What is Digg?62 Comments
- repins, on 10/12/2007, -9/+28Anything that can help kill the bad guys and protect the innocent bystanders is a welcome addition.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15There's a new strategy. Label a whole bunch of laptops with "FREE PORN INSIDE". Make sure they have sony batteries. Then drop them on the bad guys.
- djAnakin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9You're an idiot and *obviously* have no idea what you're talking about. The intel community, just like any other job, is made up of people just like you and me, going to work and trying to do the best they can.
And what's the scalpel and anal flashlight comment? That supposed to be a joke, or just you showing off exactly how ignorant you are?
Also, it amazes me how many of you still think that ANYONE said that we went into Iraq because of 9/11. It's simply not true. We went into Iraq because of their support of terrorism in general. And yes, Iraq did harbour terrorists, and supported terrorism throughout the world. Just because you don't see the information doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You see one tiny bit of biased "intel" on the news and you think you all know all the facts. Reality is you see a very small portion, and you hear only what you want to hear, which results in even less accurate information, and you believe even less than that. - raybury, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14@ Seumas
If given the choice between my enemy carpet-bombing my cities and pinpointing legitimate military and logistical targets so as to minimize loss of life on my side, I would certainly prefer the latter.
Of course giving the enemy what he wants may not be the best way to win a war. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11Compassion is for god-hating communists. You a communist, boy?
- matthewaaron, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Nice... too bad we can't tap into Bin Laden's video feed and call in a strike there!
- datastorageguy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Location of Dagonweb confirmed....
Targetting...
Target lock acquired..
Press left mouse button to fire..
Firing..
Target neutralized. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Edmundo, in what war was your sense of humor and ability to perceive sarcasm KIA?
- djAnakin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Seumus. You're an idiot. Please, stop posting.
- stupendousman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7You'd rather we respond to RPG, mortar and automatic weapons fire with harsh language?
This is impressive technology. The troops are under fire and anything that can help them to defend themselves while helping to minimize civilian losses is obviously a good thing. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -17/+20@dadrew
You're a ***** idiot. 70 people died defending their cause to kill non-muslims? What part of "civilians" don't you understand?
Also, I recall it being in the news over the last year that Americans see atheists and agnostics as the only groups that are seen as more evil and less trustworthy than gays, muslims and other "degenerates". I'm sure religious freaks in this country would have no problem rounding up all of us free-thinkers and cutting our heads off -- so excuse me if I don't have a lot of sympathy if there is a group that wants to wipe *you* out.
However, again, they are civilians. They don't necessarily want to kill all "non-muslims" anymore than I as an American want to kill every non-whitey Christian. Just because that's why my president seems to do doesn't mean I do. I'm just a civilian. And so are they. There are Christian Iraqis. How do you know some of the civilians weren't Iraqi?
People like you really sicken me, because you reflect poorly on the rest of us in this country who don't just assume every brown person is an evil god-hating terrorist. - ocschwar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4War is not a sport. Being poor and disadvantaged in battle is no indication that you are on the just side.
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6If he was broadcasting live, we probably could. Unfortunately all we see are week old tapes.
- conan359, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Unless the laptop has a Sony battery.
- Vlatro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3MOTHER *****! SHUT UP.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. The article is about a new technology, not politics. Who here aside from me and 2 others actually read the article before posting? I don't care weather we're killing Muslims, Christians, or cute little baby penguins. That's not the topic.
What the article does say :
Targeting for bombs is 20x better than it was 2 years ago. (Today = Within 100 Yards, Previously within 2,000 Yards.) That means smaller bombs will be used. Less collateral damage (whatever), but also cheaper, smaller bombs can become just as effective strategically, and deployment will be faster. Another thing not mentioned is the ground view the pilot gets is much better in many cases, as it allows them to view bunkers covered by camouflage tarps, natural cover etc. These can be pretty hard to spot from up high, so while the bombs can still be pretty accurate from higher altitudes, the pilot's ability to target (until now) has not been. This will allow for higher drops, and safer conditions for our pilots. - arpad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Socialized medicine. Jeez, what a shmuck.
