Users who Dugg This
Jason Lankow
16767 Followers
Jason Lankow
16767 Followers
Ali Qayyum
4890 Followers
Ali Qayyum
4890 Followers
bobosmitor
5469 Followers
bobosmitor
5469 Followers
Lt Gen Panda
17115 Followers
Lt Gen Panda
17115 Followers
socketassaultJul 25, 2010
Seems like it would be effective. Too bad. :/
m0og0oJul 26, 2010
It probably killed someone and thus is counter to its "safe weapon" status
crunchydeluxeJul 26, 2010
Did I miss a memo? Since when are weapons supposed to be "safe"?
crazyhorse13Jul 26, 2010
Sometimes you want to disable someone without killing them.
Why else would you use a vehicle-mounted pain ray instead of just shooting them?
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
Or friendly fire.
shawn4168Jul 26, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
neutron7Jul 26, 2010
doesn't kill enough mooslims, whats the point of war you cant kill them?
/christian reich
crunchydeluxeJul 26, 2010
It's Muslim, you f**k.
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
It was a joke, you f**k.
d4rk354b3rJul 26, 2010
That sort of a nonlethal weapon seemed like it would be effective for crowd control and dispersal but not quite so on the battlefield.
It's kind of clunky.
waitasecJul 26, 2010
Typical engagement range in Afghanistan is 500+ meters. Even if you got the people to the right place they'd still be too far away. This was only ever going to be useful for crowd control and Vietnam style firebase over-runs.
rmxzJul 26, 2010
Torture (which this is) usually "seems like" it would be effective at first glance; until you realize that it has a major side effect of making people hate you more.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
supurcellJul 26, 2010
This is torture as much as tear gas is torture.
weaksnycJul 26, 2010
I literally just watched Modern Marvels (as in, 10 minutes ago) that featured this weapon. They "shot" it at willing participants who were fine afterward, and it looked pretty damn effective at crowd disbursement to me.
Closed AccountJul 25, 2010
They should leave it in there. It's a beautiful piece of weaponry that will save lives.
trashyamericanJul 26, 2010
hah, us troops saving lives. now that's funny.
kennpetersJul 26, 2010
f**k you.
I said it. No regrets, no apologies.
Regardless of what *ANYONE* thinks of the whole Middle East/Afghanistan/Taliban situation, there are hundreds of thousands of people there locked in a conflict. Each and every one of them is there in support of their country's ideals, regardless of the reasons their country sent them.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
tapiocashineJul 26, 2010
Taking it out was the smart thing to do. Think about it; we've already had problems with troops going nuts and hurting innocent people. What would those guys do if they had a weapon that caused extreme pain, but never left a mark and never killed?
ADS is a license to torture, and the commanders know you can't trust /anyone/ with that sort of power.
superflyyJul 25, 2010
Sounds like it microwaves people.
crashkinkaideJul 25, 2010
They realized that causing pain to a group of people is less humane than killing them. =/
negative4Jul 26, 2010
^
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
so thats why cops shoot instead of going for the taser.
charlotte_webJul 26, 2010
They found something even more painful... they're showing "The Last Airbender" in all of the Afghani theaters.
theother1Jul 26, 2010
It's actually a double feature with Ishtar as the second film.
clippclopJul 26, 2010
They switching to "The Last Airbender' in an effort to stop actually killing everyone with "Twilight: Eclipse"
myztryJul 26, 2010
If we put living things "out of their misery" by killing them then wouldn't this equate to putting them "into their misery" by not killing them?
alraheemJul 25, 2010
bad news
beratebirthersJul 25, 2010
A step forwards towards the realization that ALL violence never ultimately solves anything.
