Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Weapons of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Whhhhat?
Shirrush    4/3/2008 11:48:46 PM
This article is dated from April 3rd, not first.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Shirrush       4/3/2008 11:51:36 PM
...So can anybody comment on that distinct feeling I have that someone I usually trust is tugging at one of my rear limbs?
 
Quote    Reply

FJV    Strange   4/4/2008 12:24:30 PM
The name Dave Gaubatz I have encountered before on another topic. That topic is the search for WMD in Iraq.

Mr Gaubatz claimed that that search was done incompetently and that he knew where these WMD were. He claimed that the WMD were in a flooded bunker under a river in Iraq and that the army wouldn't pay the money to dig through the collapsed entrance to find the WMD. Here is the article:

"http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/cartoons/29092/i-found-saddams-wmd-bunkers.thtml"
"http://www2.nysun.com/article/27183"

At the time I didn't post about this, because I couldn't get any supporting evidence for mr Gaubatz story that didn't trace back to mr Gaubatz. And now I see this article about his insider knowledge about some secret pentagon ray gun weapon.

To be honest it makes me question the credibility of this man. His stories are too good to be true.



 
Quote    Reply

smitty237    Easy now   4/4/2008 8:05:16 PM
This supposed "ray gun" is real, and not really secret at all.  I saw the 60 Minutes episode about a month or so ago, and have seen a number of television programs and magazine articles over the last few years that have talked about this device.  The term "ray gun" is a bit of a misnomer.  It doesn't really shoot a "laser beam" per se, but instead projects microwaves from a device that looks like a radar dish.  When it's turned on and pointed towards someone it creates a burning sensation on the skin.  The first impulse of the person it's being deployed against is to move away from the sensation.  It is being tested as a less lethal weapon to be deployed against crowds and mobs.  The goal would be to turn the thing on and force the crowd to disperse without the use of tear gas or rubber bullets.  Tear gas is messy and lingers, and rubber bullets can cause injuries and nasty bruises that make for good TV (and bad PR for the good guys), while the ray gun leaves no visible injuries (as long as the rioter vacates the area). 
 
The term "non-lethal" disappeared in law enforcement circles years ago because there is no system out there that is completely incapable of causing fatalities.  I'm sure it's possible to crank the power up on the "ray gun" to lethal levels, but I really can't envision Army soldiers or Marines melting enemy snipers or villages with ray guns mounted on hummers.  It may have been designed for possibly lethal deployments, but by powering down the weapon they found it was probably much more practical for use as a less lethal device.  This may be a moot point anyway, since the project is underfunded and it appears the Pentagon is a little lukewarm in its enthusiasm for the system (excuse the pun). 
 
I don't know anything about this guy, so I can't say whether he's full of it or not.  I will say that if they ever do find WMDs in Iraq at this point they might as well just quietly dispose of them, because by now if they announced the discovering of huge stash of Iraqi biological or chemical munitions Bush's critics would simply claim that Bush planted them.  The fact that he hasn't to this point should say something, but it wouldn't matter. 
 
Quote    Reply

Herald12345       4/7/2008 8:08:12 AM

This supposed "ray gun" is real, and not really secret at all.  I saw the 60 Minutes episode about a month or so ago, and have seen a number of television programs and magazine articles over the last few years that have talked about this device.  The term "ray gun" is a bit of a misnomer.  It doesn't really shoot a "laser beam" per se, but instead projects microwaves from a device that looks like a radar dish.  When it's turned on and pointed towards someone it creates a burning sensation on the skin.  The first impulse of the person it's being deployed against is to move away from the sensation.  It is being tested as a less lethal weapon to be deployed against crowds and mobs.  The goal would be to turn the thing on and force the crowd to disperse without the use of tear gas or rubber bullets.  Tear gas is messy and lingers, and rubber bullets can cause injuries and nasty bruises that make for good TV (and bad PR for the good guys), while the ray gun leaves no visible injuries (as long as the rioter vacates the area). 

