Political Crossfire Forums

[programmusic]

http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1703932006

[agentkgb]

Interesting. I don't know really anything about nanotechnology but it seems like the three-year estimate is kind of earlier than they could actually do it in.

[the sane voice]

programmusic wrote: http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1703932006

futuristic waepons like this are a waste of time. we need weapons that wins war and are cheap. not bugs.

[Rankor and Pissing]

the sane voice wrote: programmusic wrote: http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1703932006

futuristic weapons like this are a waste of time. we need weapons that wins war and are cheap. not bugs.

I disagree. Weapons like these can be invaluable in gathering intelligence, following suspects, identifying locations and terrorists and in the last resort, using it as a weapon itself to incapacitate or kill. A hornet is a rather large nano technology item which could easily be produced in a few years given the right engineering and skills in miniaturization.

The REAL trick is making little nano-robots that are as big as bacteria. Something that could be injected into the air and be programmed to cause say, a heart attack in a certain person, by analyzing DNA. If you don't match the DNA, the nano-robot is harmless to those it infects. To the person it finds matches DNA signatures - it kills. Tell me that's not assassination nirvana.

[agentkgb]

the sane voice wrote: programmusic wrote: http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1703932006

futuristic waepons like this are a waste of time. we need weapons that wins war and are cheap. not bugs.
I wouldn't say those weapons are useless. Bigger isn't always better.
Of course, they do need to make them before they can be useful, which is a different matter.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

What a disturbing development. This is even more dangerous than the development of nuclear weapons. These weapons essentially enable various states and non-state entities to do whatever they wish and conceal it.

[Ellron]

ToonArmyIsComing wrote: What a disturbing development. This is even more dangerous than the development of nuclear weapons. These weapons essentially enable various states and non-state entities to do whatever they wish and conceal it.

Thats what i was thinking.

This invention is just a catyalyst for another large war if its created.

[ToonArmyIsComing]

Ellron wrote: Thats what i was thinking.

This invention is just a catyalyst for another large war if its created.

The problem is that it would be an "unofficial" war because no one will ever be sure who is killing who! :shock:

[Ellron]

ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Ellron wrote: Thats what i was thinking.

This invention is just a catyalyst for another large war if its created.

The problem is that it would be an "unofficial" war because no one will ever be sure who is killing who! :shock:

Im guessing defences against these would be easy since a small spark of static could most likely take out their processing unit.

Initial attacks of these would be great but latter convential weapons.

[agentkgb]

Ellron wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: What a disturbing development. This is even more dangerous than the development of nuclear weapons. These weapons essentially enable various states and non-state entities to do whatever they wish and conceal it.

Thats what i was thinking.

This invention is just a catyalyst for another large war if its created.
Like nukes except you can actually use them without massive numbers of civilian deaths. Same fear of others getting them, same risk that a lunatic will get them, same risk they'll be misused...

[SpartanPhalanx]

Ellron wrote: ToonArmyIsComing wrote: Ellron wrote: Thats what i was thinking.

This invention is just a catyalyst for another large war if its created.

The problem is that it would be an "unofficial" war because no one will ever be sure who is killing who! :shock:

Im guessing defences against these would be easy since a small spark of static could most likely take out their processing unit.

Initial attacks of these would be great but latter convential weapons.


If Israel is investing millions on nano-tech for a "hornet"...I'm sure the Palestinians will be able to come up with a suitable fly-swatter..... :lol:

That what Israel's doing with the billions in free money from Uncle Sam??

[the sane voice]

agentkgb wrote: the sane voice wrote: programmusic wrote: http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1703932006

futuristic waepons like this are a waste of time. we need weapons that wins war and are cheap. not bugs.
I wouldn't say those weapons are useless. Bigger isn't always better.
Of course, they do need to make them before they can be useful, which is a different matter.

you people have bad understanding. i wasn't talking about size. i was talking on purpose. weapons like this don't win war they are only cool on TV.
we don't have intelligent problem. our problem is we don't have enough conventional weapons , anti anti tank utilities and etc.
when we got does things, it will be smart to develop futuristic nano gibberish Hollywood technology.

[agentkgb]

the sane voice wrote: agentkgb wrote: the sane voice wrote: programmusic wrote: http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1703932006

futuristic waepons like this are a waste of time. we need weapons that wins war and are cheap. not bugs.
I wouldn't say those weapons are useless. Bigger isn't always better.
Of course, they do need to make them before they can be useful, which is a different matter.

you people have bad understanding. i wasn't talking about size. i was talking on purpose. weapons like this don't win war they are only cool on TV.
we don't have intelligent problem. our problem is we don't have enough conventional weapons , anti anti tank utilities and etc.
when we got does things, it will be smart to develop futuristic nano gibberish Hollywood technology.
Since they've never been tried before, I don't think there's any way to tell if they'd actaully be useful. I don't think they'll be useful until they've spent some time developing them and experimenting, but eventually they would be.

[the sane voice]

agentkgb wrote: the sane voice wrote: agentkgb wrote: the sane voice wrote: programmusic wrote: http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=1703932006

futuristic waepons like this are a waste of time. we need weapons that wins war and are cheap. not bugs.
I wouldn't say those weapons are useless. Bigger isn't always better.
Of course, they do need to make them before they can be useful, which is a different matter.

you people have bad understanding. i wasn't talking about size. i was talking on purpose. weapons like this don't win war they are only cool on TV.
we don't have intelligent problem. our problem is we don't have enough conventional weapons , anti anti tank utilities and etc.
when we got does things, it will be smart to develop futuristic nano gibberish Hollywood technology.
Since they've never been tried before, I don't think there's any way to tell if they'd actaully be useful. I don't think they'll be useful until they've spent some time developing them and experimenting, but eventually they would be.
the point is priority. this kind of weapons are far more usefull in combat.
an army needs things it doesnt have, not things that can do the same job
as current weaponry , and are only futuristic and make good headlines.

[agentkgb]

the sane voice wrote: the point is priority. this kind of weapons are far more usefull in combat.
an army needs things it doesnt have, not things that can do the same job
as current weaponry , and are only futuristic and make good headlines.
It's not like they're pouring all their resources into nano-technology, just some in the hope that later they'll be useful, which they probably will be.

[MoscowMatt]

SpartanPhalanx wrote:

That what Israel's doing with the billions in free money from Uncle Sam??

I know it's so wrong that Israel should spend all that money trying to develop weapons which only kill the bad guys. Just think how many cluster bombs they could have brought!! :roll:

[the sane voice]

agentkgb wrote: the sane voice wrote: the point is priority. this kind of weapons are far more usefull in combat.
an army needs things it doesnt have, not things that can do the same job
as current weaponry , and are only futuristic and make good headlines.
It's not like they're pouring all their resources into nano-technology, just some in the hope that later they'll be useful, which they probably will be.
and you know how many resources its takes, how exactly?

[agentkgb]

the sane voice wrote: agentkgb wrote: the sane voice wrote: the point is priority. this kind of weapons are far more usefull in combat.
an army needs things it doesnt have, not things that can do the same job
as current weaponry , and are only futuristic and make good headlines.
It's not like they're pouring all their resources into nano-technology, just some in the hope that later they'll be useful, which they probably will be.
and you know how many resources its takes, how exactly?
I don't know and I didn't say I did. I am assuming that they are still making/buying tanks and planes and everything they normally do, just they're spending some money on nanotechnology. It's not like they're planning on replacing tanks with nano-tanks or anything.

[californian conservative]

Does no one see that Israel is doing this as a way to simply kill the militants and not have to worry about collateral damage? If this works it will be the best weapon Israel could have right now.

[agentkgb]

californian conservative wrote: Does no one see that Israel is doing this as a way to simply kill the militants and not have to worry about collateral damage?
I don't know if any weapon is without the risk of killing civilians.