive testing, biopsies, etc... still to this day I have no clue what it comes from. Receltly I went to a new doctor and he walks in and states "wait let me guess... you have asthmatic symptoms at random times, there's scarring in your lungs, and nobody knows what's going on. Here's your medication prescription... go search online". After searching, I find this:

www.armytimes.com...

www.armytimes.com...

www.military.com...

denver.cbslocal.com...

Some of the sources state that it's from dust and burning pits, but I wasn't around any burning pits. Dust of course... but It doesn't sound right that dust would form permanent scarring in your lungs. I wonder if I was exposed... I was in Fallujah for about 2 weeks.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by SpaceJockey1

 

True, it does violate the various conventions we signed. But DU as far as I know is not used in "carpet bombing". The objective of DU is that it is very dense.. it's used as armor penetrating, and often in Iraq used on a smaller scale to blast through walls. It's also used as armor plating. You're right that it has multiple purposes (though I do not believe they are used in conventional bombs) most likely the residue ingested was used from ground fighting in an urban setting. If ingested by a pregnant woman it is very possible for even the minute levels of radiation to cause birth defects. Of course there is also an abundance of other issues that could also give rise to an increased level of birth defects. Such as malnutrition, polluted drinking water, the use of drugs (which has increased since the war) or exposure to other chemical agents.

The various sources I have researched on the web state that DU was widely used in guided and cluster munitions during the 1990's (Gulf War 1), but their use was discontinued shortly thereafter. There is much speculation that DU is currently used to harden bunker buster munitions which would explain Fallujah in my opinion..

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!

Actually my dude, that is exactly what you said in your first post. Here I will show you:

Originally posted by SpaceJockey1
Did the US when invading Iraq, deploy nuclear weapons?
In addition to depleted Uranium being used in Iraq, there's increasing evidence that this was the case.

So the denighers read that and saw that you are in fact suggesting that "nuclear weapons were deployed" during the war. You stated that in addition to depleted Uranium being used, there is increasing evidence that actual Nuclear weapons were used as well.

Deploying Nuclear weapons means using Nuclear weapons. As in Nukes.

Are you trying to troll your own thread?

reply to post by phantomjack & sputniksteve



A bunker buster contains a low threshold nuclear payload, so yes this is nuclear, but where people are saying that you couldn't hide 'nuclear explosions', as they would be detected around the world, this isn't the case with bunker busters.

Tedd Weyman - Afghanistan was an extremely traumatic personal experience for me. I was shaken right to my core because over there the uranium was used in experimental bombs.

That was the days when the name Bunker Buster became well known.

Those cave-penetrating weapons were even called seismic-shock bombs.

So these were very large bombs in the neighborhood of two to five thousand pounds.

I found my first day in Afghanistan a village in which the entire village was no more than a kilometer away from where a bombing sortie had occurred on a quasi-military outpost in the Jalalabad area, which is near the Pakistan border.

All the people in the village were standing watching the bombers fire their bombs.

These bombs came down, very big explosions, deep into the earth, threw a lot of material up into the air as a smoke plume, flashed odd colors, then a smoke plume full of dust, dirt and debris — and of course we found out later was uranium particles — came across their village.

All these people were covered in it, like the dust you could wipe off your skin, off your clothes, off your window ledge because it was such a quantity.

Those babies didn't ask to be born that way. It's bad enough that these poor souls will have plenty of struggles throughout their lives. The title really makes me furious! "monster babies!?" Remove that from the title. SHOW A LITTLE RESPECT TO THOSE BABIES!

Jeez,some of you people posting on this thread talk about the use of radioactive material used as ammunition,like its not a big deal.

DU rounds are safe to handle until they've been used.

Got any proof to back up that radioactive ammunition is safe,TinkerHaus?

When has radioactive material ever been safe? let alone as a bullet in a gun.

reply to post by SteffieJo


The title was used as in the post discussed from original source, and sorry if you're offended, but it's there to make a dramatic point...

Aren't you more concerned about the MONSTERS responsible for all the death, destruction and 'monster' babies???

How to WAKE UP the people?...heaven knows.

reply to post by SpaceJockey1


I cannot confirm or deny the fact that three tactical Nuclear warheads have been deployed and detonated in Afghanastan between the years of 2003 and 2010. I cannot confirm nor deny that these weapons were disguised as other extisting munitions that were well known. I also cannot confirm or deny that these were indeed fission bombs that were found, and then deployed due to convenience. i cannot confirm or deny that these were Russian based bombs from three decades ago....

