The World's Spookiest Weapons 224
DesScorp writes "Popular Science has a piece on some outrageous ideas for weapons; some came to fruition, and others didn't. And while some of the weapons (atom bombs, chemical weapons, bats with bombs strapped to them that seek out homes and buildings at night) are truly frightening, some of them are also kind of silly, such as the Gay Bomb, and the Frisbee bomb that was labeled the 'Modular Disc-Wing Urban Cruise Munition.'"
The best and the worst... (Score:5, Funny)
Worst bomb to drop on DC: The Nude Bomb
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:The best and the worst... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
This is a major surprise.
The truth is... (Score:3, Insightful)
We could annihilate 5 billion people on the planet, but the average person (at least in North America) would little more than flinch, so long as their own city or state is not affected.
Or maybe I've just lost all faith in humanity. Either way, society already turns a blind eye to the atrocious acts of mankind. A little more torture and murder won't change the way those in power control the planet and its inhabitants.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Can you imagine how much pain you could inflict with a standard dinner fork (provided the subject was sufficiently restrained)? Nobody would classify this as a weapon - and it certainly wouldn't inspire fear, until one had been used to pry your fingernails off.
I guess it just goes to show, it's not the weapon you're wielding that counts, it's how you use it...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:The truth is... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:The truth is... (Score:4, Interesting)
I dunno, those might actually be the few things that can help us rid ourselves of the damned Formosan Termites [usda.gov] down here in New Orleans, etc. Just made me think of it, 'cause it is getting close to the time for them to start swarming again....every night for about a week, you see swarms of them up around the street lights, and if you house isn't air tight, if you have the lights on...they'll try to swarm in your house too. Lots of fun while cooking a late dinner...
OH well, if there is a bug or other vermin out there, it grows bigger and better here than anywhere else in the US. I'll not even get into the giant cockroaches that will fly at you....
Re:The truth is... (Score:4, Insightful)
And if we look at land warfare, the rules of war used to say that you weren't allowed to use shotguns on human beings but
I feel a very huge squicky difference between the thought of an Apache chopper firing a Hellfire into a target versus a Predator drone making the firing decision on its own. Hellfire missiles are simple robots designed to seek and destroy targets. But with the Apache, a human is pulling the trigger directly. For now, humans are doing the same with Predators but the Pentagon is working on making them fully autonomous vehicles so that they can make engagement decisions on their own when outside of direct control. Sentry robots are going to be given that same kind of authority. While there's not really much moral difference in directionless killing between an armed robot ready to shoot people with no oversight and land mines and ocean mines that are less complicated ways of spreading irresponsible and uncontrolled death and mayhem, the robot freaks me out more.
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Interesting)
Just look at the current situation in the US: the neocon start a war for the 'good' of 'merica and its net effect is that the US economy now belongs to China. Talk about being patriots !
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Interesting)
That's not really correct. Much as I dislike the present Administration, the reality is that our government and our private sector sold out to China long before Bush & Co. took office. I agree, there's a substantial amount of high treason involved, but you can't lay this at our President's feet. Well, not all of it, anyway. Hell, Bill Clinton was partly responsible for what has become the largest transfer of scientific knowledge and technological capability from one nation to a hostile totalitarian state in the history of Mankind. Kinda makes you wonder whose side either of these two men is really on. Not ours, that's for sure.
Even then, you have to go back farther than the previous Administration: this process really began back in the seventies. It's only accelerated to point of economic ruin for the United States within the past fifteen years or so. People don't fully understand the way China looks at the these things: they take a generational approach to foreign affairs. I don't know when the decision was made to take us out of the equation, but there's no doubt that once it was made they followed through with it. Look, the Russians tried the frontal approach: it didn't work, and their Empire eventually collapsed of its own weight, but China is not making that same mistake. They realized that behind the vaunted American military was a capable industrial engine, and that they'd never gain any traction over us until they removed our ability to create wealth and support our military.