You'd think that sort of loyalty to a stupid idea would have at least one success as vindication. In the case of socialized medicine there's not a single country that has socialized medicine that hasn't had to ration care to those "masses" the proponents of socialized medicine are inevitably contemptuous of when they aren't worrying about the mooing masses.
Of course in the two-tiered system that socialized medicine actually becomes, it's political clout and connections that determine the level of care you get. Pretty damned good for the prime minister, the prime minister's secretary, the prime minister's secretary's mother and so on. If you don't have connections you go to the vetrenarian to get a CAT scan because you can't wait the eight months the wonderful socialized medicine system will make you wait and the vet'll take cash. - Deuterium, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3That's funny considering that the military IS socialized medical care. Those of us that were/are in the military can attest I'll take ANYTHING but socialized medicine. The grass, my friend, is not always greener on the other side.
- dtreese, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3For people who haven't been reading the actual article:
"September 2005: ROVER technology was used to locate 182 survivors of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans and direct helicopters and boats to rescue them. Air Force Tech. Sgt. Travis Crosby, who used the system to help direct Iraqi police to stop suicide bombers last year, said the Air Force is prepared to use ROVER again this year if a major hurricane hits the USA." - Nitro2985, on 10/12/2007, -5/+6Not every member of the team will carry all that gear.
- BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2The article? Anyone want to comment on the article? The one this discussion is supposed to be about?
- djAnakin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2You doubt my aim? Bring it on!
- ahhell, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Uh....is this going to help stop friendly fire?
As there are FAR too many "accidents". - jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I can't imagine the guy carrying all that crap around is going to do so well in a close quarter combat situation. It looks like he has a laptop, wireless transmitter and backpack full of goodies.
- BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The idea is that the soldier sees the thing he's shooting at. That's sort of the way most weapons work.
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5People still using IDE HDs should be shot.
- Edmundo, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6A-hem. I sense a lot of compassion for the soldiers and innocent bystanders in some of these drive-by postings critical of the new technology.
- Vlatro, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Well, you and I stand on different sides of the political line, but I respect that comment. You point out that: "The Iraq war is the most networked, technological war we've ever fought". And you're absolutely right. That's why it's important to see what advancements are being made. We are looking at the future of how wars will be fought.
Tools like this will have a tremendous impact on all future engagements. By minimizing the cost associated with collateral damage, we are becoming far more efficient. Contrary to popular belief, we don't want to just kill everything. Every bullet that doesn't kill an enemy, is a wasted bullet. And every bullet we fire creates a future enemy, whether it hits it's mark or not. Improved accuracy is the most important area of research right now, as it should be. I envision the future of our military as primarily consisting of foot soldiers. Developments in accuracy will allow smaller bombs to be used for strikes, eventually enabling smaller unmanned bombers to be called in. Our soldiers could tag their mark with a laser or gps/radio device and call in mini air strikes as needed. The use of video here is great. If a pilot can see what the ground units see, they can make better decisions, quicker, and more accurately. I read another article a while back about new war games where every solider wore a head-mounted camera, that transmitted imagery back to a remote Field commander who could reposition his troops accordingly to avoid known obstacles, flank enemies, and essentially turn every unit into an armed recon, with real-time updates. My only hesitation is what damage could a hijacked signal do. An intercepted video relay would only reveal the locations of our soldiers. I'm sure it's really well encrypted, but I've learned enough about encryption not to stake my life on people not cracking it. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+5@dustyshadow
Actually, you ignorant twit, it was research by Professor Joseph Gerteis and Douglas Hartmann which was published in the American Sociological Review back in April.
- - - - - - -
Atheists are America's least trusted group, according to a national survey conducted by University sociology researchers.
Based on a telephone survey of more than 2,000 households and in-depth interviews with more than 140 people, researchers found that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, homosexuals and other groups as "sharing their vision of American society." Americans are also least willing to let their children marry atheists.
"It tells us about how Americans view religion," said Penny Edgell, an associate sociology professor and the study's lead researcher. "Many Americans seem to believe some kind of religious faith is central to being a good American and a good person."
