New weapon could mean the end of collateral damage

[ECH1969]

The U.S. military has been developing a gunship that could literally obliterate enemy ground targets with a laser beam.

The military plans to test the Advanced Tactical Laser, a laser weapon mounted on a C-130H air transport that could destroy any weapon system without collateral damage.

The laser could have tremendous repercussions on the battlefield, particularly in urban warfare in such countries as Afghanistan and Iraq. "It's the kind of tool that could bring about victory within minutes," an official said.

The applications of ATL could change military dynamics on the battlefield. Officials envision the laser being able to destroy or damage targets in an urban area with virtually no collateral damage. The range of ATL was expected to be 10 miles.

http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/laser.htm

[Kagemusha]

1. As a famous ace from an anime once said...

"It means nothing unless you hit!"

Certainly the potential is greater. But the fact is, you'd almost be required to put this on a drone because in an urban environment, a coordinate isn't going to be useful beyond 30 seconds, if that.

[havocmom]

2. Yeah, urban populations will shower it with flowers

:eyes: What the hell is in the water coolers in that five sided building?

[Taxloss]

3. I thought "smart" cruise missiles would abolish collateral damage?

Remember this "smart" laser will be aimed by a human. Damn civilians! Always getting in the way!

[Critters2]

31. And the tommy gun

was going to end the battlefield carnage of WWI.

The only way to end the damage of wars is to stop fighting them.

[Bob3]

4. except when you hit the wrong house like in Pakistan

And wouldn't the environment screw with this death rays("Death ray? Fiddlesticks! It's not even slowing them down" - old Charles Addams cartoon punchline) things like dust in the air even leaves stuff like that degrade the effectiveness of this type of weapon.

And we have heard this song before.

[Taxloss]

5. "Our mighty death ray will disintegrate you! ...

... In only three days!"

- "Hyperdrive", a new BBC comedy

[thebigidea]

39. is that picking up, then?

I watched the first one, which kinda left me cold despite the fact that its almost impossible for Kevin Eldon to do wrong.

[Taxloss]

40. I rather like it.

I was a bit "ho-hum" at first, but now I seek it out.

[thebigidea]

41. I wonder if the pilot is around somewhere, Mitchell & Webb play aliens

really looking forward to their new sketch series... Peep Show was one of the best shows of the decade, bound to be ripped off and copied in America for years to come. Surprised a horrible version with Jonathan Silverman and Pauly Shore isn't on UPN or something right now.

[Taxloss]

43. I find it amazing that Peep Show is only now getting the attention

it deserves. And you're right, an Eric McCormack/David Schwimmer US version must be in the works for NBC.

The IT Crowd is showing early promise - the concept of "The Office" with the warped sense of humour of "Green Wing". Speaking of which, a new series of Green Wing is soon to be upon us.

[thebigidea]

44. at the very least, its great seeing Chris Morris make with the funny again

very much in Black Books territory... Adam Buxton is supposed to show up in it, yet another demented little talent that should be exported and rammed down people's throats until they're forced to buy more Adam & Joe dvds. Stuffed animal versions of "Crash?" Ken Korda? Fucking great. All the lovely British comedy stuff on uknova is about the only thing that's kept me somewhat sane during these Bush years.

surprised Comedy Central isn't buying more of it, its as if nothing was made after Blackadder in this country. They are still flogging "Are You Being Served?" for PBS telethons. Gag. gag. gag.

How's that for thread derailing?

[Taxloss]

45. Yes, from megadeath supercannons to "Adam & Joe" - classic.

We should stop kicking this, but I should tell you that the third and final series of "Spaced" is in production. Woo!

Funny how these things go in waves, Britan experiences a huge comedy revival just as America runs out of steam. "My Name is Earl" is funny in parts, but in no way lives up to the hype. It reminds me of "Scrubs" - attempting to be a bit dark, but still just coming across all schmaltzy.

[eppur_se_muova]

48. "What does a giant laser death ray run under?" said Van.

"Open BSD. And X-Windows."
"Awesome". Van had another huff of oxygen.

actual dialog from Zenith Angle, by Bruce Sterling.

[KamaAina]

29. Oh great. All insurgents would have to do is scatter chaff.

things like dust in the air even leaves stuff like that degrade the effectiveness of this type of weapon.

"Chaff" was little bits of aluminum "confetti" that, when scattered, would confuse early radar syatems. Anyone bright enough to pound sand could easily figure out how to send up a similar cloud to block Our Ultimate Laser Death Ray Weapon. :eyes:

[Warren Stupidity]

6. uh, hmm..