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
This war may be pointless, but there have certainly been times where violence solved the problem, World War 2 for example.
beratebirthersJul 26, 2010
Wrong there. Hitler is an easy scapegoat. You have to look at the situation in context.
http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/01/11/oliver-stone-says-hitler-is-an-easy-scapegoat/
It was WWI that created WWII. Violence begets violence.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
Of course the Nazi movement was born out of some of the chaos in post war Germany (A war, for the record, they also started). All movements are born out of their climates and circumstances. My point was simply that using violence certainly stopped Germany and Japan and ultimately led to Europe being much more stable in the end.
That Oliver Stone quote is just idiotic.
kithkatulJul 26, 2010
Everybody is a product of a series of actions. Understanding the how and the why of a person's actions does not excuse them.
leezusJul 26, 2010
But then you could say that WWII begat the Cold War which shaped America's foreign policy which lead us directly the conflicts Iraq and Afghanistan.
Oh God. I think we've stumbled on to something. It's like time follows a path, and everything is caused by the thing before. Like a line of time; or a Time.....LINE!
tovarish22Jul 26, 2010
WWII didn't beget the Cold War at all. America's misplaced fear of a system unlike their own caused it. They saw communism as an affront to American life, despite no communist nation every threatening them, and then decided it was in their best interests to invade any nation that became communist, other than Russia, of course.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
hipmanJul 26, 2010
I love revisionist historians.
trexorJul 26, 2010
Who funded the building of Nazi Germany? American and international corporations, the US tax payer, and a little pinch of help from Prescot Bush.
beratebirthersJul 26, 2010
@tovarish: It was in the best interest OF THE BANKERS to make sure people saw money as necessary to life. How is a new political paradigm supposed to work if it gets attacked from a worldwide contingent of attackers from its very existence?
khirzaskJul 26, 2010
Some say the best weapon is the one you never have to fire. I disagree. I prefer the one you only have to fire ONCE.
41k1d0k4Jul 26, 2010
worked in hiroshima... oh wait.
charlotte_webJul 26, 2010
That's how Dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far.
otterpJul 26, 2010
Berate, yes, its much better for them to disperse them with the current method: bullets.
beratebirthersJul 26, 2010
Or we could try dialogue. Obama did that on healthcare and he got a bipartisan bill passed.
charlotte_webJul 26, 2010
>> Obama did that on healthcare and he
>> got a bipartisan bill passed.
What are you smoking?
Obama IGNORED the Republicans for most of the year during the healthcare debate.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
charlotte_webJul 26, 2010
BTW, how's that "dialogue" working out with Iran? Have they stopped their nuclear program yet?
charlotte_webJul 26, 2010
>> A step forwards towards the realization
>> that ALL violence never ultimately solves
>> anything.
Ever hear of "Pax Romana"?
gamerxr72Jul 26, 2010
Violence is an appropriate solution to violence in my opinion.
charlotte_webJul 26, 2010
Unfortunately, yep. How can you have a rational discourse with irrational people?
beratebirthersJul 26, 2010
"How can you have a rational discourse with irrational people?"
Barack Obama did it with the Republicans and got a bipartisan healthcare bill through.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ouzeJul 26, 2010
Solved Carthage pretty well.
ghostalkerJul 25, 2010
Does it work too well or something? Why the hell WOULDN'T they want this thing in a war zone?
asus3000Jul 26, 2010
They need them back in the U.S. for the coming economic disaster and ensuing riots.
differentangleJul 25, 2010
"The ADS, which has been in development for almost 20 years, works by firing a beam of high-frequency waves at the speed of light."
Probably because it's firing light.
dsmxJul 25, 2010
No it is firing EM radiation.
differentangleJul 25, 2010
EM radiation === light
dsmxJul 26, 2010
Light as we call it is a tiny portion of the EM spectrum, as I recall this device fires off microwaves which aren't visible to the naked eye and can't be called light as a result.
grovest4lifeJul 26, 2010
Just because its not in the visible light spectrum doesn't mean its not light, its just at a lower wavelength than infrared light.
otterpJul 26, 2010
@dsmx, actually the term "visible light" meets your definition, and the word "visible" in the phrase differentiates it from other non-visible light, such as infrared light.
