Pentagon had a FABULOUS idea!

[Bob The Mercenary]

http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_159222541.html

Yes, these are the people who are looking after us.

[neyo the king]

Wait wait wait, what? I do believe that takes "Make love, not war" to an entirely inappropriate level...

But, wait, would such a device even be possible?

[adamark]

Stupid fucks....

Why don't they just get back to creating chemical weapons that melt your skin off and turn bone into jelly?

[Mike McC]

Stupid fucks....

Why don't they just get back to creating chemical weapons that melt your skin off and turn bone into jelly?Well, they did reject the idea.

[Tendronai]

The thing which really confuses me is why this story is even news now. The proposal was made in 94, and according to the article it was turned down then. So why are we talking about it now?

[Darth SS]

Perhaps they rejected it for fear of rejection?


Or that there could be an accidental detonation, and their troops would literally be raped by it?

[Bob The Mercenary]

I guess just the fact that this sort of thing was even considered in the first place is news itself. It was just uncovered by a watchdog agency, so I guess they wanted to just forget anyone ever said anything and hid the proposal.

[Sky Warrior Bob]

You know, I find it funny when the news tries to repackage a story & present it as something new...

http://forum.nuklearpower.com/showthread.php?t=8267&highlight=Bomb

I mean, this was news back in 2005. Not mainstream news, but still news. And there isn't any mention of the halitosis bomb. Or the rat/wasp bomb.

Bah! (And Admark, you took part in that thread too! I'm suprised I'm the one who had to remember this...)

SWB
The news article I cited still works, http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg18524823.800

[42PETUNIAS]

Man, I wonder what would happen if they dropped this on a womens rights protest... Theres probably a porno for that...

[Bob The Mercenary]

Man, I wonder what would happen if they dropped this on a womens rights protest... Theres probably a porno for that...

Better than Tag body spray, I'm assuming. =/

[42PETUNIAS]

Yeah, but tag needs a male as a focus for it to work. This would just cause girl on girl action.

[Ugainius]

AMERICANS You really need to stop putting money in your military or who knows what horrors they'll create

[greed]

I can just imagine some grizzled old Cold War vet saying "We'll turn the Reds PINK!" when this was proposed. In all seriousness though, while the idea of turning someone gay by a weapon is stupid from what I know of how being gay actually works, a pheromone bomb or something that chemically alters the thoughts without harming the body is an interesting idea. Imagine a fear, paranoia or rage bomb.

That raises a question, does Geneva or something similar cover psychotropics that aren't harmful or torture?

[Ugainius]

Oh Yeah! Geneva 'll stop 'em. I mean, when as America not obeyed the dictions of a concerned outside body about their policies.

[The Artist Formerly Known as Hawk]

Yeah... this is seriously old. It was designed to be specifically used on enemy bases to drive enemy forces a bit loopy and fuck with morale. Personally I always though it was a pretty good weapon for psychological warfare, though the giant hologram projector was always my personal favourite really.

And what DID happen with the wasp/rat bombs. Also I think there was a hygiene bomb that gave people diorhea (sp?) which could have worked just as well.

And for those people who think this kind of weapon is ridiculous, remember that sometimes destroying an armies willingness to fight is often better than outright fighting them in the first place. It means less casualties and an easier takeover of hostile territory for you, while still defeating said enemy.

[The SSB Intern]

And for those people who think this kind of weapon is ridiculous, remember that sometimes destroying an armies willingness to fight is often better than outright fighting them in the first place. It means less casualties and an easier takeover of hostile territory for you, while still defeating said enemy.
You have take into consideration who we're fighting. Compared to US, these are seriously repressed people. Even with an aphrodisiacs, the thought of being shunned by society will keep most of them out of each of others pants. Although, their minds will probably not be on fighting.
AMERICANS You really need to stop putting money in your military or who knows what horrors they'll create
Something that actually kills people?

[greed]

Oh Yeah! Geneva 'll stop 'em. I mean, when as America not obeyed the dictions of a concerned outside body about their policies.

Keep in mind two things.

1. Despite evils such as Guantamo Bay and those secret prisons in Europe, even the US has rarely if ever since the Vietnam War done something on the battlefield that directly contravenes the Geneva Convention. A few suspect bombings and the like, things that could be mistakes, things that are easy to deny or pretend not to have happened. Unleashing a chemical weapon like this on an open battlefield would not be hidable. If it was in fact illegal the Geneva Convention would matter.

2. This was 1994, under the Clinton Administration. The one with some slivers of morality and actually caring about global opinion to a degree.

[Zuzak]

The pentagon had a contingency plan for invading Canada, I think. And another one for nuking Iraq. That doesn't mean that that's gonna happen.

I mean, for this to be used, you'd have to fight off all the conservitives in America.

Why does this matter at all? It was already dismissed.

AMERICANS You really need to stop putting money in your military or who knows what horrors they'll create

Yeah, I've never donated to the pentagon. What are we supposed to do, not pay taxes and hide our paychecks? I highly doubt anyone with the authority to influence the pentagon's funding is on this fourm.

And, horrors? I'm not sure weather or not to hope this is sarcastic. If it is, I just made myself look like an idiot for not seeing it. If not, then I'm really not sure how to respond. If this accutually worked, it could save lives on both sides. Not that I'm saying its a good idea or would work, but this whole thread seems to be an overreaction. Which is worse, a group dieing, or a group becoming homosexual? Of cource, the idea is political suicide, probably the reason it was kept secret.