General discussion

  • Creator
  • #2176622

    US Military seeks new non-lethal weapon; the prototype of the phaser?


    by deepsand ·

    Well, boys and girls, once again our tax dollars are hard at work, seeking to use research on using lasers to control pain instead as a means to inflict it!

    Below is fill text of article from “New Scientist.”


    Maximum pain is aim of new US weapon
    19:00 02 March 2005
    Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition
    David Hambling

    The US military is funding development of a weapon that delivers a bout of excruciating pain from up to 2 kilometres away. Intended for use against rioters, it is meant to leave victims unharmed. But pain researchers are furious that work aimed at controlling pain has been used to develop a weapon. And they fear that the technology will be used for torture.

    “I am deeply concerned about the ethical aspects of this research,” says Andrew Rice, a consultant in pain medicine at Chelsea and Westminster Hospital in London, UK. “Even if the use of temporary severe pain can be justified as a restraining measure, which I do not believe it can, the long-term physical and psychological effects are unknown.”

    The research came to light in documents unearthed by the Sunshine Project, an organisation based in Texas and in Hamburg, Germany, that exposes biological weapons research. The papers were released under the US’s Freedom of Information Act.

    One document, a research contract between the Office of Naval Research and the University of Florida in Gainesville, US, is entitled “Sensory consequences of electromagnetic pulses emitted by laser induced plasmas”.

    It concerns so-called Pulsed Energy Projectiles (PEPs), which fire a laser pulse that generates a burst of expanding plasma when it hits something solid, like a person (New Scientist print edition, 12 October 2002). The weapon, destined for use in 2007, could literally knock rioters off their feet.

    Pain trigger
    According to a 2003 review of non-lethal weapons by the US Naval Studies Board, which advises the navy and marine corps, PEPs produced “pain and temporary paralysis” in tests on animals. This appears to be the result of an electromagnetic pulse produced by the expanding plasma which triggers impulses in nerve cells.

    The new study, which runs until July and will be carried out with researchers at the University of Central Florida in Orlando, aims to optimise this effect. The idea is to work out how to generate a pulse which triggers pain neurons without damaging tissue.

    The contract, heavily censored before release, asks researchers to look for “optimal pulse parameters to evoke peak nociceptor activation” – in other words, cause the maximum pain possible. Studies on cells grown in the lab will identify how much pain can be inflicted on someone before causing injury or death.

    Long-term risk
    New Scientist contacted two researchers working on the project. Martin Richardson, a laser expert at the University of Central Florida, US, refused to comment. Brian Cooper, an expert in dental pain at the University of Florida, distanced himself from the work, saying “I don’t have anything interesting to convey. I was just providing some background for the group.” His name appears on a public list of the university’s research projects next to the $500,000-plus grant.

    John Wood of University College London, UK, an expert in how the brain perceives pain, says the researchers involved in the project should face censure. “It could be used for torture,” he says, “the [researchers] must be aware of this.”

    Amanda Williams, a clinical psychologist at University College London, fears that victims risk long-term harm. “Persistent pain can result from a range of supposedly non-destructive stimuli which nevertheless change the functioning of the nervous system,” she says. She is concerned that studies of cultured cells will fall short of demonstrating a safe level for a plasma burst. “They cannot tell us about the pain and psychological consequences of such a painful experience.”

    Related Articles
    Top US biologists oppose biodefence boom
    01 March 2005

    Pentagon reveals rejected chemical weapons
    15 January 2005

    Sweeping stun guns to target crowds
    16 June 2004

    Sunshine Project


    Chelsea & Westminster Hospital in London

    Office of Naval Research

    Neuroscience, Univ. of Florida

    Dept. of Physiology, Univ. College London

All Comments

  • Author
    • #3329397

      Now if the Evil Empire had this weapon…

      by hockeyist ·

      In reply to US Military seeks new non-lethal weapon; the prototype of the phaser?

      …first then the U.S. will be up in arms over it (probably because they didn’t possess the technology first).
      If the U.S. redirected money from these useless weapons to helping their citizens (helping the homeless, improving social services etc.) then the U.S. will be in a better position both socially and economically.
      I was in Chicago recently visiting my sister in law. I couldn’y believe how many people were living on the streets. My sister in law told me this was nothing compared to other cities in the U.S. I ended up visiting 6 states and going up into Canada. Crossing the border into Canada was like a breath of fresh air. It was completely different, sort of reminded me of Sydney. Then I crossed back into the U.S. again and it was another world.
      Governments should spend more on their people than useless weaponry.

