The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. That CAN'T be true!
  4. Should weapons be tested on civilians before battlefield use?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Should weapons be tested on civilians before battlefield use?

  • 2 Replies
  • 6360 Views
  • 3 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Hadrian (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 2180
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • Scallywag
Should weapons be tested on civilians before battlefield use?
« on: 15/09/2006 18:49:08 »
September 12, 2006  CNN

<font face="Comic Sans MS"><font color="green"><b><font size="5">Air Force chief: Test weapons on testy U.S. mobs</font id="size5"></b>

<font size="4">WASHINGTON (AP) -- Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before being used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.

The object is basically public relations. Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions from others about possible safety considerations, said Secretary Michael Wynne.

"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne. "(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."</font id="size4"></font id="green"></font id="Comic Sans MS">

More: <font size="1">http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/09/12/usaf.weapons.ap/index.html</font id="size1">

<i><center><font size="1"><font color="blue">What you do speaks so loudly that I cannot hear what you say. </font id="blue"></font id="size1"></center></i>
« Last Edit: 27/07/2017 09:45:20 by chris »
Logged
 



Offline Gaia

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 397
  • Activity:
    0%
Re: Should weapons be tested on civilians before battlefield use?
« Reply #1 on: 15/09/2006 18:59:48 »
Not as far fetched as it sounds. I believe that many years ago they (the US authorities) released radioactive gas over the US to track its dispersion!

Then there's all the guck that they (and we) put in fast food and feed their/our own peeps and in other countries.

Gaia  xxx
Logged
Gaia  xxx

"Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience." Anon.
 

Offline Karen W.

  • Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *****
  • 31886
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 41 times
  • "come fly with me"
Re: Should weapons be tested on civilians before battlefield use?
« Reply #2 on: 15/09/2006 19:03:36 »
Curious? Is not a weapon intended to injure? I am confused!

Karen
Logged

"Life is not measured by the number of Breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away."
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: weapons  / battlefield  / civilians 
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.282 seconds with 34 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.