The Nice Guy At the World's Largest Weapons Expo 180
pigrabbitbear writes "It was the second day of the Special Operation Forces Exhibition in Amman, Jordan, and the temperature outside the convention center was around 80 degrees Fahrenheit, with a typical chance of rain of zero. Drones of various sizes hovered in the hot blue desert sky. Inside, Ed Atchley had set up a booth for his company, Aspen Water Inc., right next to a 30mm chain gun designed to sink things like helicopters and Somali pirate ships. Atchley had traveled from his headquarters in Richardson, Texas, to the largest weapons trade show in the world, mainly because he makes 'the army's smallest, lightest, least expensive, high output, reverse osmosis water purifier,' he says, and people in the Middle East – including soldiers – get very thirsty."
Logistics (Score:5, Insightful)
Judo (Score:4, Insightful)
Unfortunately, at the weapons show, more of the attendees were probably interested in ways to keep this product out of the hands of "certain people" than buying it for themselves.
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:5, Insightful)
This technology could have quite a few peaceful uses as well.
Correction (Score:4, Insightful)
The Nicest Guy At the World's Largest Weapons Expo
If you want to publicise the work of some actual nice guys, what about those people who go into warzones simply to provide this kind of facility (some even do it for free, the gall of these people!) to those who are suffering because they happen to live in the middle of a war they want no part in?
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:5, Insightful)
I have to disagree with you.
The senseless murder of people by other people has been going on for a long time and will unfortunately continue for at least the near future. But developing and producing better water purifiers does nothing to encourage it.
Re:70 litres of water vs 300 (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:5, Insightful)
Potable water is the most critical resource on the planet. The wars of the future will not be fought over access to oil or nuclear fuel, they'll be fought over water shortages.
Anything that makes water easier to obtain will save lives in the long run, even if it's being used chiefly by the military today.
Napoleon said it better: (Score:5, Insightful)
'An army marches on its stomach.'
'C'est la soupe qui fait le soldat.'
Nothing, absolutely nothing, matters more at winning wars than logistics. The lethal fighting force is but the edge of a vast engineering and distribution network. Or, if it is not the edge of such a network, it is soon a defeated lethal fighting force.
Re:Judo (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, at the weapons show, more of the attendees were probably interested in ways to keep this product out of the hands of "certain people" than buying it for themselves.
There's no reason for that. We've offered to assist in the setup nuclear power plants to North Korea in exchange for discontinuing their weapons development program. If we're willing to do that, a few water purifiers is hardly anything to worry about. Besides, I think fresh water is a better diplomat than a Predator drone.
Re:Advertising strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, if you believe a significant number of Slashdot posters they are so dangerous to the established world order that they need to triply encrypt their data, send it via a darknetted Tor system and only read it under an infrared light after scanning the room for stray electromagnetic emissions. These highly sought after individuals might well need water purification systems for their discretely located subterranean lair.
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:2, Insightful)
The US military isn't evil it just follows the orders of the scumbag 1% who own the US government. The invasion of Iraq had only one driver to get Bush's croony oil folks rich'er. Everything else was a smoke screen for stupid people.
Re:Napoleon said it better: (Score:5, Insightful)
And that logistics has to work under chaotic conditions, which is why the military is so good at humanitarian disaster relief.
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:5, Insightful)
Religion is the biggest excuse for killing not the biggest cause. The cause is always power. Power from owning land, resources, strategic positions or influence. The only other cause of killing is insanity, insanity as a result of disease, poverty, oppression, etc.
Power or insanity.
Religion brings them both together in one package, so its often cited as the cause.
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:4, Insightful)
I would expect the peaceful/civilian market for such a system to be far greater than the military market. Also for more permanent installations. Plenty of communities that have a problem getting enough potable water. And it could have use in shipping industry too, saving the vessels to carry (and keep fresh) large amounts of water for long periods of time.
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes the Communists and the Nazis were just peace loving agnostic/atheists groups.
Saying religion is the problem is oversimplifying the problem. Is religion used in an excuse to make war, yes. Is religion an excuse to make peace, yes.
Religion is only one way we consider our identity. So we will support our peers of like minds. Take away religion we will fight for other thing, political ideals, resources, borders, race and ethnicity, moral code, social class status.
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:5, Insightful)
Because Sadam was better then getting a communist supporter in power. Sometimes you need to choose from the lesser of two evils. The USSR with nukes pointing at you, or put a crazy man who will not join the side with all those nukes pointing at you, we will deal with the crazy man later. Just like FDR working with Stallin in WWII the communists were a threat to America, but Germany was a bigger threat.
Sometimes in life you get places where you need to take the least bad action.
Re:Still a bad guy (Score:5, Insightful)
In general, the Military does not start wars, Politicians start wars by telling the military who to attack. "War is the extension of politics by use of force" or words to that effect.
I have tremendous respect for the US Military, its members etc. I have a lot less respect for the rich and powerful who get their politician underlings to order the invasion of a country so they can secure oil and make big profits off of the support contracts for all the troops that get sent. Anyone US soldier who died in Iraq did so not only because the enemy killed them, but also in part because they were sent there by people seeking economic gain.
Almost every war is economic at heart, and the soldiers sent to fight it are merely tools used by Politicians to achieve their goals. This does not in any way denigrate the dedication of those troops who get sent to the war IMHO.