Silly String Goes to War Against IEDs

Luban Doyle writes "In an age of multimillion-dollar high-tech weapons systems, sometimes it's the simplest ideas that can save lives. Which is why a New Jersey mother is organizing a drive to send cans of Silly String to Iraq. American troops use the stuff to detect trip wires around bombs, as Marcelle Shriver learned from her son, a soldier in Iraq."

President Bush will love this

[Anonymous Coward]

New slogan? "Iraq: It's a Party Over There!"

This was on The Daily Show 2 days ago

[Anonymous Coward]

They're also using bees. (Seriously). Silly string and bees.

Re:

[Jonah Hex]

I'll bite, how the hell do they use bees? I barely have time to read /. at work, no time to watch the Daily Show at home.
Jonah HEX

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

To sniff out explosives. Yes, I'm serious.

Re:This was on The Daily Show 2 days ago

[eln]

They use dogs with bees in their mouths, and when they bark they shoot bees at you.

It's a devastating weapon.

Re:This was on The Daily Show 2 days ago

[jeffmeden]

-1 inaccurate...

Homer: (taunting Mr. Burns) What are you gonna do? Release the dogs? Or the bees? Or the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark, they shoot bees at you?

Re:

[Pfhorrest]

Homer: (taunting Mr. Burns) What are you gonna do? Release the dogs? Or the bees? Or the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark, they shoot bees at you?

Homer: ...Well go ahead, do your worst!

Burns: My worst, eh!? Smithers - release the robotic Richard Simmons!

Re:This was on The Daily Show 2 days ago

[Qzukk]

Nobody gets attached to the bees, so there's no hard feelings should the bomb blow them up.

Seriously, though http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/11/28/bombsni ffing.bees.reut/index.html [cnn.com]

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

Wouldn't be better to use lawyers? Bees at least provide honey, whereas lawyers serve no useful purpose.

Re:

[Vellmont]

I'll bite, how the hell do they use bees?

The bees are trained to sniff out explosives instead of nectar. The article [cnn.com] makes it sound like a similar process to training dogs.

Re:

[Dmala]

Of course they should, but nothing they can say or do will bring their children home immediately. Even if the decision to pull out completely were made today, they would still have to survive days or weeks in a very dangerous place. If a can of Silly String allows someone's son to survive long enough to make it to that plane back home, then I say give 'em the Silly String.

Government should pay

[nuggz]

Why isn't the government providing the tools the military needs.

Additionally there should be a significant discount if they make a nice large contract

Re:

[Brewskibrew]

We also need to send pallets of Silly Putty for training Iraqi militas to fingerprint insurgents and cases of sugar-free Trident for detecting bubbles of mass destruction.

Re:Government should pay

[montyzooooma]

"Why isn't the government providing the tools the military needs. Additionally there should be a significant discount if they make a nice large contract"

Or more likely you'd see the birth of the $100 can of silly string in camo colors as approved military issue.

Re:

[Beer_Smurf]

Yes, they would cost much more. But not because of price gouging. Because the military adds all kinds of specs, testing and certification to things that drive the price up.

Re:Government should pay

[SatanicPuppy]

Which, in this case, is obviously a flaw in the process. Troops find this useful in detecting bombs, therefore it should be provided. Sure it's not to spec, but this is a quick and dirty fix, with the troops displaying admirable flexibility. That should be rewarded, not denigrated because the can isn't bullet proof, or some other such crap.

This is the biggest reason that conventional armies have trouble working against guerilla tactics...The irregulars use whatever works, so they have an extremely wide range of tactical options. We use the approved gear, which provides some high quality options, but a hell of a lot fewer of them.

Damned if you do...

[alexhmit01]

And if the officers sent in a requisition, and someone pushed it through, I can see the headlines:

Pentagon spends millions on children's toys
Military awards no-bid contract for toys
Millions of cans of toys bought, unable to track
Military fails to provide tools to troops, uses toys instead

You are 100% right about the edge of irregulars being able to use whatever works. However, clearly our troops are just as smart and figured out how to improvise, and away go the cans of silly string. So it's being done voluntarily by people on the home front, so what, that just makes them wonderful patriots. What is with the statist notion that it is only okay if it goes through taxes and government procurement.

The biggest problem is that we have two generations of reporters that believe their job is to undermine the government, and that that is an example of freedom of the press.

