Comments on: Marines to Pentagon: We need a freaky deaky airborne death ray, stat

By: sdd

sdd — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 15:32:24 +0000

I’m concerned about the Earth! Won’t the use of this weapon leave at least two carbon footprints? (Unless, the raghead is standing on one foot of course).

By: Ryan Gandy

Ryan Gandy — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 14:11:12 +0000

Exit question: Isn’t this weapon likely to be … counterproductive in a counterinsurgency setting? Our success lately comes from building trust with the locals. Demonstrating a godlike power to light any one of them on fire from 50,000 feet before they knew what hit them would seem to, er, cut against that.

Heck, if that thing can light Pakistan, Tora Bora or w/e the walking douche bag that was responsible for 9/11 is, I’m all for it.

By: woodcdi

woodcdi — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 13:53:58 +0000

Hmmm – Instead of a border fence…

Woody

By: EckerNet.Com » Blog Archive » The Coolest Thing You Will Read Today

EckerNet.Com » Blog Archive » The Coolest Thing You Will Read Today — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:24:22 +0000

[...] [H/T : HotAir] [...]

By: 91Veteran

91Veteran — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 05:24:10 +0000

91Vet, the pain ray, the “active denial system” is still in development (I think). But, too bad, the Air Force cancelled the “gay bomb” … now THAT woulda been funny!

Tony737 on December 4, 2007 at 7:00 AM

It’s been tested (I think it was in Future Weapons or something, they had guys volunteering to get zapped) and I read an article within the past two months in which the military in Iraq was requesting it be sent, but the Pentagon chose not to send it….because of their lawyers.

By: Dork B.

Dork B. — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 02:56:54 +0000

But will it fit on the head of a shark? Hmmmm?

robblefarian on December 3, 2007 at 3:18 PM

Heh – I think they should name it the Alan Parsons Project (finger-quotes)

By: Mike D.

Mike D. — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 21:17:16 +0000

Love the Star Blazers reference. Used to watch that after school when I was a kid. Derek Wildstar had a touch of teh ghey, though.

By: rightside

rightside — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 19:30:00 +0000

They call it the broiler.
(grill lines not included)

By: Frozen Tex

Frozen Tex — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 19:15:46 +0000

Oh, and I agree with the both of you regarding the Iowas.

By: Frozen Tex

Frozen Tex — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 19:14:24 +0000

Tony737 on December 4, 2007 at 10:19 AM

Ah, of course. I haven’t seen “Star Blazers” since I was 12 or so (along, long time ago). I also remembered reading a novel called “The Ayes of Texas” when I was in junior high, involving the re-fitting of the USS Texas with ultra-modern weaponry, although I don’t remember much of the plotline now.

By: Zorro

Zorro — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 18:56:36 +0000

The question will be “regular or extra crispy”…

By: thejackal

thejackal — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 17:56:28 +0000

Zeus doesn’t need trust when he’s got the thunderbolt.

ScottMcC on December 3, 2007 at 2:47 PM

Quote of the month!

By: Tony737

Tony737 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:19:32 +0000

Tex, never heard of that but we were talkin’ about the cartoon “Star Blazers”. If you’ve never seen the show, it’s in the future, Earth’s fleets have been wiped out by our alien enemy, and we dig up the Japanese battleship Yamato from the floor of the dried up Pacific Ocean. It’s WAY upgraded for space flight but still looks like a WW2 battlewagon.

Our Iowa class ships have been retired, reactivated and retrofitted for Korea, Vietnam and even the Gulf War. How cool would that movie be if we reactivated them one more time? I’d make it a cross between Star Blazers and “Space: Above and Beyond”.

Nick, I agree, the Iowas were the most beautiful ships ever built.

By: Frozen Tex

Frozen Tex — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 15:02:36 +0000

“…Wave Motion Gun.” – Lancer

Now you’re talkin’! And what a great movie THAT would be, huh?

Retired, reactived, retrofitted, retired, reactivated, retrofitted, retired, mothballed and turned into museums … We thought the Iowa Class Battleships were finally retired for good … but we then needed them one … last … time.

Tony737 on December 3, 2007 at 8:10 PM

“The Ayes of Texas”?

By: gajaw999

gajaw999 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 13:48:08 +0000

Downside potential? Hildebeast gets into office, sells the technology to the Chinese to reward campaign donations. The jihadi’s get the technology and start using it against us. I hope the Army plans for anti-laser suits in their future if this technology is deployed. The real exit question is this: What type of world are our children going to be living in 30 or 40 years from now. It makes one shudder. Second exit question: does the second amendment apply to this weapon? LOL

By: Tony737

Tony737 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 12:00:24 +0000

Nick, the retrofit that Lancer and I are talkin’ about are little bit more than squeezin’ through the canel :-)

91Vet, the pain ray, the “active denial system” is still in development (I think). But, too bad, the Air Force cancelled the “gay bomb” … now THAT woulda been funny!

“Achmed, we must keeeel these infidels for allah … but, I feel strangely aroused when I look at you in that robe …”

That’s one friendly fire you REALLY don’t wanna get hit with … I wonder, would ya get kicked outta the service for breakin’ the don’t ask don’t tell policy?

By: Coronagold

Coronagold — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 11:59:43 +0000

When a target is hit, does the song “Popcorn” play while they dance like a marionette?

By: Texas Nick 77

Texas Nick 77 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 11:45:14 +0000

Retired, reactived, retrofitted, retired, reactivated, retrofitted, retired, mothballed and turned into museums … We thought the Iowa Class Battleships were finally retired for good … but we then needed them one … last … time.

Tony737 on December 3, 2007 at 8:10 PM

Those old battlewagons were beautiful. Nothing else has ever floated that was as elegant. But I think nuke powered battleships (BBNs) with laser capabilities, along with the 16″ rifles, would really be awesome. Of course, they’d need the same overall dimensions to fit through the Panama Canal.

By: Texas Nick 77

Texas Nick 77 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 11:36:35 +0000

The more embarrassing the better the “weapon” the better. How about a gun that blows your clothes off?

Agrippa2k on December 3, 2007 at 5:03 PM

How about one that gives them a sex change?

By: Texas Nick 77

Texas Nick 77 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 11:19:50 +0000

If they had just managed to keep it quiet a while, we could have had the extra effect of telling the jihadi’s that the reason so many of them are suddenly catching fire is because Allah is angry at them. Now that capability is gone forever.

Defense Guy on December 3, 2007 at 2:49 PM

Yeah, too bad we couldn’t have sprung it on Al Sadr when he was leading a televised “death to America” rally. *POOF* You’re toast, would have really freaked out his minions.

By: ScottG

ScottG — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 09:08:07 +0000

I need to know the sound this weapon makes before I can get behind it.

Howse about a shofar???

By: 91Veteran

91Veteran — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:56:12 +0000

Exit question: Isn’t this weapon likely to be … counterproductive in a counterinsurgency setting?

Depends on how many lawyers get involved prior to it being fielded.

Remember the pain ray?

By: 91Veteran

91Veteran — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 05:54:09 +0000

“can be compared to long range blow torches or precision flame throwers, with corresponding psychological advantages for [Coalition Forces] CF.”

Jihadi flambe’

By: drunyan8315

drunyan8315 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:51:53 +0000

Here’s a name that might really work… and it might just work for the jihadis too!

“Fateful Lightning”… (of His terrible swift sword).

By: Neocon News » Daily Quick Hits 12/03/07

Neocon News » Daily Quick Hits 12/03/07 — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:38:43 +0000

[...] Another reason not to loiter if you’re a terrorist. [...]