Article

2008-09-23 Iraq

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2008-09-23 11:56|| || Front Page|| [10325 views ] Top

#1 These things work very well. They are an excellent non-lethal device and the only one that has significant range (other than the very expensive Active Denial System and the dazzler has much greater range). These will actually save lives and seperate those whose intent is to do harm (GWB: evildoers) from the innocents.

Posted by remoteman 2008-09-23 12:46|| 2008-09-23 12:46|| Front Page Top

#2 "Hey, these aren't the 1-megawatt pulse laser rifles we were promised!"

Posted by mojo">mojo 2008-09-23 12:55|| 2008-09-23 12:55|| Front Page Top

#3 When Al Q gets them I suppose their dazzlers with shoot red beams.

Also I wonder if they will buzz.

Posted by mhw 2008-09-23 13:05|| 2008-09-23 13:05|| Front Page Top

#4 This adds a new dimension to land warfare. Polarized goggles now necessary to function on the modern battlefield. You need earplugs to block the screamer devices, and thick clothing to block the microwave heat devices. The combat exoskeleton seems to be evolving naturally.

Posted by gromky 2008-09-23 13:31|| 2008-09-23 13:31|| Front Page Top

#5 Gromky, thick clothing does nothing to stop the active denial system. You'll still be jumpin, only sweating more.

Posted by remoteman 2008-09-23 13:42|| 2008-09-23 13:42|| Front Page Top

#6 This will be quickly discontinued, because it creates a bad precedent. Some years ago, a proposed aircraft device that scanned like the electron beam in a TV tube was quietly banned internationally, because anyone who looked at the aircraft would be instantly, and permanently blinded.

A weapon too dreadful to use, or even talk about.

Posted by Anonymoose 2008-09-23 13:42|| 2008-09-23 13:42|| Front Page Top

#7 "A weapon too dreadful to use, or even talk about."

You mean like an IED or an EFP?

Posted by MarkZ 2008-09-23 13:58|| 2008-09-23 13:58|| Front Page Top

#8 For an innocent a dazzle or temporary blindness is much better than a 50 cal through the windshield. I will admit the PR and anti-war types will probably go nuts. The lawyers have probably already vetted this or it would not have been fielded.

Posted by tipover 2008-09-23 14:00|| 2008-09-23 14:00|| Front Page Top

#9 This laser dazzler is eye-safe. It does not permanently blind anyone. It has been vetted and approved.

The advantage of the green dazzler is that it is very visible evenduring daylight. Again, it is an excellent warning device that is not likely to be discontinued.

Posted by remoteman 2008-09-23 14:25|| 2008-09-23 14:25|| Front Page Top

#10 Think about this:

The Geneva Convention bans weapons mean't to cause permanent blindness but allows weapons that can kill, or maim (VEID's, IED's) or cause massive casualties such as bombs.

Posted by Jack is Back!">Jack is Back! 2008-09-23 14:29|| 2008-09-23 14:29|| Front Page Top

#11 Why is this news? They outfitted the sharks with lazers years ago ...

Posted by Adriane 2008-09-23 14:52|| 2008-09-23 14:52|| Front Page Top

#12 A weapon too dreadful to use, or even talk about.

LMAO!

It's called WAY OVER THE TOP Mooses.

:)

Posted by Red Dawg">Red Dawg 2008-09-23 15:49|| 2008-09-23 15:49|| Front Page Top

#13 Do they have a stun and vaporise like a Phasor on Star Trek. That would be usuful. "Halt! - oops wrong setting"

Posted by Chief 2008-09-23 15:51|| 2008-09-23 15:51|| Front Page Top

#14 Just don't cross the streams. And #3 when they do they'll snap, crackle, and pop!

Posted by AlmostAnonymous5839">AlmostAnonymous5839 2008-09-23 16:18|| 2008-09-23 16:18|| Front Page Top

#15 Red Dawg: not really. The major powers have lots of weapons they don't talk about and don't use, because they are not particularly hard to fabricate and could be very ugly if used by tin pot dictators or terrorists.

Do you think for a moment that Chavez would hesitate to use lasers to blind? Kim Jong Il? So the major powers are careful not to let such kooks get their hands on such toys or even mention them to them. Sure, they are open source, but they avoid talking about them.

Among the major powers it is also understood that while Geneva may be ineffective at banning them, their use will be regarded as an escalation, which could get ugly in a hurry. If one of our combat battalions suddenly goes blind after the fly by of a Russian aircraft, half the Russian navy might suddenly develop large, acute leaks in their hulls.

Posted by Anonymoose 2008-09-23 17:33|| 2008-09-23 17:33|| Front Page Top

#16 Wouldn't an eyepatch at least protect one eye if these were suspected on the battlefield?

Sounds like the dazzle/temporary feature is the key. Anyone using versions with permanent effects is just opening the door to all sorts of unanticipated ugliness - not a good move.

Posted by Halliburton - Asymmetrical Reply Division 2008-09-23 19:17|| 2008-09-23 19:17|| Front Page Top

#17 ROLF!

Posted by Red Dawg">Red Dawg 2008-09-23 19:26|| 2008-09-23 19:26|| Front Page Top

23:48 CrazyFool
23:37 JosephMendiola
22:57 Gerthudion Glaith5839
22:56 Ho Chi Hupailing9508
22:51 OldSpook
22:32 Abdominal Snowman
22:22 bigjim-ky
22:10 Chuck Simmins
21:59 JosephMendiola
21:58 OldSpook
21:52 Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo)
21:43 JosephMendiola
21:39 3dc
21:36 JosephMendiola
21:29 JosephMendiola
21:22 Free Radical
21:15 JosephMendiola
21:07 JosephMendiola
21:07 Besoeker
21:06 Ptah
21:02 Red Dawg
20:53 JosephMendiola
20:50 Old Patriot
20:49 Red Dawg