      • #3329388

        Compassionate Conservatism

        by deepsand ·

        In reply to Now if the Evil Empire had this weapon…

        That’s what President Bush likes to call it.

        As for Canada, my experience there seems to mirror your’s.

        I am a direct descendant of Daniel Boone; and, whle growing up in the Appalachian Mountains in Pennsylvania, was accordingly raised to hold a great reverence for Nature and all its wonders.

        That Canadian’s seem to appreciate such to a far greater degree than do most American’s, along with what I observed to be a far more civil manner in their dealings with their brethren, made a marked impression on me.

        Were it not for the fact that I physically have a very low tolerance for cold weather, owing to Raynoud’s syndrome, I would long ago have moved there.

        • #3331818


          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Compassionate Conservatism

          I would suggest that Southern Ontario and central Pensylvania aren’t that different in terms of climate. Anything near the Great Lakes gets a moderating climatic effect. Ottawa is only one hundred kilometres north of Toronto(and about 400 Kms east) but is much colder, because it isn’t near the Great Lakes.

          But if you want something milder than Apalachia, try Vancouver. Very little snow in winter(but a lot of rain), ocean breeze to cool you in summer.


        • #3350284


          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Vancouver

          Normally yes, rainy fall and spring, THIS year, sun through NOvember, a few days of scattered showers and sunnshine the rest of the time.

          It’s geberally quite grey if not raining this time of year, the other day it was 18 degrees at the track. We were wearing t-shirts outside and it was warm enough to be quite confortable and enjoy a frosty one.

          Had one or two days of spot showers this weekend but supposeed to be sunny and warm again tomorrow. The summer didn’t end and the winter never came in ’04. It was just a little cooler for a week or so, a few days of snow from ONE little sprinkle and then it was New Years and sunny again.

          Yay,though a little more rain would help the forests out a bit though.

        • #3350238

          Thanks for the climate info.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Vancouver

          What about the maritime provinces?

        • #3350231


          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Thanks for the climate info.

          I lived in Sydney, NS for a while and it was fun for a kid but horrible for anyone else. TOOO DAMN SNOWY!!!!

          We used to get EASILY 4’+ of snow a good 5 or 6 month a year, at least.

          Summer was nice, and the people are some of the nicest people you could ever hope to meet. But the winter was COLD and SNOWY, definitely a good example of the Great White North.

          It’s kinda like Winterpeg on an island. 🙂

          Alberta is stunningly beautiful, but they also get a fair bit of snow and really wierd weather due to the mountains and flats in between. You can have stifling heat one minute and 1″ hailstones the next. But certainly a breathtaking landscape.

        • #3350836

          So, my choices are …

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to BRRRRRRRRRRRR

          1) Freeze my keister off; or,
          2) Get jungle rot?

          Perhaps I’ll consider North Carolina; moderate climate, mountains, & ocean.

        • #3350829

          Jungle rot?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to So, my choices are …

          Moderate climate, mountains, and ocean…..B.C.

          Google these when you get time.

          Okanagan BC interior, Vancouver Island, Victoria, Richmond, Vancouver, Kamloops, Kelowna, Abbotsford, Whistler. That should give you a pretty good idea of the different areas in BC and their economies.

          Pretty much have it all here, also with the 2010 games there is SO muvch going on already. Piles of opporunity for entrepeneurs and market share!

        • #3331229

          A reference only to the rainfall, …

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to So, my choices are …

          not the temperatures.

          And, yes, BC is still on my list of possibles.

          Sorry to have given the wrong impression.

        • #3331160

          NO, I just wasn’t sure if you had the right info

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to So, my choices are …

          It seemed as if you were mislead that’s all.

          ACtually on the idland here it is a rainforest, full of life and color. I can spend all day just taking it all in sometimes.

          But as for a bit of everything but no extremes either way, BC has it all. As for recreation, we have it all twice and then some. The old expression that in BC you can go swimming, skiing and clubbing in the same day is a completely normal and realistic.

    • #3329386

      That’s easy

      by oz_media ·

      In reply to US Military seeks new non-lethal weapon; the prototype of the phaser?