92235Jul 26, 2010
I was always told "light" was only the spectrum that we can see. Red to Violet. Could have been told wrong though
kevverJul 26, 2010
ALL EM radiation moves at the speed of light. That statement was written to make it sound cool.
crunchydeluxeJul 26, 2010
I hate to sound like a pompous ass, but I am.
Anyway, you're all wrong. EM != light. "Light" is a concept that predates the understanding of the entire electromagnetic spectrum, and its adoption into scientific literature has only confused the matter. c is the speed of electromagnetic waves (and/or massless particles such as photons). The word "light" has been clumsily handled, with some physicists accepting it as a scientific term, and others using merely as a colloquialism to describe *visible* light. Technically, we should actually be referring to it as "visible EM". It's something of a "square is a rectangle, but a rectangle isn't a square" deal.
I don't typically dwell on such pedantry, but as this thread opened that can of worms, I just figured we should get our facts straight.
ethanleducJul 26, 2010
Wow boys, way to bury the guy who spoke the truth the first time.
nitroburnJul 26, 2010
Light -Noun
a.
Also called luminous energy, radiant energy. electromagnetic radiation to which the organs of sight react, ranging in wavelength from about 400 to 700 nm and propagated at a speed of 186,282 mi./sec (299,972 km/sec), considered variously as a wave, corpuscular, or quantum phenomenon.
b.
a similar form of radiant energy that does not affect the retina, as ultraviolet or infrared rays.
liquidramJul 26, 2010
@Crunchy Delux: Your statement about photons contractions you other points.
A photon is a quantum of light, or the smallest possible packet of light at a given wavelength. It is emitted by an atom during a transition from one energy state to another.
Microwaves are light, radio waves are light, infra red is light (humans emit light which is why they can be seen on thermal imaging), UV spectrum is light... it's all light, we just can't see it naturally.
If a sound is too high or low for the human ear to hear is it still a sound? Come on guys... learn some science. Visible light or spectrum is the correct term that narrows it down to human vision.
crunchydeluxeJul 26, 2010
I really didn't contradict anything. Photos are force carriers for electromagnetism. Calling it a unit of "light" is --as I said-- something of a misnomer. It's based solely on the fact that the visible spectrum was (quite obviously) discovered and described long before an understanding of the electromagnetic process was developed.
If the electromagnetic spectrum (in its entirety) was well known and understood BEFORE the word "light" was used, then there wouldn't be a problem. As it is, "light" is a word that originally described the properties of the "visible" spectrum as seen out of the larger context. As a result, it's rather inaccurate to use this word to describe other levels of the spectrum, for which it was never intended.
I suppose I'm still not explaining it well, so think about it this way: Would you say that the visible spectrum is made of X-rays, or radio waves? Each term describes a certain range of wavelengths, and "light" is best left to describe only the visible spectrum.
Basically, "light" is anywhere from 400 - 780nm on the spectrum. increase the wavelength, and you get into IR and above. Decrease, and you get into UV and below. Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
jabbrwockeyJul 26, 2010
HURR DURR THE SUN EMITS LIGHT SO IT CAN'T BE EM BECAUSE THE SUN HAS BEEN AROUND BEFORE SCIENCE DERP DERR
liquidramJul 26, 2010
@CrunchyDeluxe: So using your logic, it's not actually a sound wave unless we can actually hear it?
I disagree; and so does the dictionary.
light
.
a. Also called luminous energy, radiant energy. electromagnetic radiation to which the organs of sight react, ranging in wavelength from about 400 to 700 nm and propagated at a speed of 186,282 mi./sec (299,972 km/sec), considered variously as a wave, corpuscular, or quantum phenomenon.
b. A similar form of radiant energy that does not affect the retina, as ultraviolet or infrared rays.
liquidramJul 26, 2010
f**k are you guys too stupid to even pick up a f**king dictionary? Light can be invisible. Bunch of morons.
errorsJul 26, 2010
I actually logged in to post this, so someone better f**king read it.. You have visible light, invisible light and the rest of the em spectrum. Call it whatever the hell you want to confuse people, sound smart, whatever.. but that's how most of the world, scientific community and idiot community alike, view it.
