Reply With Quote
What a moron. Exactly why would he rather test the affects on our own citizens rather than on the battlefield?
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.
The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.
"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."
The Air Force has paid for research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service is unlikely to spend more money on development until injury problems are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.
Nonlethal weapons generally can weaken people if they are hit with the beam. Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also can be effective in disabling some electronic devices.
On another subject, Wynne said he expects to choose a new contractor for the next generation aerial refueling tankers by next summer. He said a draft request for bids will be put out next month, and there are two qualified bidders: the Boeing Co. and a team of Northrop Grumman Corp. and European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co., the majority owner of European jet maker Airbus SAS.
The contract is expected to be worth at least $20 billion (€15.75 billion).
Chicago, Illinois-based Boeing lost the tanker deal in 2004 amid revelations that it had hired a top Air Force acquisitions official who had given the company preferential treatment.
Wynne also said the Air Force, which is already chopping 40,000 active duty, civilian and reserves jobs, is now struggling to find new ways to slash about $1.8 billion (€1.4 billion) from its budget to cover costs from the latest round of base closings.
He said he can't cut more people, and it would not be wise to take funding from military programs that are needed to protect the country. But he said he also incurs resistance when he tries to save money on operations and maintenance by retiring aging aircraft.
"We're finding out that those are, unfortunately, prized possessions of some congressional districts," said Wynne, adding that the Air Force will have to "take some appe e suppressant pills." He said he has asked employees to look for efficiencies in their offices.
The base closings initially were expected to create savings by reducing Air Force infrastructure by 24 percent.
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usa....ap/index.html
Is it just me, or has there been enough "testing" on US citizens for many years...
What a moron. Exactly why would he rather test the affects on our own citizens rather than on the battlefield?
(ZAP!) "See? Everyone's still alive, no harm done, and I just happen to have a copy of the defense contract ready for you to sign..."
The hard part will be trying to spin why everyone who protested that day developed brain tumors 5 to 10 years later.
or their prostates and ovaries shriveled up.
Uh, why does the Air Force need a riot control weapon?
CD, I'd well imagine that the AF "lead" the development of the less than lethal weapons research.
And the AF is responsible for base security as well as other security missions.
"Air Force need a riot control weapon?"
When the AF academy boyz get drunk on Sat night and go looking for AF academcy girls.
I thought about base security, but it's easier just to kill folks. Also the article said "battlefield" which doesn't really fit a security descrpition.
If it's nonleathal why don't the testers use it on each other? Those reports would be the most accurate, right?
So we won't be accused of war crimes by all the pricks back home. Because, he knows those upon whom these weapons would most likely be tested are the same ones wanting us to open the gates at Gitmo and who accuse us of torturing terrorists.
I think it's a great idea. Then the police should be outfitted with them.
avoiding war crimes > avoiding civil rights violations
The reason the AF is testing it is because they have a bigger R&D budget than the Army, so as a joint force protection project the AF is testing out some new toys on behalf of the grunts.
Hey, if it doesn't hurt them then they can't scream war crime when we start using it on the enemy.
I would rather terrorists be tortured than American citizens.
Bad idea.
And if they get cancer and die?
Whatever happened to the time honored tradition of testing out on our own military troops? Perhaps we don't have any to spare at the moment...
Yeah, well, tell the ACLU and Martin SheenI would rather terrorists be tortured than American citizens.
Bad idea.
Hey, it's non-lethal. Who said anything about it not hurting? I'll bet it'll disperse a crowd though. Or, cause them to lose all muscular control and crap their pants. Either way, fine by me.
And, if they don't?
I think trouble-makers are better guinea pigs.
What a ing . If this was your family member who this weapon was 'tested' on and later developed some sort of illness, I'm more than sure your opinion would shift.
If I have a family member that associates with mobs that have to be dispersed, I doubt we'd ever get together and I'd probably not hear of their illness until some family reunion somewhere down the road...and, more than likely, it'd be blamed on some other dumb ass activity he'd engaged in.
I'm betting this stuff has been tested on animals already.
Weapons such as high powered microwave devices? WTF? Hey yonivore why don't you stick your penis in the microwave and tell us if you get penile cancer. That should be proven safe without a doubt before it's used on any U.S. citizens.
First of all, you're taking me way too seriously and second, you've already ascribed side-effects that aren't known to be the case. Maybe you should educate yourself about the weapons before you start calling them cancer-causing ray guns from Mars.
I forgot to include aWhatever happened to the time honored tradition of testing out on our own military troops? Perhaps we don't have any to spare at the moment...to indicate sarcasm, lest anyone thinks I actually support testing troops without their knowledge and consent.
Don't even try to pretend that you know the effects of some new "high powered microwave device" developed by the military. And yes I probably took you too seriously, but that's just ed up to test things like that on your own people. That's hardly better than Saddam Hussein using biological weapons against his own people.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