      [b]”US Military seeks new “non-lethal” weapon”[/b]

      [b]”US military hires Canadian Military”[/b]


      • #3329382

        One more reason ..

        by deepsand ·

        In reply to That’s easy

        to love our friends north of the border.

      • #3329381

        The Canadian Military will…

        by hockeyist ·

        In reply to That’s easy

        …probably kill the enemy and not their own troops.
        I would be very nervous of friendly fire if I was in the U.S. Military. I wouldn’t feel safe even in a green zone.

        • #3329373

          Guess you have to experience combat

          by awfernald ·

          In reply to The Canadian Military will…

          before you realize that “friendly fire” incidents have occurred since man first started having wars.

          Of course, only the U.S. actually admits to having it happen…

          But then again, since this is a NON-lethal weapon, maybe we can disable and capture rather than simply kill the enemy???

          Nah, let’s let the people have what they want, ban non-lethal research, simply kill the enemy outright so that we Americans can remain the “devils” of the world.

        • #3329368

          Non-Lethal Weapons…

          by hockeyist ·

          In reply to Guess you have to experience combat

          …are only useful for civil disturbances, like at Universities.
          I certainly wouldn’t like to use non-lethal weapons on my enemies in war. Why pussy foot around in war, if a country declares war on another then they must use whatever means at their disposal to end the war as QUICKLY as possible. Also, a country that decides to be the World Police Force, will soon expend all of their reserves (economic reserves etc) and be in trouble internally. Maybe in this situation a use for the non-lethal weapon can be found. Printing money to pay the bills is not the solution to economic woes either.

        • #3329361

          Depends on the situation

          by awfernald ·

          In reply to Non-Lethal Weapons…

          During combat ops, the motive is to subdue the enemy for the purpose of gaining ground… in other words, the more efficient/safer method is to totally eliminate the enemy.

          However, in situations like you find in Iraq at this moment, both types of force would be useful. You see a suspicious looking person at the side of the road, zap him. Then if he was just a kid wanting to cross the street, you won’t feel bad about killing an innocent.

          Granted, during war, the primary objective is to kill the enemy. Better the enemy die than a friend.

        • #3328887

          Which means that US citizens are safe!

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Non-Lethal Weapons…

          The US military is prohibited from performing law enforcement duties within our borders.

          Still, you must expect that the world market for such a device, particularly if it’s sufficiently small & sufficiently parsimonious with power, would be huge.

        • #3329363

          Another thing – war tallies

          by hockeyist ·

          In reply to Guess you have to experience combat

          If the kill ratio is in favour of the country that declares war then everything is ok, the population supports the President (even if the number of casualties is obscenly high).
          What happens if the ratio is reversed because of non-lethal weapons…the population will revolt and move to the opposition.
          The general population likes to feel they are on the winning side, and that is reflected in the ratio of our body count versus theirs.
          Personally I liked intelligence to be used instead of war.

        • #3329360

          non-lethal weaponsof war? :-)

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Another thing – war tallies

          No point in taking a knife to a gun fight.

        • #3329358

          Suitable weaponry wins wars and saves lives

          by hockeyist ·

          In reply to non-lethal weaponsof war? :-)

          Governments don’t care how many lives are lost as long as they can force some sucker to hold a weapon and shoot.
          I have seen a lot of footage over the years of soldier complaining about inadequate weapons and equipment for protection.
          When soldiers start having to purchase equipment just so that they can stay alive it makes you wonder what governments are thinking (economics no doubt).
          I spoke to a vet a few years ago who survived Vietnam. He had horror stories about the U.S. friendly fire. He also said that their high velocity rifles were not suitable for jungle fighting. He said something about the bullets being deflected by twigs and leaves. His favourite weapond was a solid bore shotgun. He said it was very effective for stopping the fight quickly.

        • #3328892

          Not a problem.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Another thing – war tallies

          We control the vertical; we control the horizontal; we control …

        • #3329362

          That I can agree with

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to The Canadian Military will…

          Iraqi AND British troops are adamantly against fighting near US trrops nowadays.

          British troops were furious at the thought of staying in Iraq recently and had requested they not have their stay prolonged. They were scared of tactics US troops were using during recent insurgent movement in Iraq. To paraprase as close as one report said about a month ago, ‘They’re like cowboys running around playing a game and they’re going to have us killed if we stay.’

          The ‘cowboy’ mentality is driving the troops, it’s not their fault, nor that of the commanders, the media has blown this up into a chance to showboat and people are dying because of it.

        • #3342222

          Not surprising…

          by notsochiguy ·

          In reply to That I can agree with

          I am in a martial arts class with a couple of guys that work with the Illinois Army Reserves. Recently, both guys have helped conduct training with regards to having the troops taking over ‘combatant occupied building’…in other words, HOUSES.

          The training consisted of a team of 4 men labeled as insurgents protecting a small residence. Teams of 12 reservists were to take the house.

          From what my buddies said, the initial reservist-to-insurgent kill rate was 12-1 (meaning, the entire reservist team was taken out having only killed one of the insurgents). The problem was that the majority of the reservists were laughing, joking, and pretty much taking the whole thing as little more than a suped-up version of Duck Hunt; giving little thought to tactics.

          If this is how they were training, it is little surprise that this is how they’d react when they actually ‘got into the $h!t’.

          In terms of ‘safe weapons’, I do not doubt that the US military would implement them. It would allow the US to take the moral highground (we’re not there to exterminate), and in all probability we’d still suffer significant losses…meaning that jobs would continue to open up here, and reducing unemployment (reservist soldiers getting killed + additional Mickey D’s and Starbucks = job growth).

          Considering this cavalier attitude towards our own troops’ lifes, and it is little wonder that we are flying people to Ubekistan (sp?) and parts unknown to be boiled alive and tortured for information.

          As a supposedly Christian nation, we should look back in history and recognize an army that once used similar tactics,and see what happened to them. They were known as the Romans, and are discussed in detail throughout the 4 Gospels.

          Those who don’t learn from history….

        • #3331847

          Reservists in Iraq

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Not surprising…

          I watched a documentary last night on CBC about a group of Arkansas National Guard troops, from their call up, through their training, through their “war” in Iraq.

          In terms of training, I watched in horror as they went through the exercise at Fort Hood, and had similar results to what you describe. The exercise shown was a street scene, they were all caught in the open, they abandoned their vehicle and were “mowed” down by the machine gun on the vehicle they abandoned.

          I don’t blame the troops. I blame the lack of adequate training.

          And when they got to Kuwait, they had to contend with the fact they had very old trucks, in bad repair. They broke down constantly on the way to Bagdad. They didn’t have the armoured Humvees, so they found scrap metal and improvised additional armour.

          While weapons help win wars, so does training and preparation.

          I am sure that not all reservists are the same. And I know there is a vast difference between the reservists and the elite SEALS/Rangers etc.

          I also watched a similar documentary on Frontline, but this time it had regular army troops. They were still unprepared for their mission – I watched it with my father in law, a retired Colonel. We both grimaced at how the troops reacted when the stuff hit the fan. No weapon can help overcome lack of discipline and lack of communication – only training can.


        • #3350392


          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Reservists in Iraq

          You MUSt have got this lefty BS from a Canadian media source. It is certainly just Canadian government controlled propaganda, I never saw it on Fox News yet. 😉

        • #3350378

          Shock and AWE!!

          by jessie ·

          In reply to Doubtful

          You haven’t seen the REAL news on Fox News yet? Hmmmmmm…. wonder how THAT could’ve happened.

          A good friend of mine just got back from Iraq, he was an MP called up from the Army Reserves, in charge of one of the major training facilities for the new Iraqi Police… he kept a daily journal from which he emailed us tidbits when he could… he talked of all kinds of shortages of weapons, men, housing, beds, food, you name it, they didn’t have it.

        • #3342107

          That is completely counter to what my friend speaks off..

          by tomsal ·

          In reply to That I can agree with

          Though I’m saying that some of that isn’t going on, my friend who is going back in June for his 2nd “tour” in Iraq, he’ll go back with a Navy Seal team that is stationed in Pearl Harbor, HI. His team is very methodical, surprisingly patient and as he says “stealth and surprise is our best friend”.

          Certainly counter to any “cowboy attitude”

        • #3342080

          Navy Seal

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to That is completely counter to what my friend speaks off..

          I think that says it all.

          If everyone fighting in Iraq was trained as a Navy Seal and if the combat were less a street brawl I am sure that would be a general concensus.

          But when it comes to thousands of troops on the ground, MOST aren’t as well trained nor focused on tactical/covert ops.

          This isn’t my opinion, this is what I have read quoted from the troops stationed IN Iraq that sent the letters to Tony BLair explaining that they no longer wanted to fight in the vicinity of US troops, as he was suggesting lengthening their stay to support the efforts in Fallujah.

          TV news that interviews them shows the exact same mentality, a group of tanks took a stand down order when fghting in a US/Iraqi battlefield. They didn’t want to advance out of fear from being mistaken for Iraqi Insurgents and shot at by US troops.

          THis is not new news, it has goes back to Desert Storm if not earlier. People are scared sh*****s to fight near American troops.

          Yes freidnly fire is a part of was, it just seems that it is always US friendly fire though, wasn’t it Afghanistan when US troops shot down an RAF plane…by accident, ooops.

          NOw if BRITISH troops had shot down a US plane, what do YOU think would have happened? 300 million Americans ready to lynch Great Britain perhaps?

          “UK Troops Buy Flags To Prevent US Fire

          British troops in the Gulf are ordering Union Jack flags over the internet to ward off “friendly fire”. Soldiers want to use the flags to identify themselves and their vehicles to their US allies as clearly as possible, reports say.”In a conflict in which ‘friendly fire’ has claimed the lives of more servicemen than the enemy, the Union Jack may provide better protection than a Kevlar helmet or any piece of body armour,” The Times said.

          Staff at Britain’s largest flagmakers in Swansea, south Wales, are working flat out to meet the demands.

          “The troops want British flags for identity purposes to ward off US planes,” Charles Ashburner, managing director of United Flag Traders, told the newspaper.

          “We had a load of them (British troops) in before the war and they seemed more scared of the Americans than the Iraqis. They didn’t want them just for show – they wanted them for protection,” he said.

          “After all, they are killing more of our boys than the enemy,” he added.

          [As of Saturday 5 April,] Five British soldiers have been killed by friendly fire since the war on Iraq began on March 20. ”


          [b]Troops’ anger over US ‘friendly fire'[/b]

          Too little too late?
          Shortly after the takn was hit by a US anti tank missile, the US had stated it was implementing new equipment. To help reduce friendly fire for some troops on the ground.


          Tom, I would not be suggesting your friend is a cowboy that is shooting up everything in sight. He is also a SEAL, not just a scared soldier with a bunch of friends playing Metallica in their tank. Much like a live game of Duke Nukem.

        • #3342012

          Thank you Oz

          by tomsal ·

          In reply to Navy Seal

          For the sources you posted regarding the friendly fire of the US troops.

          I can see your point, Seals are not exactly your run of the mill troops, they are elite.

          Too use the word “shame” is too weak, to properly expess how I feel regarding US troops and their FF taking out our allies.

          I believe its a mixture of Bush policy and the fact the troops themselves are probably paranoid — since foks dressed up as civilians have turned out to be enemy soldiers, or terrorists. Suicide bombers from out of nowhere. You don’t know friend from foe in the chaos.

          All that said — no, I’m not excusing FF of US troops just trying to perhaps explain some rationale behind the paranoia they seem to have.

          I’m sure once they learn it was friend and not foe that was injured or killed they are not proud or happy — but they themselves which they were dead.

          God bless all our troops — whatever country, that this thing may end sooner than later and they all get home to their families.

        • #3341989

          My pleasure

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Thank you Oz

          When I read of your friend i didn’t see his position as one and the same as the MAJORITY of troops in Iraq. Obviously much more stringently trained and specialized in his tasks.

          This is also the way the UK and many other militaries have been structured. Whereas there is less raw manpower, they feel a need for more specialized forces.

          I wouldn’t discount ANY man or woman’s serivice to their country, from ANY country’s military. But this FEAR seems to be contagious and growing with each ALLIED conflict. I am sure this is reported in the US too, but I suspect mostly by left wing focused media that is instantly discounted as BS lefty lies, whereas a balance and some give and take form reports on both sides would be better overall viewpoint I think.

          I also see this ‘cowboy’ mentality fuelled by a cockiness or arrogance in their own ability. It is one thing to fight with a vengeance but another to fight with a ‘no fear’ attitude that is simply a false mindset brought on by all the cheeleaders and partiotism gone too far.