Take the body armor issue... Our troops have some older body armor, and there is a dispute as to which ones to replace. If the government replaced EVERYTHING, we'd be screaming about waste from throwing out our perfectly good 2 year old body armor that we spent billions on. In addition, the guys in the cities don't want the bulkier armor, and were refusing to wear it, so the Pentagon, sick of the bad PR, REQUIRED the use, even for units that didn't want it.

The anti-government press goes beyond reporting problems so that they can be fixed, and tries to play gotcha with our government. So government officials play CYA, instead of doing the right thing. It's a HORRIBLE mess, and it will take more than an emergency requisition of silly string to fix it.

Re:

[kpharmer]

It's interesting that some people think that the military spends efficiently but will then criticize the rest of government for being inefficient.

The reality is that they're all just massive bureacracies that waste money like mad - because everything takes too many review steps, too many approval steps and effective requirements gathering doesn't work this way.

> throwing out our perfectly good 2 year old body armor that we spent billions on.

well, there ya go - if you just spent billions on 2 year old, p

Re:

[LukeCage]

The biggest problem is that we have two generations of reporters that believe their job is to undermine the government, and that that is an example of freedom of the press.

Well, it may cost me my karma, but I am simply not going to allow you to get away with saying this. It is complete nonsense.

It is not the press's responsibility to glad-hand or enable the government. It is the press's responsibility to ask questions and report the facts of the situation. Inevitiably, there will be bias. A story can c

Re:

[evilviper]

Troops find this useful in detecting bombs, therefore it should be provided. Sure it's not to spec, but this is a quick and dirty fix, with the troops displaying admirable flexibility. That should be rewarded, not denigrated because the can isn't bullet proof, or some other such crap.

You're not looking at it properly. The Silly String company probably doesn't care if one in 100,000 cans shoots out string that is 2X as heavy as normal. However, in this use, that could get people killed.

There's good reason

Re:Government should pay

[PPGMD]

Why does this always come up when military spending is mentioned. The $10,000 Toilet seat is one of three examples on a submarine designed to prevent seawater from coming up the toilet, they are really expensive because of all the R&D invovled and how few are made. The $1,000 wrench is a wrench made of a non-sparking metal for use around high explosives in the USAF.

Most of the item prices that people go off about are limited production items, and often the costs figure in R&D to bring it upto military specs, and the lowered productivity of the production line because of military auditors and paperwork. GE for example charges 25% more for the same engine if it's going to the military because the auditors slow the line down, and they have to store all the additional paperwork for years longer then would be required for it's civil product. Lockheed Martin for example is still charging the DOD for warehouse full of paperwork just for the F-16.

Re:

[Junior J. Junior III]

You try filling out a requisition form for $10,000,000 of silly string, and submit that to the Pentagon. See how far you get;)

Re:Government should pay

[Junior J. Junior III]

Req. Order #12308-129

Item Description: Can, Aerosol, 12 oz., String, Silly, Camouflage
Quantity: 100,000
Destination: US Army, Baghdad, Iraq
Status: Approved
Comment: Can be weaponized as flame thrower if we purchase optional birthday cake.

Re:

[networkBoy]

That was awesome, thanks ;)

Re: Almost perfect Req. order.

[TaoPhoenix]

Except in military usage, it wouldn't be called "silly". (This, besides being pejorative and politically incorrect, might infringe upon trademark.)

Expect instead "long-chained nontoxic polycarbon semi-liquid fast drying compound."

Also, some of your information seems to be missing. Accounting forwarded the following rejection notice:

Please supply

Department
Cost Code
Category type
Expected use rates for prepaid asset scheduling
Routing number
Authorized sign-off official

Re:

[zentinal]

However, ask for ten million aerosol delivered methacrylate [wikipedia.org] IED detection units (ADMIEDDU) and it will breeze right through.

Re:

[OeLeWaPpErKe]

Obviously ... they do ... have you checked the US budget lately ?

Re:Government should pay

[Lev13than]

Why isn't the government providing the tools the military needs.

Because this isn't about military procurement - the story is only partly about evolving military tactics (if there is a real need for these items, any self-respecting logistician would do whatever it takes to get them into the hands of their unit).

Mostly it's about people on the home front trying to feel like they are contributing. In that sense it has more in common with the campaign to knit socks [historylink.org] in WWI or recycling [about.com] in WWII.

