Pentagon seeks ideas to fight 'urban' wars

Washington Times ^ | Sunday, September 12, 2004 | By Jennifer Harper

[JohnHuang2]

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

---

Pentagon seeks ideas to fight 'urban' wars

By Jennifer Harper
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published September 12, 2004

---

Urban-canyon flying vehicles, persistent staring reconnaissance and perching machines may one day prove the weapons of choice among American troops doing battle in dim city streets far from home.
    That is, if someone comes up with a workable design.
    A public call for ideas to help soldiers on the unpredictable, unorthodox "urban battlefield" has been issued by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA -- the unabashedly inventive arm of the Defense Department that specializes in "revolutionary, high-payoff research," according to its mission statement.
    DARPA is looking for what it calls "force multipliers" in 11 separate disciplines, seeking ways to bolster the smaller numbers of U.S. forces commonly on patrol in the likes of Fallujah or Kabul.
    The official solicitation offers a wish list of futuristic technology, which includes devices that literally can see through walls or perhaps spirit a soldier out of a hazardous position.
    "Systems of interest include capabilities to detect and characterize personnel and equipment in severe urban clutter and through external and internal building walls; flying/perching machines able to carry and operate communications and sensor payloads; survivable urban-canyon flying vehicles," the DARPA notice says.
    An initial round of proposals already has arrived, said DARPA spokeswoman Jan Walker. She would not comment on the nature of the offerings to date, other than to note, "We're very satisfied with what we've received so far."

[CWOJackson]

Evening John...I'm sure this post is going to fuel a few of the conspiracy folks: see, the government is preparing to suppress the public in the streets.

[Donna Lee Nardo]

Thought you might have interest in this article.

[SpaceBar]

The future of civilized life shouldn't become something out of The Terminator just because of some bad apples. Effective social and legal mechanisms need to be in place to weed out the troublemakers from entering the law abiding general population before they have a chance to muck up the system for everyone else. That would prevent the necessity of becoming a police state with Big Brother in every dark corner scanning your irises. The freedom to go about one's business unharrassed, spied, on, electronically molested is the real freedom we cherish. The alternative is a glorified concentration camp. That said, the single greatest fixable problem is our lax immigration policies and nonexistent border protection.

[Anti-Christ is Hillary]

"Pentagon seeks ideas to fight 'urban' wars"

Idea:

Daisy Cutter, M.O.A.B.

[CWOJackson]

This article is about urban warfare in foreign combat areas, not about libertarian paranoia in the United States.

John: In three.

[Alia]

Agreed. It is about R&D for urban warfare in foreign combat areas; a current great and costly concern to citizens and US/Coalition alike.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

This was not a problem in WWII.
Why is it a problem now?

[JasonC]

Commies here. We've lost 1000 men liberating 50 million and they call that a disaster. If our men kill a hundred terrorists a day they call that a humanitarian catastrophe and demand we back off. We lost that much taking any number of medium sized towns in WW II. What counts as an acceptable use of force and bearable losses has changed.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

And I think we would have lost fewer than 500 if we had liberated 49,900,000 and made an example of the other 100,000. And yes, 500 good guys saved for 100,000 scumbags is a GOOD deal.

[Tilly]

Actually, there's a couple of fairly effective time consuming models of urban warfare.

1) Siege. Practiced by the Romans, and perfected in the middle ages. Surround the town. Cut off all basic services and supplies, and let the populace starve, die of disease, or surrender. Easy and cheap, tho time consuming.

2) Genghis Khan -- added the touches of razing the towns that defied him, and killing all inhabitants after the siege.

3) Bomb them out of existence -- more expensive, less time consuming, probably bad for PR (but Middle East Press hates US anyway)

4) Putin's "magic" gas used last year in Moscow theatre. About 25 percent casualties ... but probably easier on the civilians in the long run.

Plenty of tried and true methods. However, none of them are politically correct.

[Poohbah]

This was not a problem in WWII. Why is it a problem now?

Because we're not willing to expend over a hundred soldiers per day in this day and age, which is what we were doing in WWII.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

That didn't happen in urban fighting.
We simply flattened the places.

[ExSoldier]

Uh-uh, sorry there already exists all the technology they need to have to suppress any population, especially one as soft as our has become, by design. Any doo-dad gee whiz gadget can be overcome by any soldier willing to find a way to accomplish his mission. Suppressing the public at large isn't the problem, they'll just need a good sheepherder for that. No, it's the former marines, soldiers and SpecOps folks who will give them their headaches. Also the cops who used to know the real taste of freeeeeeedom!

[CWOJackson]

"No, it's the former marines, soldiers and SpecOps folks who will give them their headaches. Also the cops who used to know the real taste of freeeeeeedom!"

LOL! Yes, I'm sure you could find a few fringers in those groups...not many fortunately.

[ExSoldier]

...not many fortunately.

I think you'd be wrong about that. My best friend retired from SpecOps as an 05/LTC. During the Y2K scare, he invited FIVE of his old A-Teams up to his place in Maine. Their plan? Get roaring drunk. If the world went to hell? Get roaring drunk, cook up some Cemtex and go north and south three exits on the interstate and (in their words to me) "drop the spans." This would force anybody who cared enough to look for them, to come through the woods against a combat experienced force of Special Forces (So called Green Berets) Operators. Would like that task? It's not so much the numbers, it's the dedication of the folks involved. Look at that wacko Eric Rudolf. He wasn't even a SpecOps guy. He was a lousy little pfc rifleman. He ran a huge force of Feds all over the North Carolina wilderness for quite awhile. Imagine a thousand Green Beanies or SEALS or PJ's with an Axe to grind? We're talking guys who might even be in their 80's. Don't laugh. Geriatric? Yup. Aging and weak? Sure. Still deadly after all these years? DAMN RIGHT. Realistically, we're talking about folks in their 40's-50's. Bifocals and Bipods.

[CWOJackson]

"I think you'd be wrong about that. My best friend retired from SpecOps as an 05/LTC. During the Y2K scare, he invited FIVE of his old A-Teams up to his place in Maine. Their plan? Get roaring drunk. If the world went to hell? Get roaring drunk, cook up some Cemtex..."

LOL! That pretty much says it all, Y2K wackos to boot. I don't image he and his buddies from the VA Mental Wards, oops...I meant the West Ward A-Team, pose much of a threat to anyone but themselves.

[ExSoldier]

I don't image he and his buddies from the VA Mental Wards, oops

I doubt that many wacko's reach the rank of Lieutenant Colonel and get decorated in the first Gulf War. On the other hand, what's the definition for a WARRANT OFFICER? Spec/4 with a Club Card? There's a reason they usually don't let warrant's hold positions of command......

[CWOJackson]

"I doubt that many wacko's reach the rank of Lieutenant Colonel..."

I doubt many of them command an A-Team either. However, I'm sure the orderlies in the Shrink Ward allowed him to.

[CWOJackson]

You really are watching way too many Rambo reruns.