Posted on 09/13/2006 6:42:45 AM PDT by rightgrafix
WASHINGTON - Nonlethal weapons such as high-power microwave devices should be used on American citizens in crowd-control situations before they are used on the battlefield, the Air Force secretary said Tuesday.
Domestic use would make it easier to avoid questions in the international community over any possible safety concerns, said Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne.
"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens, then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation," said Wynne.
"(Because) if I hit somebody with a nonlethal weapon and they claim that it injured them in a way that was not intended, I think that I would be vilified in the world press."
The Air Force has funded research into nonlethal weapons, but he said the service isn't likely to spend more money on development until injury issues are reviewed by medical experts and resolved.
Nonlethal weapons can weaken people if they are hit with the beam.
Some of the weapons can emit short, intense energy pulses that also disable some electronic devices.
========================
Air Force Secretary Muhammed Wynne:
"If we're not willing to use it here against our fellow citizens,
then we should not be willing to use it in a wartime situation.
We have just taken out three US cities to test our new nukes."
"Use the term "non-lethal" only if we're convinced that they are."
Yeah..I think the disclaimer is "less-lethal".
Apparently this idiot thinks the police forces aren't militarized enough. Does she know the difference between "to serve and protect" and "to kill and destroy?"
WTF?!
My thoughts exactly.
Agreed. This guy should be the first tester.
So this jackboot would rather test them on his fellow citizens than the Islamofacists overseas...very telling.
Would someone PLEASE run some tests on the DC water supply and find out once and for all what it is that scrambles the brains of our "leadership"?
Let me guess: Clinton appointee?
I do want to be clear:
I have no problem with having two categories of weapons -- "Weapons we use domestically" and "Weapons we use in foreign countries". I just have a problem if we pretend that we can wage a non-lethal, bloodless war with our advanced weapons, which -- by the way -- are too horrific to use in our country.
To me, that shows dangerously muddled thinking. We lose our wars because we screw up the political aspects of war. This is a potential example of how we get things wrong.
Let's mount them on poles in all high-crime areas and activate the devices during the high-crime hours. Yeah, there's a good idea.
P.S. sarcasm....
OK, let's apply that same thinking to bunker-busers, nuclear weapons, etc... what a moron !!!!
They use these on Americans and the lawsuits will fly. Really, really dumb idea.
If it's good enough for our citizens its good enough for the enemy. The age of the PC War's, where the strong can never be allowed to win and the weak are left able to fight on forever using all means available.
How about an ANSWER rally???
Leftist Clinton holdover?
Yep, definately a Clintoon appointee....
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.