It is the first in a series of national studies conducted by the American Mosaic Project, a three-year project that looks at race, religion and cultural diversity in the United States.
- - - - - - - - BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Usually when you reply to a post, it's because your comment has something to do with the post...
- BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1We research both types of technology, offensive and defensive. It's ridiculous to say that an army should only have armor, with no weapons.
- BIllyBobFett, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It won't help in those cases, but it will in actual urban fighting like Fallujah.
- wibblewibble, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3How about some precision technology that helps them find their chairs in the UN.
We do not need OFFENSIVE technologies, if you claim to be "defending" then do it with ANTI OFFENSIVE technology, this is not defensive, its offensive. Defending means you protect yourself from "incomming" weapons, so what about this anti missile shield, that I can accept, this I cannot. - Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3The Iraq war is the most networked, technological war we've ever fought. It allowed us to completely overwhelm a late-'50s era Iraqi military armed with Soviet tanks in short order. However, no matter how good the tech, it still doesn't know whether one guy is a suicide bomber or a sniper and another is a guy getting his kid from school or a woman going to buy some bread. Rumsfeld's "new military" still needs somebody other than fools in command.
If it can help people in hurricanes, that's good. Most of all, a new administration is required. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Canadians -- we're looking at you! ;)
- VSKBadCRC, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Let me guess... This precision technology involves linking the world's PS3's together to create a virtual super computer?
- Edmundo, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5Obviously you don't have any.
- cplusplus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0If only they knew which Iraq people were the enemies.
- tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -5/+2Im still confused why they are using state of the art technology in guerilla warfare. What good will this do when the enemy is just driving a civilian car packed with explosives and parks it out in front of a store? Or the one guy who runs into a crowded area with a bomb strapped to his back?
- MikeMacMan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1I wonder how long it will be until the first video game based on this comes out... "Be a forward observer... call in your own air strikes!"
- josegutz, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"A New Precision Technology: Helps US Combat Troops Pinpoint Enemy"
Full Spectrum Warrior? - approxinfinity, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2Anyone who wants to work for our government's "intelligence" agencies needs a security clearance (scalpel? check. anal flashlight? check.) Unfortunately, there isnt a bevy of clean cut, brilliant, worldly people in this country to stock the ranks.
How many can say both "I haven't tried anything" and "I understand everything"
Add several dozen layers of beaurocratic ***** and that should be a good indicator of how quality our "intelligence" is. - bling4mm, on 10/12/2007, -4/+0lol
- riverside71, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1all this is great when fighting piss poor nations who don't even have an airforce, let alone air defence systems.. let's see the bravery fighting real armies who can actually fire back..
- caleb4mj, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3Its not just in the news. Talk to your grandmother lately? Mine is a devout christian and she believes socialists, atheists and gays are just as sinful as terrorists.
These aren't rocket scientists we're talking about. They're simple folk without much education to help them think for themselves instead of believing whatever Fox News says.
The main difference I see between Fundamental Chrstians and Fundamentalist Musilims is the muslims are willing to blow themselves up to kill their enemies. So Christians, IMO, are just cowards and fools. Unless, of course, they're right. But how will they ever prove it without creating armageddon?
If you gave a christian the bomb that could destroy the world and asked them to prove to you God exists, I bet they'd blow up the world and claim it was revelations. - rockefeller, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3This is just propaganda. The bombs may be precise, but how about the intelligence?
Even G.W. admitted that the intelligence for going to war was flawed. Do you think the intelligence being used to determine whether to kill "Joe Raghead who looks like he's planting an IDE" is any better? - tont0r, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0Apparently thinking like that gets you dugg down.
- rockefeller, on 10/12/2007, -5/+0oops IED, not IDE.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Why bother? Poor and middle class people are the cheapest renewable resources on the planet.
- dadrew1, on 10/12/2007, -28/+22That means that 7 brave heroes died so that you can freely say whatever you want to say about our gov't and just what you think about any war we participate in.
That also means that 70 Arabian people died defending their cause, which just so happens to be to kill anyone that isn't Muslim. Which I just so happen to be, not Muslim. - Sukino, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Does it aim at the White House or something?
-
Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is