          No matter WHO you are or what country you represent, you are a guy with a gun, against another guy with a gun. Patriotism doesn’t help at that point. All the ‘America is the mightiest’ you could possibly brainwash into people will not save you from gun fire. These people are running around like they are playing a video game, THAT’s why others don’t like it.

          It is war and you must win at all costs at this point, but not in a haphazard way. I think a little more humble pie and some tactical control would help a lot.

          May everyone come home safely real soon.

        • #3342113

          I’ll give you your first post, but your trending in shark infested waters..

          by tomsal ·

          In reply to The Canadian Military will…

          ..with the US Military comment regarding shooting their own troops.

          Let me post the general preface/disclaimer (whatever you want to call it) — I have friends over there (Iraq) in the US military, one who died during action in Iraq so yeah this topic hits me a little close.

          Being in war is very dangerous, very heated, very intense — I can only imagine what chaos those guys endure. Friendly fire is an very real, yet very tragic reality to war fare. It happens, and unless someone puts some very detail reports in front of me with credible sources — friendly fire is never intentional.

          Another news flash, it is something that all the world’s armed forces face and had to endure at one time or another.

          Finally, its the law of averages, the force that does the most fighting is at higher risk for FF incidents than those that don’t.

          One last thing — I disagree with my country being over there, I think Bush is a friggin’ idiot for what is going on over in Iraq, our troops shouldn’t be there..but I can’t get upset or mad at our military for trying to do their jobs and get home alive.

          I really hope the friends I know over there get back here alive.

        • #3331911

          FF accounted for 24% KIA and 15% WIA…

          by hockeyist ·

          In reply to I’ll give you your first post, but your trending in shark infested waters..

          …in the Gulf War.
          Check out
          and for a bit on statistics
          What will the statistics be for this Iraq War.
          I also have friends over there and they keep going back for more. I asked one friend why go back and he said “because I’m a professional soldier”. Thinking about it, all of our troops were well trained and weren’t drafted, it’s their chosen profession. It’s a little known fact that there are many other countries over there other than the U.S. Australian SAS were the first into Iraq and probably will be the last to leave. You don’t need a large number of troops to succeed in war. Strategy and good training is what it’s all about (the badly armed and trained may just be canon fodder for the politicians mouths). Check out
          I found a link where someone claims to have done some research and the following is an extract “Turns out the States suffered from the most friendly fire casualties of any country in both wars, despite having fewer soldiers fighting, and despite entering both wars at a later time than both Germany and Britain. I’m sure this trend runs current throughout the conflicts in Vietnam and possibly Korea too. I wonder why? Gung-ho arrogance maybe? Dunno.” It can be found here
          Stupid mistakes made by badly trained people with a “get-there-itis” leads to a lot of deaths, not just in the military.
          I came accross a bit of Australian history on the web regardin FF. In one incident Australia was responsible for U.S. deaths in WWII because an Australian ship was ordered by the U.S. commander to lay fire on a beach prior to marines landing. The Australian ship patrolled around the island to the other side. The U.S. commander noted that the Australian ship was still on the other side of the island and ordered an early landing. You can guess what happened. The marines had landed and the Australian ship lay a barrage up the beach as ordered at the designated time and killed a lot of marines. The mistake made (besides bad communications) was that the commander assumed that the guns on the Australian ship had the same low elevation of U.S. ships and couldn’t possibly have the elevation to effect a barrage on the beach. Mistakes happen in war but why does it always involve the U.S. troops in a very high percentage of the time?

      • #3350407

        ROFLMAO re canadian army

        by bhunsinger ·

        In reply to That’s easy

        Oh my ribs!!!!!

        • #3350389

          Awww c’mon

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to ROFLMAO re canadian army

          Iy was just some fun, in all fairness the Canadian military plays an EXTREMELY important role when it comes to fighting with allies.

          Canada has been the first to war, was the first to land on D-Day and secure the bridges and all that stuff. Canada does have a well trained, yet small military when compared to the US of course. But Canadian recon is desired anytime the US goes to war due to the advanced high speed vehicles.

          SO we all have our place, it’s just that Canada isn’t know for blowing up many countries over the last 40 years.

