Posted on 08/10/2006 8:33:13 AM PDT by neverdem
The difference is that Israel has a conscience and respects the 6th Commandment.
And anyway, the real solution would be to nuke Tehran, not Beirut. The Lebanese don't have the power or the will to stop Hezbollah.
"Follow the money"
No, but since these are generally *chemical* lasers, you do have to refuel after some number of shots.
Still, maybe we should send this baby over to Israel for some Field Testing. (Although it's really designed for "Scud" type missiles)
, But maybe it would be better to just send over the laser they were talking about in the article
However my former Coworker is a contractor working on the ABL program (but not as a supplier) , and an Air Force Reservist assigned to the unit that will use them, would like give "his" toy a shot.
Not really. It might detect them, but it's laser is optimised for high altitude use. Too much energy would be absorbed by the air (at the frequencies it uses!), causes all sorts of problems.
That's one of the reasons that most of the significant work is in airborne lasers. With stationary lasers, the air that comes in contact with the beam heats up, causing the beam to deflect.
With a moving laser, no air has a chance to heat up, so the beam is easier to predict and target. It will still achieve a similar level of absorption, but scattered among a much higher volume of air.
Somehow "personnel" sounds more like a legitimate target than "person". Anti-flesh? Maybe "indiscriminate" is the word I am looking for.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.