Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Re: kidnapped soldier...dumb question.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:14 PM
Original message
Re: kidnapped soldier...dumb question.
why can't gps chips be put in servicemen and women like we put in our pets. that way they could find the location of kidnapped soldiers lickety split.

I understand it could be considered an infringement on privacy, but if there was a voluntary opt-in option, maybe some folks would want it will serving in Afghanistan and Iraq, then have it removed when your done serving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
katanalori Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
1. good idea
The only flaw I foresee is that the kidnappers would look for the scar and promptly remove the chip upon capture. But maybe it could be installed where the scar would not show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pocoloco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #1
10. Oh Hell Yeah!!
Lets put them in everybody!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atreides1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
2. You're Right
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 01:22 PM by atreides1
It is a dumb question!

There is no "could be" it is an infringement on privacy and there is no opt-in where the military is concerned!

Not to mention that it could also be considered a violation of a soldier's religious beliefs.

And who's to say that a soldier captured with a gps chip won't be used to target enemy locations? Why go through all the hassles and cost of a rescue when you use the chip to guide in a Hellfire missile and destory an enemy bunker, HQ, whatever?

Eventually the enemy will figure it out and just kill them instead of taking them as prisoners, is that what you think is better?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. thx. if it was a voluntary program then no need to worry about religious beliefs.
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 01:24 PM by ourbluenation
Also - what's to stop any deploying soldier from going to a vet to get a chip.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. As long as the Army is a Voluntary force, religious objections do not count.
In fact there is a explicit Military Ruling on Sikhs entering the army. If a Sihk volunteers he MUST cut off his beard, even through his religious belief clearly states all males must leave their facial hair grow into a Beard. The Military position is the Sihk gave up his right to object to the military requirement that all personnel be clean shaven when he enlisted.

On the other hand if the Draft is ever reinstated any Sihk that is DRAFTED can object, for no voluntary action by the draftee was done and he retains his right to a religious objection to have a beard (Through if he volunteers to be an Officer, even if the alternative is to serve as an enlistee, that is again a "Voluntary" action and the beard has to go if he wants to serve as an Officer).

I bring this up to show that the military can argue that you gave up your right to object by enlisting or reenlisting, so not an issue unless a draft is reinstated.

Second problem is how do you activate the Chip? The Chip only works if it is energized, then it transmit a signal. If you are underground even by a few feet the electrical power needed by the chip to activate will never reach the chip. Chip works if you go by something that energizes the chip and can then transmit the message. Careful planning can make sure any prisoner NEVER goes near a transmitter and remember the transmitter MUST have a source of power, which can be detected and thus avoided or otherwise neutralized (i.e. a bullet right though the mechanism blowing it to pieces).

Chips work today in Cattle as the Cattle go into a barn or other common area pass a sensor which collects the data and transmits it. Dogs chips are activated when they go to a vet or other person with such a transmitter. If the dog do not go near a transmitter no transmission takes place and the dog stays unfounded.

Furthermore the chip is generally put in a place very easy to detect, an ear is the most common location. People will see the chip and cut it out. If buried deeply so that such simple operations can NOT remove it, then you have the problem if the chip does not work and has to be replaced. Present Chips is you pull out the old chip an install a new chip in the same location. Some discomfort for the Cows, Bulls and Dogs but nothing more then a simple one to two minute operation. In a person you could put the chip is a similar common easy to change location but how is that better then as part of his or her dog tags? The answer is it there is no better location. As to deeper locations, the problem of energizing the chip increases along with making it harder to install in the first place AND harder to change out if it does not work (your body is 90% water and that acts as a block to energy signals, the reason cards in you wallet work is that the energy beam is going AROUND your body no through your body to energize the chip.

Thus the religious objection is weak, the real problem is the technical objections, how does physically tagging a person better then a dog tag? The answer is it is not. Having someone swallow it, just leads it to the digestive track and out in one to two days (Through that might be a reason to adopt such a device for Pilots, have the pilots take it as part of their ejection system or landing system in enemy terrain and if the pilot is captured the chip will work it way through his body. The problem is most armies have underground latrines (Or have their soldiers dig them) and the dirt will prevent the energy from getting to the chip to be activated. We have to hope the pilot is told to do "nature's calling" along a road and hopefully a plane flying over that road at a slow speed to activate the chip and received a signal from the chip. Possible but in my opinion NOT worth the effort.

If you do NOT have the person being tagged swallow the chip you have to surgically install it deep inside his body. You run the risk of infection, rejection and interference but possible. The problem is most people are NOT taken prisoner and such an operation would be a waste of time. For the few people taken prisoner, getting an energy source close enough to them to active the chip AND then receive the information would take a lot of effort I.e. a drone used just for that purpose flying over the roads trying to find where the prisoner are, making them easy to shoot down, to avoid being shot down the drone will have to flay several hundred feet above ground, minimizing they ability to activate the chips. Furthermore such a transmission of energy could be used to track the drone by a missile designed for such a mission, making the whole effort moot at a very low lost to the side holding the prisoner (The technology to follow a radio beam is only WWII in origin). If you opt to transmit at various different frequencies to avoid such a missile, not only the transmitter be changing the frequencies, the chip has to be able to take in ALL of the Frequencies (Through you could opt to concentrate on certain frequencies per mission, but run the risk of using the frequencies the chips in the prisoners you are looking for, are NOT set to (or increasing the size of the chip to cover a huge number of Frequencies).

Just some rambling about the technical problem if Chipping the troops. Easy for Cattle and dogs, no one is trying to hide them from the people who installed the chips. Prisoners are a different matter.

