[PISANO]

HUH?

We are worried that we may harm someone ON THE BATTLEFIELD in a NON leathal way, that was unintended?

Has our nation gone mad?

Am I losing my mind or does this make sense to anyone?

[FreedomCalls]

We are worried that we may harm someone ON THE BATTLEFIELD in a NON leathal way, that was unintended?

Yes. There was a big stink a few years back over the Israelis intended use of a percussion weapon that did not kill but caused many people to go permanently deaf in the area. There is also a prohibition on using laser weapons that will blind but not kill.

[philman_36]

Am I losing my mind or does this make sense to anyone?
It works great in our peaceful world where every action force is a peace keeping force and nonviolent/nonlethal peace establishment campaigns quell any problems.
The aircraft overfly the area disabling everyone in the area and then the peacekeepers drop in and detain everybody. Oh, a few have to go to the reeducation centers, but they always turn out to be good productive members of society afterwards.
Everyone lives, goes back to work and keeps on spending...

Mooooo
too morbid?

[Beckwith]

We are worried that we may harm someone ON THE BATTLEFIELD in a NON leathal way, that was unintended?

Has our nation gone mad?

Am I losing my mind or does this make sense to anyone?

Please reread the article.

What the man is suggesting is a way to blunt the inevitable criticism in the left-wing press on the use of such weapons.

It makes a great deal of sense to me, after all, the operative word here is "non-lethal" and, as the accompanying picture of Code Pink suggests, would be used against the left-wing Marxists.

Actually, I would prefer that "little-less-than-non-lethal" weapons be used against Code Pink, International A. N. S. W. E. R., United for Peace and Justice and the rest of those goons who wish to see the United States fall.