China's leaders may be evil and corrupt by our standards, but they most certainly aren't stupid, and are rapidly taking care of their only real obstacle to world domination, the United States, by using the greed and avarice of our elected and corporate leaders as a weapon. It's working, and probably working better they they ever expected.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re:The truth is... (Score:4, Insightful)
But it doesn't prove your point:
Given that just about any weapon can be scary in the right context, I think what you're proving is that nothing is scary when you aren't paying attention to it, no matter how scary it really is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, we couldn't, because the US has moved most manufacturing overseas and is completely dependent on Europe and China economically.
Re:The truth is... (Score:4, Interesting)
Same thing with Europe... they're farther ahead in terms of infrastructure than China (well, Western Europe is, anyway), but the same thing applies. Europe needs American markets and dollars too. Look at all of the stuff Americans buy from Europeans. Airliners, petroleum (hello BP and Dutch Shell), automobiles, etc. I'd wager that Sweden would be less of a social-democratic paradise if Americans weren't putting significant money into their economy buying their Volvos, Saabs, and Ikea furniture. Germany would be hard hit if the BMW's and Benz's stopped rolling off the docks. Add to that the fact that US companies have factories in Europe and China, and European companies have factories in America and China, and that shows just how tightly integrated and interdependent we all are economically. Even China is now looking to build plants in America. Economic dependency isn't a one-way street.
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Interesting)
I suppose this is true. I think it's partially because of becoming desensitized and not allowing it to affect onself too much because of the flood of these messages. Numbers also are meaningless to many; if one would report 3000 people being killed, noone would react. If one would give 1 person a face (documentary, reportage, ...) people would feel affected and connected. (disgust, confusion, empathy, ... depending on what's being brought across.)
This connection would fade over time though, as it's not related to one's own life. If someone in your family or environment dies, you're confronted with his or her absence on a regular base. The memory of some flickering screen is less strong and doesn't integrate or reconnect as strongly with your frame of reference as your own, direct experiences.
Perhaps it's a good coping and survival mechanism, to be able t shrug it off. If I wouldn't be able to shrug of the news I hear every day, I'd be unable to live my life; I'd be saving puppies and bulls in Spain, protecting seals on the north pole, trying to end world hunger, giving Russian futureless boys perspective to lower the crime rates, start an organisation to help people with difficult personal problems, fight at the side of the innocent in Iraq, protest at the White house for more US citizens rights, would pound my fist on the table in the parlement, reform the police, reshape the educational system, take away the need for fugutives to emigrate, spend my life finding cures against AIDS and cancer, shelter all the homeless, and build rockets to fly to Mars. (because that would be cool)
If I sum it up, it's almost like news is there to give you a feeling of helplessness, and accept the fact your influence in the world is limited and puny.
Re: (Score:2)
Then explain the "reaction" of 9/11.
Agreeing with the OP: What percentage of North Americans truly care about the x-mas tsunami, the Myanmar cyclone, or Chinese earthquake?
Re: (Score:2)
The truth is there is no such thing as a spooky or scary weapon. A non-naive look at the world shows that human beings really don't care about what happens to the rest of the world, as long as the effects aren't felt at home.
We could annihilate 5 billion people on the planet, but the average person (at least in North America) would little more than flinch, so long as their own city or state is not affected.
Or maybe I've just lost all faith in humanity. Either way, society already turns a blind eye to the atrocious acts of mankind. A little more torture and murder won't change the way those in power control the planet and its inhabitants.
I cannot say I agree with you. I was in downtown Portland when the Iraq war protests were at their peek. I had never seen so many people out and about in that town, not even at the waterfront when festivals were taking place. I couldn't even drive home until after 9 because the streets were so thick with the protestors. From what I've heard, San Francisco was even worse. Lots of people cared.