Re:Government should pay

[LWATCDR]

Because to make sure that the contractors are not cheating the government they would have to spends years and months putting it out for a competitive bids, writing specs, and following regulations.
To give you an example the USMC wanted to buy the software my company produces.
It had tried several and like ours the best. So they wrote a spec that our software fit and put it out for bids.
The request for bid came in a BOX that weighed 50lbs! Mind you this was off the self software that thousands of other people where using everyday.
Fine we did the paperwork and summited a bid at a low price. A competing company then submitted their software for the bid and lied that it would meet the specs. We lost the bid by $50. Of course our yearly support contract was $500 a year less for that number of seats than the winner.
Fine three years latter the other company was out of the business because frankly their software sucked and it started all over again.
We won it this time but the government wasted well over $100,000 on software that was now useless.
There are so many rules and regulations in place to stop abuse that it extremely painful to get anything done.
Back in the late 90s a lot of pilots bought their own GPS and laptops because the Air-Force hadn't installed the integrated mil-spec units yet.
In the 80s they bought radar detectors for the same reason.
This isn't really anything new. Soldiers have been buying supplemental equipment since David spent his allowance and a state of the art sling and extra hard stones.

Re:

[Nimey]

It sounds like the grunts knew what they wanted but the REMFs didn't listen to the grunts and fucked it up.

Re:

[LWATCDR]

"The government went with the cheaper bid, good for them."
Except that the support contract for a single year was several times the savings of lower initial cost.
You work for government procurement don't you?

Re:Government should pay

[darkmeridian]

It's near-impossible to predict exactly what troops on the ground need before you actually get there. Therefore, American soldiers have always innovated in the absence of the right tool for the job. In World War II, soldiers fighting in France were getting bogged down in hedgerows, which were basically dunes. Aerial photos did not reveal the three-dimensional structure of the hedgerows, so the soldiers were not prepared for such a battlefield. Defending Germans would lay in ambush behind every hedgerow, and American soldiers going over the top of the hedgerows were mowed down by German machine gun fire.

Initially, GIs tried to dynamite the hedgerows so they could attack from a more concealed position. Though this met with some success, it took up too much dynamite. Other GIs tried to drive tanks through the hedgerows, but those got stuck and wouldn't reliably penetrate the hedgerows. Eventually, the soldiers welded on a long metal rod onto tanks. The tip of the rod contained a barrel of explosives that was detonated once the tank shoved the rod into the hedgerow. The "Rhino" saved many American lives by creating a fast and safer way to secure hedgerows in France.

The current administration should be faulted for many things. However, not being able to anticipate Silly String as a precious wartime commodity should not be one of them. I mean, no one would have thought that this would have saved American lives -- and in fact, it was only the innovation of the American soldier that created such a need for a child's toy.

Re:Government should pay

[Bender0x7D1]

When I was in the U.S. Marines, we used a low-tech, low-cost solution that was used in Vietnam...

We would tie a string to the end of our M16 or a long, thin stick, and have it hang to the ground. You move forward slowly and watch the string. If it stops hanging straight down, you need to stop moving forward and find out what is blocking the string.

The advantage is that it forces you to move more deliberately that just shooting silly string. The downside is you are right next to the tripwire when you find it.

Re:

[gurudyne]

That IS the way it was done in Nam. The point guy concentrated on the immediate environment, usually outdoors, for booby traps and tripwires. The second guy look past the first guy and to the sides (and to be able to report just what got the point when he screwed up :(

I've been in both positions.

The Silly String is shot into hallways and rooms. Great for dimly lit areas. And, most of the "bad guys" right now don't come at you. They lurk, outside of the blast radius of the IED.

Re:Government should pay

[veganboyjosh]

hell, if Lockheed could create something which does the same thing and uses the same mundane process and chemicals, they can charge $5,000 per can, and the government may be interested.

Re:Government should pay

[Lord_Slepnir]

If Lockheed did make it, it would be glow-in-the dark for night time use, would be packaged in such a way so that it didn't explode (throwing shrapnel everywhere) if it got punctured, and would use a chemical so that the cans wouldn't explode if they heated up to 120 degrees in the Iraqi sun.

And yes, there would be a steep price tag because there would be a very limited volume (only 140,000 troops in Iraq), and they'd have to recoup R&D costs. Different rules apply in the military.