Get over it.. we get it, you understand they're all part of the EM spectrum, we all understand on the most basic level they could be considered light.. but until science finds an animal SEES microwaves in their natural 'color', I'm not f**king calling microwaves light. That's just common sense..
again.. to us humans, it's 'visible light', 'invisible light' (or infared and uv) and 'the rest of the EM spectrum',
I have spoken!
crunchydeluxeJul 27, 2010
@LiquidRam:
I already addressed the second part of the definition, but I'll repeat myself once again for you.
"Your second definition is dicey at best. IR and UV certainly do have more properties in common with the visible spectrum than Gamma or Radio waves, and thus, the terminology "UV light" and "IR light" are grudgingly acceptable, but by no means preferred. As stated earlier, the attachment of the word "light" to every wave frequency is a colloquialism -- it favors the easy understanding of the basic principles by laymen such as yourself."
Besides, a dictionary definition is built on the evolution of colloquialisms. If you'd like to argue the definition of "light" within its EM context, as it's defined by physicists? Good luck. The semantics bulls**t you're trying to push won't fly.
I do have a yes/no question for you: Do you have X-ray vision?
otterpJul 26, 2010
dsmx, actually the term "visible light" meets your definition, and the word "visible" in the phrase differentiates it from other non-visible light, such as infrared light.
mwrlJul 25, 2010
The system works great, but the range isn't enough to be useful.
knightkrawlerJul 26, 2010
FTA: "The beam can hit someone up to a third of a mile away"
That seems like a pretty good range.
vladiggerputinJul 26, 2010
You're correct, most engagements in Afghanistan occur at ranges up to 500 meters. However, many of those fights take place in terrain and locations which would be inaccessible to the ADS.
If you want more information, Army Major Thomas Ehrhart authored a monograph entitled "Increasing Small Arms Lethality in Afghanistan: Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer". It's a wealth of information on the current combat situations that troops are facing in Afghanistan.
You can find it here: http://www.scribd.com/doc/27765477/Increasing-Small-Arms-Lethality-in-Afghanistan-Taking-Back-the-Infantry-Half-Kilometer
creationismlolJul 26, 2010
It's probably more of a hippy cannon than anything.
americangunnerJul 26, 2010
That was the nickname of my penis in high school.
erkokiteJul 26, 2010
Why- because it's made of electromagnetic waves and has physical body?
erkokiteJul 26, 2010
SON OF A BITCH HOW DID I F**K THAT UP?
khirzaskJul 26, 2010
Might wanna get that checked out, dude.
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
I think antibiotics will clear that up.
ancientdinkoJul 26, 2010
cuz you stuck it in a guy name Ray?
compositesenseJul 26, 2010
TOO FUNNY !
morningloriiJul 26, 2010
That's funny whether you're referring to "Pain Ray" or "Afghan War Zone"!
slade605Jul 26, 2010
or Active Denial System.
reedmon29Jul 26, 2010
@morninglorii - Or, better yet, "Active Denial System"
morningloriiJul 26, 2010
I can't tell which of these is funnier!
creationismlolJul 26, 2010
I guess that's why they say they are "withdrawing the pain ray:"
tomtutsJul 26, 2010
Aww, it's like a little frightened turtle...
xdynabladeJul 26, 2010
Did you have to pull that out, too?
moussifJul 26, 2010
The U.S testing weapons on brown people once again, this isn't news.
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
They withdrew it so they could set it up at various locations in the U.S. as the recession starts to double dip.
/tinfoil hat
cakecakecake2Jul 26, 2010
you're going to need a lot more than just a hat when they turn this sucker on you
crazyhorse13Jul 26, 2010
Yeah, like a mirror.
brad3378Jul 26, 2010
He's right.