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Interesting)
There are some pretty good arguments that we actually live in one of the least violent times in human history. [edge.org] With the 24 hour News cycle and instant global communications, we now see and hear about bad things from all over the world. The earthquake in China would have only been a small blurb in a western paper 50 years ago and would have been almost unknown in the western world 100 years ago. Darfur wouldn't have been an issue to anyone outside of Africa 100 years ago. I would say that rather than turning a blind eye to atrocities, we are paying ever closer attention. The total numbers of atrocities may be going up, but the number per capita is going down, after we reach our global peak population (predicted for 2070) then the amount of global violence should decline as humans become ever more civilized and our populations slowly decline.
Re:The truth is... (Score:5, Informative)
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/01/0111_040112_consumerism_2.html [nationalgeographic.com]
Iraq, $12 billion a month:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23551693/ [msn.com]
Hopefully you are just misinformed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Frisbee improvement idea... (Score:2)
ok, ok, I'll stop now, geeks should supress such ideas
Prior Art (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sick (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not very complete (Score:5, Informative)
The american Gyrojet rocket pistol.
Heinlein, schmeinlein (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not very complete (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Not very complete (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd quite like to see George Bush fight a war on malnutrition, disease and lack of medical care rather than a war on 'terror'..
As much as I appreciate the idealistic sentiments of what you're saying, I can't agree with how you dismissively put 'terror' in quotes. The collapse of the WTC towers and crashing of those planes was undoubtedly pretty damn terrifying to those trapped inside. A bomb exploding on a train, or bus, or at a nightclub is undoubtedly terrifying as well. These were all real events that happened to real people, and they were perpetrated deliberately by others with a political or religious agenda.
I'm not saying
Re:Not very complete (Score:4, Insightful)
America was doing nothing about all this until it happened to them too, and then they went waaaaay too overboard on upping their security policies. I don't want to make little of the lives that were lost on 9/11 and the proceeding days, it was tragic, but there really isn't a way of making sure that something like this will never happen again. There have been a few American terrorists (and just plain old homicidal maniacs) as well as those from other countries. Even with a heavy police state there will always be ways of causing problems, many that nobody ever really thinks about (like hijacking a plane and doing a suicide run). You are more likely to catch terrorists early if everyone is being carefully monitored, but what would you rather - live in America of the 90s, or live in a 1984 style "Big Brother is Watching You" dystopia?
PS there have been a couple of terrorist attacks in the UK since September the 11th, one even in the place where I was born (Glasgow), and there was at least one in London. I usually do casually dismiss that kind of thing, you can't just live in fear your whole life. If someone close to me was hurt by terrorist I would be angry and sad as hell, but you really can't "fight" that. You don't know when the next lunatic, fanatic, psychopath or drunken idiot will snap and cause terror in someone's life.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Like in Somalia [unicef.org], where UNICEF is prevented from providing aid to some of the "conflict affected areas".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless there's more to this than meets the casual eye, see the link in my sig for the movie Zeitgeist. Rallying the support of people to start a war and make a profit might just be worth a "few" lives for some people.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn...I gotta dig that book out again. SOOOO much better than the stupid movie....
Not mentioned in this (Score:5, Funny)
You mean Cruise munition isnt the Gay Bomb? (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
They Missed Some (Score:5, Funny)
Pigeon Guided Bombs in World War II (Score:5, Interesting)
The screens were covered with grids of fine wire. The pecking would cause a horizontal wire to touch a vertical wire, completing a circuit and providing the course correction to the bomb's electronics.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Pigeon Guided Bombs in World War II (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.oddee.com/item_91684.aspx [oddee.com]
Crowd control? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now of course, using non-deadly force to stop riots etc. is better than using deadly force. But at the same time, the fact that something isn't deadly - not intended to be, anyway - will also take away people's inhibitions to an extent and make them more likely to actually resort to it.
We're seeing this with tasers already, for example. And in fact, tasers are a good example insofar as that while the manufacturer would like to position them as non-deadly, they in fact are quite so.