Re:

[Brummund]

It would be delivered in 2015 and certified for field use around 2020. There would also be a specop edition using depleted uranium for extra can protection.

Re:Government should pay

[Lumpy]

They do. it has a pair of UV led's at the nozzle exit to make the phosphorus glow get charged on the way out of the nozzle and it looks more like a Mace can than a silly string can.

My nephew brought one home from Desert Storm. the special ops have had this stuff for at least 10 years. It's just that silly string bran is far cheaper.

Re:

[Squalish]

The soldiers have been using the glow in the dark commercial version at least since house-to-house searches became a 'patrol' just after the invasion. While it may have originated with the special forces, it's been in WIDESPREAD use this entire war, according to enlisted friends' comments years ago. It's a frequent request for care packages - glow in the dark is preferred, but neon still shows up in any light.

Re:

[rwhamann]

I'm sick of hearing stuff like this - we're not all out there wasting money. As an Air Force member I take the cost of items I request and approve very seriously.

Re:

[djh101010]

By the way: the fact that she chose that particular metaphor indicates the depth to which television has taken over her mind.

How else do you propose she gets updates about what's going on over there?

I'm pretty impressed.

[SpecTheIntro]

That's a really ingenious use of Silly String. I just hope it continues to work.

Me too.

[DG]

In fact, I'm going to teach that to our guys tonight.

Who'd've thunk I'd pick up a tactical tip from Slashdot?

DG

Re:

[Xzzy]

I think the only problem I can imagine with the trick is that you get a relatively small amount of string out of a single can. If you coat every room you enter with this stuff, you'll go through a lot of cans really fast. Can't this stuff be imaged? I would think an infared emitter and a camera to detect reflection off the wires would work too. I guess that assumes the tripwire is actually metal, but I'd think thread or fishing line would be detectable too.

I could also see the terrorists increasing the sens

Re:

[xappax]

I could also see the terrorists increasing the sensitivity of the trip wires

Yeah, that's the first countermeasure I thought of too - but we're talking about such a small change in weight/pressure that the wire would probably be tripped by a breeze or strong vibration.

I can't really think of any other good ways to make the tripwire undetectable, but it'd be pretty trivial to exploit the silly string IED detection method by producing false positives. Just string up fishing line in dark rooms all over th

Boom!

[tttonyyy]

1,000 cans of the neon-colored plastic goop are packed into Shriver's one-car garage in this town outside Philadelphia

Just needs one unstable can, and BOOM! One explosion in a spaghetti factory. :)

Useful in the US, too?

[sesshomaru]

"IED-like device" supposedly found near Cincinnati [d-n-i.net]

Poor Choice of Icons

[DumbSwede]

OK call me overly sensitive, I usually am against Political Correctness, but this is a serious issue. DEADLY serious.

I'm glad this low tech method of booby trap detection is being used. My nit however is in leading the article with the "It's Funny, Laugh" icon.

There is a humorous element in using a humorously named children's toy for sure, but I still chafe at the juxtaposition of the Monty Python foot with something that is in actuality so far removed from humor.

Military Grade Silly String

[6Yankee]

Let's make it in olive green and sell it for ten times as much!

How fitting!

[orzetto]

Let's make it in olive green and sell it for ten times as much!

Now that would be silly... The thing is supposed to be well visible so it detects booby traps. Making it camouflage-colored is hardly going to improve its performance. Again, it would be so fitting... "Silly String in stupid format for an idiotic war!"

Re:

[OldeTimeGeek]

I agree. There should be an icon for a "cool idea". Like a lightbulb with icicles on it (or something).

Re:Poor Choice of Icons

[TheJasper]

OK call me overly sensitive, I usually am against Political Correctness, but this is a serious issue. DEADLY serious.

You are overly sensitive. Almost all humor is based on pain/humiliation in some form or another. There are certainly exceptions, but very often humor is used to laugh at serious things. DEADLY serious things. Just think about it. Here is you're highly trained soldier creeping around with his night vision goggles, instant communication with HQ, live satelite imagery being fed to his pda. His grenades have an IQ higher than we do. he steps up to the door of a house. he carefully opens it. Then he sprays the house with silly string. It's Funny, Laugh.

Re:

[DumbSwede]

I think they were dark humor yes, but fiction.

I'm not against finding humor in any situation, I'm sure the service men in the field are having a hay day with this. I have no truck with the various humorous riffs that will posted to slashdot. I just wouldn't lead with the humor icon when thousands and thousands of service men and civilians have been maimed and killed by IEDs. I personally think it is in poor taste. Maybe I'm wrong.

Old news!

[Anonymous Coward]

This was mildly interesting when it was reported about the SAS [thesun.co.uk] ages ago.

It has other combat uses too...

[weatherguy48]

Seriously, silly string can be used during skirmishes as well.....has anyone ever gotten an eye-full of that stuff? Hurts like hell....

Silly String goes to war

[British]

Isn't this the 2nd time war and toys have crossed paths? IIRC Silly Putty was made by accident in WW2, attempting to make an explosion. While no explosive was made, the designers pressed it on a newspaper photo and went "but hey! Look what you can do with Hitler's face!"

Let's look for other toys with the word "silly" in them to see if they are usful in military applications. I'm betting now there's some research funds diverting towards it.

Name Change

[writermike]

"Silly String?"

Couldn't we at least change the name to Freedom String-In-A-Can?

How much does silly string cost?

[ibbo]

We used to use a metal coat hanger.

Untie the hook part and strighten it up. Make a finger loop at the top and curve it slightly at the bottom. Hold in font of you when walking, you will notice when it contacts something trust me.

The use of silly string is hardly enviromentally friendly and I see that US forces did not learn of the even cheaper trick from the Brits. Perhaps you dont have metal coat hangers in the US who knows.

I still think tin upon tin of silly string will amount to lots of $$$ though.

Ibbo

Finally

[antifoidulus]

The BSharps can put that whole "poisonous" thing behind them and start producing the silly string again!

Slashdot tipping of the insurgents ;)

[edxwelch]

"The military is reluctant to talk about the use of Silly String, saying that discussing specific tactics will tip off insurgents."

IIEDDD

[fuggo]

Would that then make silly string an IIEDDD?

improvised improvised explosive device detection device

First thing that went through my mind...

[amper]

...was the scene in Shelob's Lair from the LOTR movies. Seriously.

I wonder, could we make something akin to "Silly String" that could fire huge globs of a gooey, rubbery, net-like substance that could be used to immobilize people?

I figure, if anybody out there knows, or has tried this, they're probably on Slashdot...

Home remedies for attrition

[Micklewhite]

Using every day objects and the sort is pretty commonplace on the battlefield. Back during the Napoleanic war soldiers used to piss down the barrels of their guns to clean them out. In World war I, allied soldiers brought bathtubs with them into the trenches, and would launch them with catapults into the enemy trenches. The Germans and Turks had developed completely different bathtubs at the time, and were terrified of the Allied tubs. This always led to a horrendous panic in the German trenches, which would almost always be followed by a push across no mans land by the allies. It's said that the Dardanelles could have been taken, had Churchill been provided with adequate bathtubs. During World War II allied soldiers brought white makeup along with them so if they ever got caught they'd paint themselves up like mimes. When the Germans tried to question them and saw the white makeup they just let them go, knowing that there'd be absolutely no way they could get a mime to talk. Then during the Korean war soldiers made good use of old coffee grounds. Since the North Koreans knew soldiers always drank a lot of coffee, if they found old coffee grounds they assumed there was a base near by and retreat. In the first Iraq war American soldiers used to bring soccer balls along with them. At the outbreak of the war almost all of Iraq's soccer balls were destroyed in a freak smoke stack toppeling. When ever the Americans got in a serious fire fight, they'd just lob their soccer ball into the frey and all the enemy soldiers would just stop and try to get it, which usually ended quite badly for the enemy. Unfortunatley Iraq was able to build up a tremendous stock pile of soccer balls since the first war, so the strategy doesn't work any more.

It's quite remarkible how such common things can prove to be so useful. I think it's overall a great testimant to human ingenuity in time of war.

Re:Shipping

[Random Destruction]

Its for the war on iraq!!

If they don't accept it they're TERRORISTS!

Re:

[BVis]

Read TFA. The Postal service won't ship it by air.

Re:Shipping

[galego]

Simple ... volunteer pilot with plane. From the article I read (on Yahoo!) ...

Marcelle Shriver said that since the string comes in an aerosol can, it is considered a hazardous material, meaning the Postal Service will not ship it by air. But a private pilot who heard about her campaign has agreed to fly the cans to Kuwait _ most likely in January _ where they will then be taken to Iraq.