Is any of this starting to sound familiar? There were more Atomic weapons buried in the Sahara after the Cold war than any other place, you could find one there, and according to the increasing reports I think this is what happened. You would have trouble transporting, deploying and using a nuclear weapon if you were to bring it from the states or another military base. SOMEONE would notice. But if you found one, or several, and bringing them to the light of day would cause serious issues and concerns globally (everyone would know we have nukes buried like treasure in the desert) and could even strain tensions further with the US, China and Russia. So, why not use them where they are or nearby and blame something else? Easy way to make sure no one knew about it, and anyone who might of, even the soldiers, will be dead from radiation poison within a decade or so, so it would be easy containment and cleanup too.

Perhaps my mind is too dark, but if I were a military strategist, a good one, I would use all my available resources to accomplish my assigned goal most quickly and efficently; using resources found on the battlefield can change the tide of war, and it seems most logical to me this is what happened in Afghanistan.

Just my two cents, no real data or sources to back this up.

reply to post by Mikemp44


Interesting...maybe plausible...who knows!

Sure you're not posting this as a partial resume, looking for a JOB offer?

reply to post by EmperorXyn


The US DID! drop nukes, i have seen a thread in here somewhere before about it, you wouldnt hear about it because allot of the witnesses are probebly dead but also the media and the government covered it up, look at the lies with binladen, the guy died back in 2001, and most the videos he was in did not match up with his chronological agin self, and now the US is making the iranians more angry after "finding" Iran was behind 911, did anyone see that coming? serriosley, most obvious lies for war propergander ever, and then they had the right to threaten iran not to block oil, when iran owns it! dont get me wrong, im worried about iran, but the US is creating a storm of trouble and antagonising iran, im worried about both countries, there about as evil as eachother. End note: Yes, US did drop nukes and this thread proves it.

Yes of course we used DU rounds in Iraq....it works best against armor. As for the nukes and causing birth defects, there were no nuke ordinance used there. The reason there are high birth defects and cause of the terrible environment. The place has open sewage in the street, oil everywhere and no sense of safety as far as pollutants.

It's what America would be like if the corporate system were to go buck wild with no concern and regulation.

reply to post by gymbeau2000


How much are you being PAID to write that NONSENSE???

Ignore all the evidence you like, but the world is waking up to all the LIES & DECEPTION, so you'll need to try much harder...

Wow, the pictures someone posted of babies from fallujah are just awful. If the US is using weapons that caused birth defects like that then I don't know what to say. It is inexcusable. I remember reading an article a while ago that claimed that we used neutron bombs during the take-over of baghdad airport. It may have been a thread here on ATS that brought that article to my attention. I sort of dismissed it at the time as being a little too far-fetched. But if children are really being born over there with these birth defects this frequently, then maybe there is some truth to that claim.

Also, I think someone posted on the first page that It couldn't be blamed on the US because it would take years for these effects to show up. You have to remember that we have been over there fighting the iraqis since 2003. That is almost 9 years. And as far as I know, we first attacked fallujah in 2004. So it has been at least 8 or 9 years now.

Edit to add: This is not the exact same article I remember reading, but it is the same story. Really scary stuff if it were true!
www.workers.org...

Originally posted by gymbeau2000
Yes of course we used DU rounds in Iraq....it works best against armor. As for the nukes and causing birth defects, there were no nuke ordinance used there. The reason there are high birth defects and cause of the terrible environment. The place has open sewage in the street, oil everywhere and no sense of safety as far as pollutants.

It's what America would be like if the corporate system were to go buck wild with no concern and regulation.

What was the environment in Iraq like before the invasion? Did it suddenly get worse? Why and how? What kinds of birth defect causing chemicals, elements, and other contaminants and sewage did the invaders bring and spread around? Why didn't those kinds of birth defects occur before the invaders arrived?

No doubt that the "terrible environment" with all its "pollutants" are a problem. Who made the environment so terrible? Who brought the pollutants?

reply to post by dave0davidson


Appreciate the input...just more horrifying reading, if true.

There just so many pieces to the 'story' and like 9/11 we need to uncover the TRUTH.