Re: (Score:2)
I say make that even simpler. Any cop who uses the Taser receives it afterwards. That would create the perfect balance. It would get used when really necessary and not otherwise. (before anyone complains, I know very well it's not implementable)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
he dreads pulling his taser because it means staying back 3 hours after work filling out a report and taking statements.
So he basically avoids doing anything which would mean he has to do work? :p That's one very messed up system. I can understand that they should have to fill out some amount of paperwork, but if he's hesitating at all because taking action is going to mean paperwork, that seems pretty dangerous to me :/ Not blaming your friend here, more the people that have put the system into place. I've considered joining the police in the past but I couldn't be bothered with all that paperwork, not for how much cops ge
Bat bomb (Score:2, Interesting)
This sort of opposes the Japanese developed Balloon bomb.
Of course both didn't exactly become conventional weaponary.
Hey (Score:5, Funny)
It shows just how much the military fears gay sex (Score:5, Insightful)
Only on slashdot (Score:3, Funny)
Pesky Turks preventing your Dardanelles invasion? Needs more gay sex.
Can't fight both the Russians and their winters? You guessed right: Not enough gay sex involved.
Roadside bombs in Iraq continually blowing up your troops? Guess what? I've got a fever! And the only prescription...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Upkeep - Bouncing Bomb? (Score:4, Interesting)
Coincidentally, yesterday was the 65th anniversary of the missions, and there was a reenactment at the dam in the UK that the Royal Air Force No. 617 Squadron trained at. They were to later be called the Dambusters.
Video footage here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7405514.stm [bbc.co.uk]
Heinlein quote... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Heinlein quote... (Score:5, Funny)
There, fixed it for you.
Sincerely,
Jack Thompson
Re: (Score:2)
But recent study showed that video games aren't as dangerous as thought to be. So I guess we are back to action movies and heavy metal then.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
When... (Score:2, Funny)
They forgot "The Funniest Joke in the World" (Score:5, Funny)
The Rods from God (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The Rods from God (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, absolutely. It is impossible to just "drop" something on earth from
a stable orbit - remember: You are already constantly falling.
Or will a tiny push be enough to get them down to earth?
I'd expect them to be rocket propelled rods to a certain extent.
Targetting will be a bitch though: You'd have to do a more or less controlled
reentry (tip forward, or the earodynamic breaking would mess with your speed) on
an arced trajectory, and very precisely hold on to your trajectory - even very
minor errors will make the rod completely miss the target.
The whole thing sounds interesting as an idea, but gets complicated very quickly as you
start thinking about an implementation.
Re: (Score:2)
What, no Neutron Bomb? (Score:4, Interesting)
Those WMD in Iraq (Score:5, Funny)
The Spam Bomb (Score:4, Funny)
what's so special about nuclear? (Score:2)
I guess they aren't too much different to other weapons in the WMD category...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Fallout. Radiation sickness. Conventional bombs can create just as much devastation, but they either kill you outright or they don't. What people don't like about nuclear weapons is the idea that their effects remain as a silent killer for generations to come.
In reality, they clearly aren't as bad as all that; Hiroshima ce
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In addition, modern nukes are much cleaner than the dirty bombs that were dropped on Japan. Hydrogen bombs actually have almost no long term fallout. Unfortunately they never use straight hydrogen bombs, they are always part of the three stage "Trinity" Thermonuclear devices, which are quite dirty due to the third stage.
What's scarry is of course, that the first stage of a "trinity" device is small enough to fit in a briefcase, and level a city block. But that has nothing to do with it being nuclear
No. 19 (Score:2, Funny)
Geez. This article is naive. (Score:3, Interesting)
The Thermobarbaric bomb. [bbsnews.net]
Works the same way dynamite kills fish in a lake. Liquefies your organs. Nasty stuff.
Also, they left out cluster bombs. [digg.com] --The munition which kills and terrorizes civilian populations long after the war is 'over'.