Our African born president is going to use this against us and then nurse us back to health with Obamacare!
Oh the humanity!
Wake Up Sheeple!!!!!
Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
moussifJul 26, 2010
The U.S testing new weapons on civilians once again... this isn't news seriously.
glassagateJul 26, 2010
This weapon doesn't do any harm to the people. They're not testing a new
weapon, they're using a new weapon, one that is harmless.
ruthlesspirateJul 26, 2010
Alright let me put you in a giant microwave and see how it feels. Might hurt a little but hey, it'll be harmless in the long run
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
So you would rather be shot?
ruthlesspirateJul 26, 2010
Yes I would, I'd take a bullet over a pain ray frying my skin any day.
glassagateJul 26, 2010
All that it did was caused a burning sensation to the skin.
It's a deterrent.
overridemymindJul 26, 2010
"Testing weapons on civilians again"
Wow... just... wow.
1 - it's been tested repeatedly back in the States before ever being deployed.
2 - it's a NONLETHAL weapon -- designed to, you know, PREVENT civilian casualties.
kingbpdJul 26, 2010
One Boombox and a Justin Bieber CD,problem solved.
tovarish22Jul 26, 2010
A boombox can change the world, but you gotta know your limits with a boombox.
foamatorJul 26, 2010
A BOOMBOX IS NOT A TOY!
jollywalrusJul 26, 2010
THIS WAS A CAUTIONARY TALE
kingbpdJul 26, 2010
So many types of people will never get along
Till I bust out my boombox and play this song..
andyd273Jul 26, 2010
That wouldn't be focused enough. You would get friendly casualties with that method.
Needs a highly directional speaker, just don't walk into the sound beam on pain of Bieber.
gobstopper45Jul 26, 2010
I wonder what this would be like a bondage situation?
I'd be the guinea pig, assuming there isn't any lasting damage.
bjornskiJul 26, 2010
If you like pain, this might be your thing.
gobstopper45Jul 26, 2010
I like pain the sexual settings, not in a normal setting
bjornskiJul 26, 2010
Well, if you find being covered in napalm to be a sexual thing, go for it.
hubrisJul 26, 2010
Seems this would be more beneficial to dealing with protesters who have a specific place they are trying to stand near - rather than individuals hiding around rocks for miles.
bjornskiJul 26, 2010
Exactly. It's a weapon intended to be used on civilians.
cajungator3Jul 26, 2010
Yeah but can you f**k it?
werehuskyJul 26, 2010
It's the other way around.
creationismlolJul 26, 2010
Only if you have a infra red blocking vagina.
vostokJul 26, 2010
I'm guessing they found out people in the middle of a crowd can't get out. It works great at motivating people to move, but if they can't it's effectively like standing in microwave, if you stand there to long you will actually explode, no joke.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
toxicshokJul 26, 2010
Incorrect. The frequencies used are not true microwaves. They are only able to penetrate the skin by about a 1/32 of an inch. This is just enough to heat the area where pain receptors are located but not to damage internal organs.
stabbityJul 26, 2010
Wait, what about the eyes? Isn't there a possibility of damage?
theother1Jul 26, 2010
"Isn't there a possibility of damage?"
It is a f**king war zone...
cawfeeJul 26, 2010
If it actually made people explode I don't think they would've pulled it
soloroneJul 26, 2010
They will use it, when and if, it gets down to a portable size.
seanaybJul 26, 2010
does it run crysis?
ancientdinkoJul 26, 2010
I think because turning insurgents into pizza pockets is bad PR at this particular juncture
kevverJul 26, 2010
The local police will probably be using (and abusing) a version of this device in a few years.
chileangodJul 26, 2010
"Don't painray me bro!"
morningloriiJul 26, 2010
But will it blend?
scabnabbitJul 26, 2010
Be interesting to find out if it was a "wonder weapon" that just wasn't viable when deployed.