Re:

[gEvil (beta)]

WTOWA? IDK.

Re:IED?

[Tony Hoyle]

I thought IED was some kind of contraceptive.

Re:

[yumyum]

Bet your wife is not too happy about that...

Re:

[jimstapleton]

probably:

Installed Explosive Device.

But yes, I want to joint
DAWATS (Do Away With Acronyms They Suck) too.

Re:IED?

[sarahemm]

Improvised Explosive Device :)

Re:

[gEvil (beta)]

booty traps?

Re:

[plover]

That's what I said! Booty traps!

Re:

[Gogo0]

Or maybe because the government uses acronyms for everything and its quicker to say "IED" than "Improvised Explosive Device".
Back into your hole, now...

Re:

[arniebuteft]

Improvised Explosive Device.

Military also uses VBIED a lot - that's Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device.

Re:

[jimstapleton]

Improvised Explosive Device.

Me + nonstop flight to Iraq + All-You-Can-Eat Chilli.

Re:

[mrchaotica]

Military also uses VBIED a lot - that's Vehicle Borne Improvised Explosive Device.

Phew, that's a relief! I thought for a moment it meant "Visual Basic Improvised Explosive Device" -- one of those could be the end of us all!

Re:

[Xzzy]

Actually it's "improvised", not installed.

Most of us would call them booby traps.

Re:IED?

[mkro]

Most of us would call them booby traps.

After the whole Janet Jackson/FCC thing, mainstream media prefer IED.

Society: Bound by email chains

[.c]

You have to love email forwards disguised as news articles.

This has been floating around for years -- I first saw it as a piece promoting British Special Forces ingenuity. Our very own Bruce Schneier [schneier.com] mentioned it (and the suppressed Cockeyed piece [cockeyed.com]) around this time last year.

What do you expect?

[AltGrendel]

It's the military. The same group that calls a zipper a "sliding interlocking fastener".

No, I'm not kidding.

Re:

[chill]

Zipper(tm) was a trademarked brand for the longest time.

Re:I bet they refer to Kleenex(TM) as facial tissu

[SomeoneGotMyNick]

Booby Traps are trademarked?

Playtex(tm)

Re:IED?

[MachineShedFred]

In the post Janet Jackson FCC gestapo tactics landscape, anchors on CNN are afraid to use the following terms:

boob
booby
boobies
tit
titties
fun bags
dirty pillows
natty-sags

I'm sure there are plenty more. This is the reason for the INAs we're hearing (Improvised Non-sensical Acronyms) such as "IEDs".

Re:IED?

[somersault]

At least they're Very Apt Germane Improvised Nonsensical Acryonyms

LOL, you said booby!!!

[RingDev]

In todays politically correct society where there is a fear of lawsuits and an assumption that any word that can be taken in a childish context will be. For example in my organization: Primary Management System was renamed because the acronym was PMS. The Financial Unit reports were renamed because some manager couldn't ask for the F-U reports with a straight face. And most recently a data translation application had its name changed because someone tried to pronounce the acronym as "La-tee-dah-tol".

-Rick

Re:

[jomama717]

As a consultant a few years back I worked on a product called GIS which ~half of the clients (the naive ones I guess) pronounced "jizz", with the unfortunate consequence of me sometimes being referred to as the "jizz expert". Hard work maintaining a professional air at one of those meetings...

Re:IED?

[SnowZero]

I'm sure they once called these "booby traps". What's the obsession with acronyms?

When's the last time you referred to memory as Double Data Rate Random Access Memory rather than DDR RAM? If you work with something every day, you tend to shorten things. You also define terms more specifically than general usage (RAM vs memory).

An IED is a booby trap consisting of a rigged Device containing a large amount of Explosives in a fairly jury-rigged fashion (i.e. Improvised). It's not uncommon to find multiple anti-tank mines stacked together or even unexploded bombs. When talking about risks and countermeasures, it pays to be specific. Just like you wouldn't refer to large artillery as a "gun" when describing it to someone else, because it is too imprecise without qualification. A "gun" could be anything from a pistol to a 155mm howitzer. This is the same reason Lawyers define a bunch of "useless" jargon and acronyms; They can put a precise meaning on it for their purposes. Now, the military does have a huge number of acronyms, and maybe more than are needed, but it is just as specialized an occupation as practicing law.

Now, IANAL and I did not RTFA or GP, but AFAICT, we are now a nation of acronyms, especially TLAs. If you don't like it you can STFU while I LMAO <JK>.

Re:

[Apocalypse111]

That whooshing noise you just heard? That was the joke flying by at Mach 2. Wait a moment, you'll hear the sonic boom...

Re:And in a pinch

[emor8t]

It's like Napalm in a can! "I love the smell of Silly String in the morning!" Surfs Up!

Re:

[WormholeFiend]

I was being sarcastic, but I'll bite...

How can we claim the moral high ground if we don't follow the Geneva conventions?

If we're not bound by the Geneva conventions, then why arent Afghanistan and Iraq Neutron-Bombed already?

Re:

[soft_guy]

They volunteered to serve the United States and to defend the country, a very honorable thing to do. However, their leader, the commander in chief aka the president, let them down. He led them astray believing that they were protecting american by getting rid of "WMD's" when the real reason they were sent to Iraq is to secure US oil interests in the middle east.

Then they should have paid more attention in US History and civics class before they joined. When I was 18 (Bush was president, but the Iraq war wasn't even on the radar yet), I did NOT sign up for the military (despite heavy pressure from parents). My stated reason was "I don't want to end up cannon fodder in the next vietnam." I also did not register with selective service for the same reason. I also think that the draft is unconstitutional (violates the thirteenth amendment) and if it came down to it, I

Re:

[soft_guy]

OK, so someone modded me as troll. I am not trying to troll - I'm just pointing out that if you are going to join the military, you should at least have some kind of realistic idea as to what you are signing up for. If someone signed up because they wanted to be in a war, that's fine. That's what they got.

I'm not saying I wouldn't be willing to volunteer to join the military under the right circumstances. If I was around during WW II, I probably would have enlisted because the war was a just cause and the l

Re:

[Anonymous Cow herd]

So, unfortunately, our soldiers are just there to be targets for the insurgents. I don't see how that benefits anyone.

It benefits alot of folks. Defense contractors, the banking/investment industry, oil companies, independent civilian contractors (logistics, procurement, transportation, etc..)

Re:

[soft_guy]

I hate to be a cliche, but one of the reasons I joined (in addition to it being a family tradition) was to defend your right to have that opinion. Which, by the way, I agree with: The Draft is unconstitutional, and I would have, I think, gone to jail (well, canada actually) if drafted.

I hope you aren't offended by my asking, but defend [civil rights] against whom? Unless you are old enough to have served in WW II, no one has bothered to attack the US in a serious way. And by serious, I mean take over our country by force. Terrorist attacks are not an attempt to take over our country by force.

If you really want to protect people's rights, perhaps you should have become a lawyer for the ACLU or the EFF.

I might be willing to fight to preserve american freedoms, but it is another thing enti

Re:New in the war on terror

[mpoulton]

It should be noted that protection of foreign economic interests of the United States is a valid, publicly acknowledged function of the US Armed Forces. Defending US citizens from attack is not their only function.

protection of foreign economic interests is valid

[bussdriver]

protection of foreign economic interests is valid?

No. Just because many people and their nations have done so since the dawn of civilization does not make it a valid move (bandwagon [wikipedia.org].)

The "protection" of economic interests fuel and even are the underlying causes for a great many wars and covert acts all over the world (gaining a lock [wikipedia.org] on mutually exclusive [wikipedia.org] resources.)

Allowing nations to perceive it as a VALID means to their ends will allow them to continue excusing it and perpetuating such actions in th

Re:

[cayenne8]

"He led them astray believing that they were protecting american by getting rid of "WMD's" when the real reason they were sent to Iraq is to secure US oil interests in the middle east."

While I debate the reasoning you put forth here (pretty much the whole world's intelligence thought that he had WMD's hidden or was making them)....securing oil interests is NOT the worst thing in the world.

I was listening to a recent George Carlin rant....about being scared at what would happen if the electricity suddenly

Re:

[xappax]

Actually the pope has made multiple statements opposing the war in Iraq, and has been generally a voice for peace in recent history. In fact, many Catholic organizations, such as the Catholic Workers [wikipedia.org] have actively opposed US wars.

Re:

[geekoid]

It was professional killers that created the country that allows you to say stupid stuff. So don't get to high brow, slick.

And it doesn't matter what country tyour in, that holds true.