They got the one about crowd control right, though. But the creepiest are the ones you use to screw up the nervous systems of people through the electro-magnetic sphere. (Even though, according to the cell phone companies and half of Slashdot, humans are not affected by non-ionizing EM. Whatever.)
-FL
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I often wondered why Japan didn't improve fire safety regulations after the Great Kanto Earthquake in 1923, which a large
F-Bombs (Score:2, Funny)
About the rods from the gods weapon. (Score:2)
Some of these weapons I'm pretty sure never made it out of concept because they were impossible. For example the "rods from the gods" kinetic energy weapon makes no sense as to put something in orbit with the potential kinetic energy to be a WMD it's going to take multiple nuke's worth of energy just to lift it to that orbit. Any chump at NASA, or who's graduated a real physics class could h
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And because it lacks a "print layout" -- clicking "print" actually tells the browser to attempt to print.
I wouldn't call it the "worst ever" layout, though. That's an honor reserved for a few million MySpace pages.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They missed the worst weapon of all. (Score:5, Insightful)
How would you classify those things in a lion's mouth, those things on a bear's feet or that thing a scorpion carries around? They ain't musical instruments, that's for sure.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:They missed the worst weapon of all. (Score:4, Insightful)
w[=ae]pen; akin to OS. w[=a]pan, OFries. w[=e]pin, w[=e]pen,
D. wapen, G. waffe, OHG. waffan, w[=a]fan, Icel. v[=a]pn,
Dan. vaaben, Sw. vapen, Goth. w[=e]pna, pl.; of uncertain
origin. Cf. Wapentake.]
[1913 Webster]
1. An instrument of offensive of defensive combat; something
to fight with; anything used, or designed to be used, in
destroying, defeating, or injuring an enemy, as a gun, a
sword, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:They missed the worst weapon of all. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They missed the worst weapon of all. (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course, a lot of these conflicts end with one party surrendering rather than death, but the same is true of humans. On Killing [amazon.com] does a pretty good job of showing how humans have a natural aversion to killing members of their own species (even in times of war) just like any other animal. And plenty of animals other than humans have been known to use tools. I'm too lazy to find the article, but I remember reading, about a year ago, an account of an ape using a bone to test the depth of the water in a river. It's safe to say that they animal kingdom has the same capacity for 'evil' as man. We just happen to be the dominant species and are very self-centered so no one pays attention to what the other creatures of the Earth are up to.
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK, man is the only creature with morals and ethics. I've never seen anything that could be considered inherently evil that was not the product of man.
Similarly, slight off topic: there are many beautiful things in this world, some created by man - but the only "ugly" things I see are created by man alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Ever watch a dog pack, or cats fight? If the animal does not fear death, why would it stop fighting when losing a battle? Self-preservation. Which is inherently fear of death.
Re:They missed the worst weapon of all. (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, what pitiful long-haired bullshit is this? Humans are not the be-all and end-all of violence in nature. Sure, we have the intellect to come up with very dangerous things. Sure, there are those dope-arsed enough to use these things. But as general violence in the animal kingdom goes, we're really quite the softies.
Take dolphins, the poster children of New Age flakies, often put up as these supposedly peaceful, gentle, intelligent creatures that could teach us a thing or two about being in harmony with nature. Bollocks. Dolphins are psychos: murder, violence, gang rape including bestiality and that of their own young --- you name it --- are all staples of dolphin behaviour. Frankly, I wouldn't want to be anywhere near one of these fuckers without someone standing at the ready with a charged harpoon. Where are the dolphin justice mechanisms? If they're so peaceful and moral, where are the dolphin courts and prisons?
Ducks are just as bad. I was sitting by a pond the other day with about 20 or so ducks there. In the space of about half an hour or so, about six fights broke out, half of which were sexually motivated. In the same amount of time, over a hundred humans must've passed by --- a population in whom not one case of violence or sexual harassment broke out.