BULLSHIT


They trot this crap out all the time. We got them smart bombs them laser rays them safe weapons blah blah blah. Half of it is bullshit to fund kleptocracy welfare programs the other half is bullshit to make our planet wide killing machine more palatible to the populace.

[formercia]

7. Lasers don't deliver much in the way of kinetic energy.

As was found out in Viet Nam when a backpack laser system was tried. The enemy didn't even know they had been hit many times and kept right on coming. A M1911 .45 knocks them on ther butt.

[Solon]

32. I don't think kinetic energy is what they are after...

Infrared and Microwave energy, on the other hand, can be quite devistating. Even though I don't know how this would eliminate collateral damage though, especially in urban enviroments. Look at the SAM sites they now have around Washington DC, imagine a laser delivering an infrared beam intense enough to melt steel in a few seconds, as would be necessary, it would crack the concrete of the building under the target, and if it hits one of the missiles, then what will happen to the propellent and the armaments? A big-assed explosion, only a slight fraction less than an explosion caused by another missle hitting the target instead. The only difference, I can see, is that they better be accurate, because the site of vaporization and carbonized bodies of humans will kill the program really quick, if not done secretly.

[formercia]

34. I've seen what a Megawatt height-finding radar will do

to an Albatross. They would follow our ship by riding the air currents. Every once and a while, one would intersect the radar beam while in operation. They would fall to the deck dead without any apparent damage save their eyeballs were cooked white. It was a shame as they were quite curious and would come very close to those on deck.

[Occulus]

42. Ever read "Rime of the Ancient Mariner"?

:silly:

[formercia]

46. Bad luck to kill an Albatross

The Chief BosunMate went ballistic when he found out someone had shot one. He really believed it.

[benburch]

8. Ummm... Except we keep sending "smart" weapons to the wrong targets.

Until you can always be 100% certain that you know exactly what target to hit, which is impossible, innocents will always be killed by warfare.

[JohnyCanuck]

27. Excellent point. Collateral damage is built into the mission

Hellfire and damnation: The Washington consensus for murder

by Chris Floyd

Strange, isn't it? While the American Establishment is now convulsed over the issue of a president ordering wiretaps without court approval, the same president's assertion of the right to kill anyone on earth he chooses without charges, trial or judicial review is readily accepted on all sides. Even when these "targeted assassinations" go horribly awry - as in Pakistan last month, when 18 innocent people, including four children, were obliterated in their homes by Hellfire missiles, as the Observer reports - there is no demur, no moral shock. Just tough talk about "doing whatever it takes" to defend civilization from the barbarians.

The misfired Hellfires were reportedly aimed at al-Qaeda honcho Ayman al-Zawahiri, thought to be the Dick Cheney-style brains behind the gang's dimbulb, Bush-like frontman, Osama bin Laden. The missiles were directed by unmanned CIA Predator drones, acting on the usual "credible intelligence" that Zawahiri was in the village of Damadola, near the Afghan border. But of course, in this kind of shell game, you can never know exactly which coconut the evil ones might be hiding under - so the CIA targeted not one but three houses, just to be sure. Thus even if the intelligence had not been the usual half-chewed cud and Zawahiri really had been in Damadola (sitting on top of Saddam's phantom WMD, perhaps), the scattershot attack on the residential area would have guaranteed civilian casualties in any case.


In other words, "collateral damage" - always "regretted" with copious crocodile tears from the damagers - was actually built into the mission. As in Bush's ongoing, ever-intensifying, unreported aerial bombing of urban areas in Iraq - which has killed thousands of civilians, TomDispatch reports - the deliberate killing of non-combatants in Damadola and other targets of Bush's "extrajudicial" wrath is meant to convey a clear message: "Knuckle under - or else."

Indeed, the Bush brass in Iraq have been explicit on this point. As Michael Schwartz reports in Mother Jones, the regular use of massive, indiscriminate force in anti-insurgent operations - e.g., destroying an entire apartment building, and everyone in it, if suspected guerrillas are thought to be hiding there - is a key component of Bush's "larger strategy" in the occupied land. Schwartz quotes an officer who told the New York Times that American attacks are meant to "punish not only the guerrillas, but also to make clear to ordinary Iraqis the cost of not cooperating." This, as Schwartz accurately notes, is "the textbook definition of terrorism - attacking a civilian population to get it to withdraw support from the enemy."

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/article.php?sid=24698&mode=&order=0

[FlemingsGhost]

9. If I'm shielded by a mirror, and my tin foil hat, am I protected?

Just curious.

:shrug:

[yurbud]

10. so they won't miss when they aim at al Jazeera? often the 'collateral

damage' was the real target.

[GregW]

11. Somebody set us up the bomb

We get signal!

