Firing der Bush’s bunker busters in Iran, or anywhere else for that matter, will vaporize hundreds of thousands of tons of earth, water and rock and send this radioactive soup downwind to kill and sicken whole populations. Those immediately downwind will die quickly, in hours or days. Those further downwind will take longer. The global incidences of cancers and disease will again rise markedly. The land downwind will remain contaminated and unusable for generations. If there were deep shelters, it has been postulated by the designers that the bunker busters would not penetrate deeply enough to affect them. I imagine that would initiate the attack theory of sending one nuke after another into the same hole. Picture the intensity of the radioactive disaster that would perpetrate on the area.
There are not too many of us left that witnessed the tests, but there are a number of groups that monitor the effects through cancers, birth defects, both physical and mental and monitoring of contamination in the environment. We are still feeling the results of those tests. I have exchanged e-mails with downwinders and with the children of downwinders who have had children with birth defects that had no previous history of such things in their families; who suffer from cancers that are peculiar to nuclear radiation.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=OSB20060314&articleId=2093
Note: http://www.globalresear...
Nuclear Bunker Buster Bombs Against Iran: This Way Lies Madness
Posted on Sunday, March 26 at 13:07 by Ed DeakContributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
Page 1
The consequences of a surface nuclear attack launched from Iran on Israel would far exceed the effects of "bunker busters". It would lay waste to the Middle East, rendering it unhabitable for decades. The resulting radiation would permeate throughout the globe far in excess of the weapon mentioned.
I find it rather amusing that the author of this piece conveniently omits the REASON why an attack is being considered. If Iran were to simply stop it's single-minded determination to develop nuclear weapons, there would be no need for anyone to consider using "bunker busters", or any other weapon against them.
Assuming that they are. I agree that Iran should not have the big boomers, but how many times did we hear "Saddam had WMD's".
Wasn't Iran supposed to be turned into a parking lot yesterday?
---
"I think it's important to always carry enough technology to restart civilization, should it be necessary." Mark Tilden
Israel is an aggressive, militarist state with aspirations on expansion. THEY are the ones who should disarm first. If Israel disarmed it's nukes, with full assurances that ANY attack on them would be met with overwhelming force from the Security Council (and, DUH! of course it would!) and at the same time, ANY Arab state around it could NOT be allowed to develop nukes,
It would work.
But that is never going to happen, is it? Because it is Israel that is pulling all the strings.
The claims of possession of nuclear technology are coming from the Iranians themselves. They continuously profess their right to possess it.
The difference is Iran has repeatedly announced that they are proceeding with the development of nuclear technology for "peaceful means", yet they have expelled the United Nations Nuclear Inspectors. The very people who could verify that they are in fact using the technology for "peaceful means".
Vladimir Putin presented Iran with a proposal to have the uranium for their nuclear facilities refined in Russia to ensure that it was not weapons grade. Iran refused.
The Iranians continue to assert that their nuclear program is being initiated solely for peaceful purposes, yet they reject any and all attempts to verify and ensure that their motives are genuine.