          It’s all in fun and I do appreciate the Canadian military but we have to be able laugh at ourselves sometimes.

        • #3350383

          Go ahead and laugh

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to ROFLMAO re canadian army

          Yes its perpetually underfunded. But the commander of the 101st Airborne was glad to have the Canadian army serving with them in Afghanistan.

          4 Canadians were killed by friendly fire, after a F16 pilot disregarded direct orders from their controller, and bombed the Canadians at a well established firing range that had been used by both Canadian and US forces, just a few miles from the main base at Khandahar. Yet we even after that incident, and after the 2000 Canadians left, we redeployed abother 750 troops.

          Canadians have a great expertise in peacekeeping. We lack some modern equipment, but we bleed like everyone does. Our navy lead the operation in the Persian gulf to stop ships transiting weapons to Afghanistan(and stayed during the war in Iraq). We share joint defense of North American airspace with the US. In the latest budget, the government did committ to both increase the number of infantry and buy new equipment.

          Ask someone who served in Afghanistan what they think….


        • #3350276

          I know James,

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Go ahead and laugh

          In fact I have highlighted just those points many times. As I said it’s just a joke, and if you can’t laugh at yourselves once in a while….

    • #3329356

      I don’t like to kill…

      by hockeyist ·

      In reply to US Military seeks new non-lethal weapon; the prototype of the phaser?

      …insects. I would like the chemical companies to work on a stun flyspray so that I can subdue insects and move them outside.

      • #3329343

        In Canada

        by dafe2 ·

        In reply to I don’t like to kill…

        We’ve invented a special vacuum for that.

        • #3328936


          by jaqui ·

          In reply to In Canada

          it’s called the usa.
          so full of hot air it draws the flies.
          just listen to bush talk, noting but hot air.

        • #3328890

          Yes, but …

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to yup

          he does say it ever so coolly. Or, sholud that be coldly?

        • #3328883

          Green Mile

          by dafe2 ·

          In reply to Yes, but …

          Actually, I’m still laughing at Jaqui’s line…..I can picture (Bush) releasing all those critters on the world like that guy on the green Mile though.

        • #3342108


          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Green Mile

          That guy healed the sick and killed the evil.

          If that was the case here, Americans would have a decent health care system and the White House would be empty.

        • #3342098


          by jessie ·

          In reply to Nah

          He didn’t kill the evil! He “shared” his gift with one who was evil, and I think it drove him somewhat insane… but he did NOT kill anybody!

        • #3342083

          Uh ok

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Nah

          Well in THAT case, it would have the exact same effect either way.

        • #3342109


          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Yes, but …

          Ot is it bumbling stupidity?

        • #3341942

          To Bush …

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Coolly?

          they’re one and the same.

        • #3331930

          and half the country

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to To Bush …

          Seems others buy it too though. Who’s really the fool afterall, the magician or the kid in awe?

        • #3350287

          Yes. But, not my half.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to To Bush …

          As soon as I get may phaser, that problem will be addressed, “non-violently.”

    • #3342072

      So basically….

      by jessie ·

      In reply to US Military seeks new non-lethal weapon; the prototype of the phaser?

      This thing is a long-range tazer… which most people in the US don’t have any objections to…

      Why are we objecting to attempting to find a way of disabling possible enemies without permanently harming them? We should just SHOOT them. Preferably with a sawed off shotgun filled with buckshot and rock salt!

      [i]But pain researchers are furious that work aimed at controlling pain has been used to develop a weapon. And they fear that the technology will be used for torture.[/i]

      We’re in the middle of a WAR here… (not that I agree with our reasons for it) and anything that can be used as a weapon will be!!! I’m sure the guy that invented the spoon never figured it could or would be used to pop out someone’s eyeballs. When God put water on this earth, I don’t suppose he figured we’d use it to kill and torture each other either. Anything can be a weapon in the “wrong” hands. Just about anything can be used as an instrument of torture.

      I’m certainly not condoning torture… but I think those who are objecting to this thing are looking at it the wrong way. We should be praising them instead, for trying to find a way to win without killing. Come on now, we spend our tax dollars on enough stupid, frivolous CRAPOLA, I for one, happen to think, trying to find a way not to kill anybody, is a good investment. It’s certainly a better investment than trying to find the effects of ketchup consumption on a herd of cattle.