[Hand]

49. What! Main screen turn on. nt

[DS1]

12. Quick... Everyone fill your attic windows with popcorn and put some foil

over it

:D

[Mithras61]

23. We can get...

Val Kilmer to perform the calculations! :D

[DS1]

24. I'd go with Lazlo

;-)

[Mithras61]

25. Yeah, he'd probably be MUCH more accurate...

although he DID miscalculate the number of prizes... B-)

[OneBlueSky]

13. anyone believe that BushCo actually wants to eliminate . . .

collateral damage? . . . the more civilians killed, the more terrorized the population becomes, and the smaller the pool of potential "insurgents" . . .

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

14. you see ! War IS like a video game! and I LOVE games!! let's INVADE-YEEHAW

Now we can get approval from the average
Christian "Love thy neighbor" fun_doommentalist to take over the world...
(and they do comprise a great portion of our population.)

Dr Strangelove come on down!

[Ezlivin]

15. We need to spend trillions more dollars on pursuing sci-fi weapons!

Our troops need hand-held phasers and communicators. And how 'bout those boys in the lab whipping up some teleportation devices as well?

[Posteritatis]

50. Better this than throwing more HE and DU around. *shrug*

Much like the microwave area denial stuff, this strangely fills me with far less reflexive outrage than rifle bullets, artillery shells, and misaimed cruise missiles. I really don't mind it. In fact, I find stuff like this kind of neat, and vastly preferable to the far less subtle conventional weapons being used. If the US has to deploy some kind of weaponry, I'd rather something which is physically incapable of wiping out half a city block.

Just playing devil's advocate here.

[alfredo]

16. Any weapon developed for war on our enemies can be turned upon

us.

[951-Riverside]

17. What happens if the enemy get a hold of a mirror?

:D

[xchrom]

18. so then that will make the illegal invasion

of other countries ok?

or is it meant to scare the chinese?

[coalition_unwilling]

19. We can probably use it on all the terrorists disguised as children

[LynnTheDem]

20. And the world rush is on.

[Jose Diablo]

21. Roger Ramjet sending out more BS n/t

[daleo]

22. Always with the death rays and secret weapons

The Martians in War of the Worlds or Hitler in 1945? Take your pick of what it reminds you of.

[oneighty]

26. "victory within minutes"

And then you put occupying forces on the ground and they get killed the old fashioned way; sticks and stones and human guided bombs.

And that will take forever.

180

[Javaman]

28. So even though they destroy the weapon, that same weapon has...

munitions, will those not go off as well? So I still find the concept of no collateral damage (innocents killed) as very hard to believe.

So if they shoot this thing at a tank will it's shells be neutralized as well? And the same with artillery pieces or transport trucks carrying gas or ordinance?

Whoops, didn't think of that did they...assholes.

[MisterP]

30. how very "Left Behind"; maybe President Satan can use them on Arab

horses and forces like in LaHaye's drivel (once he proclaims himself Jesus), and all the freeps and fundies have a simultaneous Rapturegasm while gravekeepers on Patmos report a spinning noise under the Roman mausoleums...

[Auntie Bush]

33. Wow, Now we can conquer the the whole Middle- East and the

worlds whole oil supply without killing anyone and control the price of oil. Yipee...we can all drive huge SUV's while thumbing our nose at everyone else. No one would not dare to love us.

[eppur_se_muova]

35. That's funny, every laser lab I've ever seen has warning signs all over

warning about the hazards of REFLECTED and SCATTERED ratiation. These guys wear special safety goggles and are usually scared shitless that one day something will go wrong and they'll be blinded for life. I guess "collateral damage" doesn't include all the retinas scorched dead when they catch 0.0001% of that radiation.

On closer read, I note that "could destroy any weapon system without collateral damage" should be read in the same sense that "monkeys could fly out of my butt smelling like roses".

Maybe they'll drop the whole thing after they find the guys firing it aren't immune either.

[Clara T]

36. Just as nature abhors a vaccuum

the Pentagon cannot exist with a rationale for cooking up new ways to burn flesh. Investors count on this. Need to start a new war and test this thing out huh?

[Robb]

37. As the XB-70 was to the A-12 (SR-71)

...there are always two projects going on, the "white world" one we get to watch go through its paces haltingly, and the one we get told about 25 years later that works much, much better and is years ahead in development/deployment.

Be truly, truly terrified about the possibilities for the ATL's "black" counterpart. :(

[genie_weenie]

38. this is a bad idea

Collateral Damage is *how* you win wars...

[retread]

47. We have already greatly reduced collateral damage by simply

redefining the enemy. New definition: an enemy is anyone we hit with a weapon.