I'd imagine the people deployed have a pretty short tolerance for that sort of thing.
moderntenshiJul 26, 2010
"Sorry, boys, but it just doesn't kill anything. Get back to me when it makes 'em hot enough they explode, like when you put one o'em microwave buhreetos in for too long, hyeh hyeh hyeh."
tgc1Jul 26, 2010
They must have fried some people over there or something. I'm telling you. Someone was probably not keeping track of the settings and didn't notice it was set to 11 and wammo. Someone got extra crispy, in 30 seconds or less.
r00fusJul 26, 2010
You mean like the bodies that were sliced in Iraq?:
http://www.democracynow.org/2006/7/25/u_s_broadcast_exclusive_star_wars
chijim70Jul 26, 2010
Holy crap 1 meter tall afterward... IT'S A SHRINK RAY!
tenderloveponyJul 26, 2010
Apparently you missed the COMINTERN.
xeddJul 26, 2010
Looks like a huge target. It's probably so easy to hit with a single RPG.
BOOM! ... out of operation.
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
You wouldn't want to hurt anyone now would you?
trentdeuxJul 26, 2010
Yeah its not like those Taliban go around producing snuff videos, they are really respectful combatants.
ivanmarshJul 26, 2010
Yeah... we should start firing into crowds of unarmed people that we aren't sure are combatants or not like the Chinese. U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!
twigboyJul 26, 2010
There seems to be alot of war articles on digg lately ...
ecoreJul 26, 2010
Something makes me question the science behind how it doesn't leave any lasting effects.
alienufoJul 26, 2010
50 years ago, cigarettes didn't cause cancer
fifteenstepperJul 26, 2010
Why is the amount of money expressed in pounds?
Closed AccountJul 26, 2010
b/c that's what they use for money in the uk.
/the world isn't america
theother1Jul 26, 2010
That's the whole metric system thing.
theother1Jul 26, 2010
That's the whole metric system thing.
fifteenstepperJul 26, 2010
Screw you guys. It's an American weapon.
mypovertyJul 26, 2010
And you are reading it from a British website so they are using pounds.
notmanJul 26, 2010
Probably because people there are already use to unbearable heat
needcoffeeJul 26, 2010
Guessing Geneva convention issues stepped in. It's a tough one, sounds horrible to me, but as others have mentioned if it immobilizes someone that is probably better than outright shooting them.
Wish there was more details. It does sound like a low form of microwave, if so how can it not cause permanent damage.
l0nerJul 26, 2010
Big slow moving target
nitroburnJul 26, 2010
I have one of these.
It's called a microwave with the door left open
davidtcJul 26, 2010
"The beam can cover a person’s entire body, causing agonising pain as it heats water and fat molecules beneath the skin’s surface."
That's the problem. The people there are so skinny and dehydrated the weapon wouldn't work on them.
ivanmarshJul 26, 2010
...because it's now field tested and ready to be deployed in American cities.
jahtari1Jul 26, 2010
This is not the first time this weapon has been deployed by the U.S. The people of Panama are already quite familiar with it....
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-446387292666223710#
cyber2uallJul 26, 2010
Time to bring it home so we can start using it against home-grown terrorists. You know the ones... they're everywhere.
str3amaJul 26, 2010
They're bringing it back so that it can be used on the real criminals, politicians.
harpoonhank420Jul 26, 2010
This seems like the type of weapon that would really f**k with someone who's brain is stuck in the 6th century
brokowskiJul 26, 2010
Violence has solved many problems actually.
skeloothJul 26, 2010
Because it's a mobile torture device.
lennybirdJul 26, 2010
They're too impractical; from what I understand, crowd dispersal isn't an issue over there.
abadoxxJul 26, 2010
This account has been closed by the user
asus3000Jul 26, 2010
They probably think they need them back in the U.S. for the coming economic collapse and riots that will ensue.
wengyangJul 26, 2010
this was used on the "Hulk"