Remember the public's reaction to the pic of the naked Vietinamese girl that had been badly burned with Napalm? I sincerely hope that the same sort of OUTRAGE is shown when more learn of the horrors like in Iraq, Afghanastain, Libya etc that have been and probably still are occuring around the world

---

DU is an extremely effective weapon. Each tank round is 10 pounds of solid uranium-238 contaminated with plutonium, neptunium, americium. It is pyrophoric, generating intense heat on impact, penetrating a tank because of the heavy weight of its metal. When uranium munitions hit, it's like a firestorm inside any vehicle or structure, and so we saw tremendous burns, tremendous injuries. It was devastating.

The US military decided to blow up Saddam's chemical, biological, and radiological stockpiles in place, which released the contamination back on the US troops and on everybody in the whole region. The chemical agent detectors and radiological monitors were going off all over the place. We had all of the various nerve agents. We think there were biological agents, and there were destroyed nuclear reactor facilities. It was a toxic wasteland. And we had DU added to this whole mess.

When we first got assigned to clean up the DU and arrived in northern Saudi Arabia, we started getting sick within 72 hours. Respiratory problems, rashes, bleeding, open sores started almost immediately.

When you have a mass dose of radioactive particulates and you start breathing that in, the deposit sits in the back of the pharynx, where the cancer started initially on the first guy. It doesn't take a lot of time. I had a father and son working with me. The father is already dead from lung cancer, and the sick son is still denied medical care.

Originally posted by Mikemp44
reply to post by SpaceJockey1

 

I cannot confirm or deny the fact that three tactical Nuclear warheads have been deployed and detonated in Afghanastan between the years of 2003 and 2010. I cannot confirm nor deny that these weapons were disguised as other extisting munitions that were well known. I also cannot confirm or deny that these were indeed fission bombs that were found, and then deployed due to convenience. i cannot confirm or deny that these were Russian based bombs from three decades ago....

Is any of this starting to sound familiar? There were more Atomic weapons buried in the Sahara after the Cold war than any other place, you could find one there, and according to the increasing reports I think this is what happened. You would have trouble transporting, deploying and using a nuclear weapon if you were to bring it from the states or another military base. SOMEONE would notice. But if you found one, or several, and bringing them to the light of day would cause serious issues and concerns globally (everyone would know we have nukes buried like treasure in the desert) and could even strain tensions further with the US, China and Russia. So, why not use them where they are or nearby and blame something else? Easy way to make sure no one knew about it, and anyone who might of, even the soldiers, will be dead from radiation poison within a decade or so, so it would be easy containment and cleanup too.

Perhaps my mind is too dark, but if I were a military strategist, a good one, I would use all my available resources to accomplish my assigned goal most quickly and efficently; using resources found on the battlefield can change the tide of war, and it seems most logical to me this is what happened in Afghanistan.

Just my two cents, no real data or sources to back this up.

And why would the Russians bury nuclear weapons in Africa? Instead of taking them home?And we would feel the need to set them off in crapistan" when we could've had an intelligence coup brought them back to one of the national labs and dissected them? Just asking inquiring minds look at loose ends...

Not only were our troops using DU ammunition rounds but we were also using bunker buster bombs which are mini-nukes. I could be wrong but I am almost certain that they were used throughout the beginning of the Iraq War especially during the "Shock and Awe" bombardment.

reply to post by RedMarx1867


Correct, I did post further up that bunker busters are generally mini-nukes, and it's highly possible that they've been used in this and other conflicts.

The following makes for interesting reading, if you have any DOUBTS about the dangers of DU (note also that there's been plenty of DU weapon testing on US soil, that's never been cleaned up!

The following is just a snippet of the full article:

[bold]The War Against Ourselves - An interview with Major Doug Rokke by Sunny Miller[/bold]
These consequences last for eternity. The half life of uranium 238 is 4.5 billion years. And we left over 320 tons all over the place in Iraq.

Rokke - We also bombarded Vieques, Puerto Rico, with DU in preparation for the war in Kosovo. That's affecting American citizens on American territory. When I tried to activate our team from the Department of Defense responsible for radiological safety and DU cleanup in Vieques, I was told no. When I tried to activate medical care, I was told no.

The US Army made me their expert. I went into the project with the total intent to ensure they could use uranium munitions in war, because I'm a warrior. What I saw as director of the project, doing the research and working with my own medical conditions and everybody else's, led me to one conclusion: uranium munitions must be banned from the planet, for eternity, and medical care must be provided for everyone, not just the US or the Canadians or the British or the Germans or the French but for the American citizens of Vieques, for the residents of Iraq, of Okinawa, of Scotland, of Indiana, of Maryland, and now Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Full Article