One last comment, if the Technology was capable of working some state would be doing it to its prisoners in Prison. No more guards, the chip would indicate where the prisoner is at all times. If a Prisoner Chip does NOT work, it must be replaced ASAP and till then no food and not allowed out of his or her Cell (To make sure people do NOT de-chip themselves). In a prison situation where the prison is doing the chipping, chipping could cut costs and if Chips works in prison it would work in the Military. The problem is that no prison has figured out a way to install chips in a cost efficient way AND in a way prisoner could NOT undo easily. Until you see that, the technology simply does NOT exist.

Side Note: In Criminal Prison system I do NOT mean chips as part of a Dog Tag type system. That can be done today. No Chip, no Food. No Chip not allowed to go ANYWHERE unless a Guard puts you in custody and takes you to a place you can get a new chip on a new DoG Tags Chain. You can Control the flow of people. Prisoners could exchange the chips, but if caught can be stopped of any privileges they have and otherwise punished. If you have detectors all over the prison with a computer system that double checks anyone going through a detector (i.e. picture taken as they go through the detector matched with a picture of person whose chip that is suppose to be, should be both computer checked AND checked by visual means. Such a system would work today in many prisons, but not in a combat situation where the Guards want the Chip DESTROYED, instead of in a Prison situation where the Guards want the Chip AND the Prisoners want the chip installed. While I believe the effectiveness of a Chip on a person in the Military would be minimal as best if he of she is taken prisoner, it has a place in the military for knowing where your personnel are or are not. Al of this can be done by a Chip on a Dog Tag Chain, hard installation on the body provided no additional benefits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cid_B Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Damn...
What a jackass response...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. Because there's no such thing as a "GPS chip"?
We DO have RFID tags, but they're passive. They don't broadcast a signal, they must be read by an active scanner and that scanner must be in close proximity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ourbluenation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. thx. that clearly explains why it wouldn't be a solution. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Great idea, the technology just isn't there yet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slampoet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. No it is a shitty idea because any chip that broadcasts that much energy is a SURE CANCER cause.

It would be like wearing a power line pressed up against your skull.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Maybe English isn't your first language
A "chip" (like an RFID chip) doesn't use any power because it doesn't transmit. Therefore, it shouldn't be a health hazard.

As I said, we don't have the technology to make a chip system that would useful for locating lost people yet...and nobody is advocating implanting transmitters or power supplies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slampoet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. The 555 timer chip uses 5vdc. SSM chips use power. IC chips of all sorts use power.
Just because RIFD is passive doesn't mean that all IC chips are the same. Got to Radio Shack and learn before you comment. In order for it to be useful any system would need to transmit. A transmitter is what would be required to reach satellite orbit for world wide detection. Anything of that power level would cause health problems if it were subcutaneous no matter what it were made of.

I have gotten awards for my writing in English and have worked with all sorts of IC chips as well.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. SOME chips use power. RFID chips don't.
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 05:50 PM by MercutioATC
...and a personal locator system would need to transmit to be useful AT OUR CURRENT LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGY..which is why I stated that wedon't have the technology yet.

If we DID have the necessary technology, this would not be a "shitty" idea, as you claimed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slampoet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 07:48 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. If we lived with Harry Potter at Hogworts it wouldn't be a shitty idea.
but in this universe ANY FUTURE TECHNOLOGY WILL ALSO NEED TO BROADCAST A STRONG SIGNAL.

That is how the laws of physics work. Some particle or wave will need to reach orbit from under this soldier's skin and anything that has enough power will disturb the biological cells around it.

You can't pull something out of your ass just to save face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Incorrect
The sensitivity of the receiver could be enhanced without requiring transmission from the chip.

No magic required, no violation of the laws of physics...just technology more advanced than we have right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slampoet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #24
25. Okay...Then explain to me how you think RIFD Currently works.
Edited on Tue Jul-21-09 11:33 AM by slampoet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-21-09 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Passive RFID uses radio waves from a reader to create a magnetic field in the chip.
At our current state of technology, they can only be read from very short distances.

In theory...again, without technological advances...higher-powered radio waves could be used to make the chip readable at longer distances. This WOULD bring about the issues you speak of, but it's not what I'm suggesting.

If the sensitivity of the reader could be increased to allow identification of an RFID tag with low-energy waves but at longer distances, this would minimize the possible health hazard while making it useful in the scenario proposed in the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchum Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. OT: T threw together some 555 based audio oscillators last week
signed,
mitchum the geek
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. You could still put a GPS device in a vehicle or clothing nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pocoloco Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. LOL
Got a cell phone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MercutioATC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. Yep, and a cellphone has a battery-powered transmitter.
...that has a range of 5-8 miles. If you want to implant a GPS tracking device, transmitter, and battery into somebody, you could locate them from 8 miles away.

...but that's a lot more than a "chip".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Torn_Scorned_Ignored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal In Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. People have been watching too many movies.
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 02:16 PM by Liberal In Texas
Edit to say: People are BELIEVING too much of what they see in movies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 01:29 PM
Response to Original message
7. how about just following orders and not going outside the perimeter
Edited on Mon Jul-20-09 01:29 PM by grantcart
without your assigned buddy, a rifle, your flak jacket to meet locals for a social occasion.


I feel bad for the family and the young man but what an idiotic thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
13. do you know this to be true?
I'm asking because of that asshat on Fox yesterday who was busy speculating about the soldier being a deserter, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrary1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-20-09 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I just read this on a different website...
...no link, because it is a Right Wing rag.

Some are saying he left a note behind, indicating he was going to go live in the mountains and find himself.

If this is true, I believe it is more likely that he just cracked, rather than deserted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC