| May 2012 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
Bad guys do not want one of these pointed at them:
(CBS) U.S. scientists are on the verge of creating a laser weapon that could give American forces an awesome advantage on the battlefield, but would also raise tough questions for Pentagon war planners, a newspaper reports.
After 40 years of work, the Pentagon may have a solid-state laser in its arsenal within a decade, reports the Oakland Tribune.
...Once fully developed, the Tribune reports, solid-state lasers could shoot down mortars and artillery shells, explode ordnance in enemy depots and even wipe out ballistic missiles 500 miles away. They would strike with incredible speed and could be retargeted instantly.
...Nor will lasers be holster-sized — the smallest to date is the size of a commercial jetliner.
...How will U.S. doctrine accommodate a weapon that can strike without detection possibly hundreds of miles away at relatively little cost? Since no other country is anywhere near developing a militarized solid-state laser, under what circumstances would the U.S. use it in a war?
It appears to me that such a weapon would change the balance of power still further in favor of the U.S. Terrorist facilities could be targeted and wiped out at low financial and political cost. The accuracy and speed of these lasers would be far greater even than existing cruise missiles. A weapon such as this would, it appears to me, be devastating to Islamofascists.
There is a reasonable question regarding how civilization is supposed to survive a century or two from now, when weapons like this will be much smaller and could fall into the hands of terrorists. On the plus side, things could easily change so much by then that such a question could be irrelevant.
After all, things have changed quite that much in the past 100 years. For more, check back for part two of this series, posting later today.
This is part one in a series of three articles.
#1
Lasers are unique in that you can destroy a aircraft, civilian or military and it leaves no signature, it ultimately looks to be a mech failure if done right.
The article claims of no hand held models being a prospect of reality. I would argue that be it has been done along with sentries for automatic weapons and sniper weapons with facial reconision. People should limit weapons to just human limits but primarialy robot or simple computer usages be it networked or even blu-tooth.
I love the big dog robot that does real well with terra movements but shrink it down and ad some more tech and watch it work. I am just financially strained but I love to play paintbot wars, I'll mail the robot and operate via personal computer while stopped at a red light, wife driving of couse.
I like the article and the video of the truck being scared on the hood by a C-130 I believe. Anyway, have a nice day!