      I want my “home team” to come home safely, and it’d be awfully nice if we could win this war without having to kill 90% of another country’s male population. Pain hurts, but people get over pain, there’s no getting over death, it tends to be pretty final!

      • #3341985

        Not to mention your own

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to So basically….

        It’s is one thing to not kill the enemy, but how many others would not be dead due to friendly fire?

        These Women, children and schools that have been raided only to find out it was mininformation would be alive too.

        The country would retain it’s civilian population better.

        BUT….if YOU use stun guns and others shoot you with a rifle, the other side will remain strong while weakening and reducing your own.

        I can’t see Iraqi insurgents adopting such technology.

      • #3331916

        If you give a bunch of scared guys…

        by hockeyist ·

        In reply to So basically….

        …who are fighting in a foreign land a thing that is supposed to “disable” the enemy, they will more than likely discard it and buy some real firepower locally to protect themselves. That’s certainly what I would do. Taking enemies alive (or on stretchers with really bad toothaches as the case may be) strains the resources of any army.
        What the military should be doing is finding the enemy weakspot and attacking that, which is exactly what Black Jack Pershing did.
        Maybe the military can work on a water canon that fires liquid lard or pig manure onto their enemy (only good for muslim enemies). Check out

      • #3331774

        I didn’t make myself clear…

        by jessie ·

        In reply to So basically….

        Having MULTIPLE tools at your disposal is what I’d recommend… they have both knives AND firearms, give them something AS WELL that is somewhere in between, that will allow them to disable someone who merely looks suspicious… SHOOT the ******* that are trying to kill you… but have the ability to make choices about whether or not you’re going to kill… If you’re going on a fact finding mission, disable first, ask questions later… If someone’s shooting at you, kill’em.

        EDIT: I edited out my own use of foul language, as TR apparently didn’t block it, like it was supposed to do… My apologies to any who were offended before I had a chance to correct the situation.

        • #3352475

          If there was time to determine…

          by hockeyist ·

          In reply to I didn’t make myself clear…

          …that someone was “only suspicious looking”, then a megaphone and a language course would be a heck of a lot cheaper and friendlier. If I was some dude walking down the street and I came across a bunch of other dudes with guns I’d stop. If I saw them pull out a phaser thing, which I knew would cause my nuts to shrivel and my body to do multiple back 1.5 pikes that would make Greg Louganis proud whilst in excruciating pain, I think I would run. This may in turn cause the dudes with the phaser thing to then pick up their guns. Vicious circle. Who in their right mind would willingly stand and accept a zap from a phaser as treatment for being suspicious.

    • #3341936

      Where can I get one…

      by mrafrohead ·

      In reply to US Military seeks new non-lethal weapon; the prototype of the phaser?

      Man, that’d be great. Every schmuck driver on the road that drives like a jerk. Just phase them… ;p

      That’s way better than the alternative… ;p

      Now if I could only get one for that guy that’s trying to sue BoA… ;p

      nyuck nyuck nyuck

    • #3350770

      The only people…

      by hockeyist ·

      In reply to US Military seeks new non-lethal weapon; the prototype of the phaser?

      …making money out of this are the researchers. I wonder how they are going to sustain a burst of plasma across no-mans-land to the targets.

      • #3325821


        by bhunsinger ·

        In reply to The only people…

        Heterodyning frequencies that will be 180 degrees out of phase at the target point.

        Geez didn’t you read Tom Swift Jr vol 14?

        • #3342565

          Does this mean…

          by hockeyist ·

          In reply to Elementary

          … that you can guard against being zapped by wearing foil sprayed with matt-black paint?

        • #3250935

          Just duck.

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to Does this mean…

          A laser’s effects are line-of-sight.

        • #3250913


          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Just duck.

          Wear a mirror, that’ll teach em!

          Something tells me Laser Tag is catching on afterall. Doesn’t hurt like paintballs (man you freeze them buggers and they sure as heck hurt!)

          OR so I am told…

        • #3250875

          Introducing “Mirror Man,” the new Super Hero!

          by deepsand ·

          In reply to OR

          Faster than a clump of speeding crab-grass; able to catch high flying enemy missles in a single gulp.

          Look, up in the sky, it’s a bird; it’s a plane; no, it’s Mirror Man.

Viewing 5 reply threads