 

The term "non-lethal" disappeared in law enforcement circles years ago because there is no system out there that is completely incapable of causing fatalities.  I'm sure it's possible to crank the power up on the "ray gun" to lethal levels, but I really can't envision Army soldiers or Marines melting enemy snipers or villages with ray guns mounted on hummers.  It may have been designed for possibly lethal deployments, but by powering down the weapon they found it was probably much more practical for use as a less lethal device.  This may be a moot point anyway, since the project is underfunded and it appears the Pentagon is a little lukewarm in its enthusiasm for the system (excuse the pun). 

 

I don't know anything about this guy, so I can't say whether he's full of it or not.  I will say that if they ever do find WMDs in Iraq at this point they might as well just quietly dispose of them, because by now if they announced the discovering of huge stash of Iraqi biological or chemical munitions Bush's critics would simply claim that Bush planted them.  The fact that he hasn't to this point should say something, but it wouldn't matter. 


Oh yes it is very possible to kill with this weapon. Its like an unshielded microwave beam with an infinite focal length  to within 500 meters; if you understand the optics.

Trouble is that DEFENSE is ridiculously simple. just stand behind something radio opaque and you are perfectly safe. That means Johnny Jihady just needs a shelter from where he can fire a rocket and say goodbye to the microwave cooker. Its use as a riot gun is also questionable. 500 meters a mob can cover in forty seconds. Belt-buckle tactics. get in among the police and storm the shooting position which has to be out ion the open and fairly obvious isa more likely than running away..

Riot prevention continues to be best handled by good community relations, and when  that fails-water cannons. Cold water is better than radio beams any day in the book, when the mob riots.

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/7/2008 10:35:54 AM


Riot prevention continues to be best handled by good community relations, and when  that fails-water cannons. Cold water is better than radio beams any day in the book, when the mob riots.

Herald

I always think sewerage water is infinitely better for the purpose. If you splash crap water on a crowded mob, they will disperse and disappear in no time.
 
Quote    Reply

DragonReborn       4/7/2008 10:39:29 AM




Riot prevention continues to be best handled by good community relations, and when  that fails-water cannons. Cold water is better than radio beams any day in the book, when the mob riots.

Herald


I always think sewerage water is infinitely better for the purpose. If you splash crap water on a crowded mob, they will disperse and disappear in no time.

And risk getting accused of germ warfare!

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       4/7/2008 10:56:26 AM


And risk getting accused of germ warfare!



They can use large amount of bleach to sanitize crap water before its use, and making it more nasty to rioters.

Anyway, ray guns can kill, what a news, big deal. High power radars are known to be small animal cookers since 1950s. Any radar expert will tell you not to stand in front of a radar antenna, especially Russian radars, for your own sake.
 
Quote    Reply

smitty237    Effectiveness vs. Acceptability   4/7/2008 11:33:19 AM
It is important to understand that when you are dealing with field force scenarios (riot control), political considerations and public relations are as much a part of the tactics and planning as the methods actually used to control the crowd. 
 
Sure, water cannons are an effective way to disperse a crowd, but so is a machine gun.  Granted, water cannons are a lot less likely to cause deaths or injuries than machine guns, but no police department in the United States has used water cannons since the 1960's.  The reason for this is the disturbing images of water cannons being turned against civil rights protesters, most of the black, during the civil rights struggles in this country forty years ago.  Since then, using water cannons for riot control has been deemed politically unacceptable.  In fact, most police departments specifically prohibit it in their general orders and procedural manuals.  This prohibition may not extend to the military, especially overseas, but I would dare say that the foreign press would be quick to use images of US troops spraying Muslim protesters and quickly compare them to images of police spraying down black civil rights protesters in Selma, Alabama, among other places.  I'm sure the US military is well aware of this, and is understandably leery of using water cannons against crowds.
 
The "ray gun" is one of the alternatives being researched because when it is turned on the only thing you see is people trying to get away from the invisible beams.  Nobody falls over dead, bursts into flames, or gets blown over by a blast of water.  They just quickly turn away and try to vacate the AO to avoid the burning sensation.  I'm sure there are ways to combat the ray guns, but that would require some organization and planning, which is something most mobs lack.  The ray gun is not a magic bullet, just another option that the geeks are looking at. 
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics