Skip to comments.MORE ON WARLOCK'S TRICKS [U.S. remotely detonates IED's and incoming enemy mortar rounds in Iraq]
Posted on 11/29/2004 11:01:47 PM PST by Southack
click here to read article
Amazing how the defense contractors can invent this stuff that really works.
The information on the anti-IED and anti-mortar product is useful, but sadly, Defense Tech is wildly anti-Bush due to a personal relationship with Spencer Abraham, among others...
So why are we telling everyone???
Spencer Abraham the soon to be former Energy Secretary? Is he anti-Bush? Am I missing something here?
So, this is one of the toys I'll get to play with, once I get in theater!
The ingenuity of the terrorist, versus the innovation of a motivated entrepreneur - guess who wins every time?
That dark blanket is there to keep the enemy from adapting it weapons to defeat our countermeasures and THAT is the real issue.
Any countermeasure detail is information that can be used by an opposing engineer.
Ask Bin Laden about his sattelite phone and whether he uses it anymore. What he didn't know was very dangerous to him.
Has something been developed to counter the car alarms being used to trigger booby-trapped vehicles?
Here's another idea. The "insurgents" use cell phones as triggers. When a cell phone is turned on, it has to ping a tower to let the system know where it is. Have the system call back everyone when they turn on their phone. If it's a bomb, it will explode - in the terrorist's hands. Good for one or two tries before they catch on.
I missed the farmer example. Still, I agree -- product and research development secrecy has VERY serious flaws. Not only do you shut out a lot of very smart, cunning and out-of-the-box thinking folks -- but you fortify the castles of the incompentent. The technically incompetent and uninspired are quick as all get out to realize the value of project secrecy in terms of (1) protecting their jobs by radically limiting the client's available market, (2) as a lever applied against the competent to remove them by shutting them out of key information and thereby allowing false charges of incompetence and/or inability to be brought against even the most competent, and (3) to preclude accountibility for failure, schedule overrrun, and incomptence. Once the technically incompetent, yet politically shrewd, learn this they can be quite adept and potent at empowering and enriching themselves while buggering the rest of us.
We kinda inferred the existance of these devices, what, about 3 or 4 years ago?
"THERE'S MORE: Shhh! Keep quiet when you're reading Steven Aftergood's Slate story on why airport screeners don't have to tell you what law they're relying on to give you the pat-down"
A quick fix to this whole "pat-down" problem would be if we could Pick from a team of Pat-Downers who we would like to pat us down.
Of course then the only objection would be that they didn't "finish" or pat us down enough...........
Yeah, that was great. Marcinko was riding through Beirut with the device running, and blowing up bomb factories they got near. Sadly, the diplomats at the embassy wouldn't let them use it there, allowing the marines guarding it to be vulnerable. According to his version of events.
Well, we hope you get to play with it.
Were you here when they tested ShortStop?
They may also be looking at agile jammers...
Thanks for the post.
It is amazing how the enemies of America have wrapped the flag around themselves, then burrow into a defense industry, and then work 24/7 to expose our tech secrets to minimize their effectiveness.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.