US deploys experimental sonic weapon in Iraq

Sparks

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/030904E.shtml :

SOUTH POMFRET, Vt. — Marines arriving in Iraq this month as part of a massive troop rotation will bring with them a high-tech weapon never before used in combat — or in peacekeeping. The device is a powerful megaphone the size of a satellite dish that can deliver recorded warnings in Arabic and, on command, emit a piercing tone so excruciating to humans, its boosters say, that it causes crowds to disperse, clears buildings and repels intruders.

"[For] most people, even if they plug their ears, [the device] will produce the equivalent of an instant migraine," says Woody Norris, chairman of American Technology Corp., the San Diego firm that produces the weapon. "It will knock [some people] on their knees."

American Technology says its new product "is designed to determine intent, change behavior and support various rules of engagement." The company is careful in its public relations not to refer to the megaphone as a weapon, or to dwell on the debilitating pain American forces will be able to deliver with it. The military has been equally reticent on the subject.

And that's a problem. The new sound weapon might, in some scenarios, save lives. It might provide a good alternative to lethal force in riot situations, as its proponents assert. But the U.S. is making a huge mistake by trying to quietly deploy a new pain-inducing weapon without first airing all of the legal, policy and human rights issues associated with it.

This is a weapon unlike any other used by the military, and it is certain to provoke public outcry and the conspiracy theories that often greet new U.S. military technology. If the military feels that its new-style weaponry brings something important to the battlefield, and if testing has shown it to be safe, then why not make our reasoning — and research — transparent to the world?

Last month, the Council on Foreign Relations issued a task force report on nonlethal weapons, arguing that their widespread availability might have helped in the immediate post-combat period in Iraq to reduce looting and sabotage. The council threw its weight behind greater investment in these technologies partly based on a Joint Chiefs of Staff "mission needs statement" signed last December. "U.S. military forces lack the ability to engage targets located where the application of lethal [weapon fire] would be counterproductive to overall campaign objectives," the Joint Chiefs concluded.

The Council on Foreign Relations recognized that the effect of nonlethal weapons is mostly "psychological — persuading people that they would much rather be someplace else, or on our side rather than opposing U.S. military forces." It warned that "television coverage of encounters involving [nonlethal weapons] can still be repugnant, and it would be desirable to provide reliable information to minimize unwarranted criticism."

Yet after paying lip service to the very psychological and political fallout that could result from the employment of novel technologies like acoustic weapons or high-powered microwaves, the council task force urged that prototype nonlethal weapons — that is, weapons just like American Technology's new sound weapon — "be placed with our operating forces" to test their efficacy and create greater demand among combat commanders.

Is actual combat in a foreign country the appropriate place to test a new weapon? Apparently, we are about to find out.

I guess it sure must be nice to have a place to test fancy new weapons on humans without those nasty legal restrictions that you get in other countries that you don't run....

Sleipnir

Imagine the outcry if they said they were going to test it in New York, or California?

Sure if an Iraqi baby dies after their ears start to bleed, who will ever know?

Nuttzz

But the U.S. is making a huge mistake by trying to quietly deploy a new pain-inducing weapon

Arent all weapons pain inducing? Bullets, Pepper spray, mace, CS Gas, Sonic weapons, whats the difference? Whats the difference between a G8 summit protest and an Iraqi protest. Water cannons were tested at live protests, if the US had not of invaded Iraq they would have tested this at a live protest. The US didnt invade Iraq to test new weapons out.

Anyway who would volunteer to help them test this weapon????

Sleipnir

if the US had not of invaded Iraq they would have tested this at a live protest.

So it's better to test it in Iraq rather then at a protest in America? Why?

Sparks

Originally posted by Nuttzz
Arent all weapons pain inducing? Bullets, Pepper spray, mace, CS Gas, Sonic weapons, whats the difference? Whats the difference between a G8 summit protest and an Iraqi protest. Water cannons were tested at live protests, if the US had not of invaded Iraq they would have tested this at a live protest. The US didnt invade Iraq to test new weapons out.
Anyway who would volunteer to help them test this weapon????

The point was that this weapon hasn't been tested yet. Noone knows what kind of long-term damage it'll do. And it's not exactly discriminate - you could wind up being permanently deafened because you were in the adjacent building, unable to escape because of a demonstration.

And pepper spray, mace, CS and water cannons don't leave you permenantly disabled.

sovtek

Pain inducing crowd control. Well I guess it's better than shooting them..the current MO.

Iraqis: "We want electricity, water, jobs, security"
Paul Bremer: "BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONK"

Stark

Good old US. The problem I see as well is that these use sounds outside of human hearing range, so it could be used to secretly break up peaceful demonstrations. A concealed device, set on low setting so that people in the crowd bit by bit start getting migraines, prompting them to leave the crowd to go home thus dissipating the crowd. Only the extremely paranoid would be any the wiser.

I've heard of these weapons being tested at anti-government rallies in the US before, but the rumours were dismissed as "science fiction conspiracy theory nonsense". This is the first time that the US has admitted to having them.

I guess this sort of thing is okay once it's not used on white people. Then it's a conspiracy theory

Nuttzz

Originally posted by Sparks
The point was that this weapon hasn't been tested yet. Noone knows what kind of long-term damage it'll do. And it's not exactly discriminate - you could wind up being permanently deafened because you were in the adjacent building, unable to escape because of a demonstration.

And pepper spray, mace, CS and water cannons don't leave you permenantly disabled.

My orginal post should have said rubber bullets, remember them, nice and non lethal, i think not.

Question is how do you test these weapons? With US troops comming home in body bags weekly do you think that the US people or the makers of these weapons give a flying about some deaf iraqi's

BTW I am not defending these type of weapons, but the yanks will always find a good reason to use/test them somewhere

bonkey

American Technology says its new product "is designed to determine intent....

Good god Jim....its a thinking weapon.

jc

Bunny

this weapon should be most effective against hippies and crusties

sovtek

Originally posted by Bunny
this weapon should be most effective against hippies and crusties

Exactly! All those tie-dye clad Iraqis really chap my hide!

Sand

I guess it sure must be nice to have a place to test fancy new weapons on humans without those nasty legal restrictions that you get in other countries that you don't run....

Doesnt sound like a test - sounds like its simply the first deployment and it was deployed where there is an urgent need for non-lethal weapons, especially those which can be used in urban fighting to clear buildings holding snipers for example.

Raskolnikov

Originally posted by Sparks
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/030904E.shtml :





I guess it sure must be nice to have a place to test fancy new weapons on humans without those nasty legal restrictions that you get in other countries that you don't run....

truthout.org, great source you've got there buddy.

When you actually have some proof that the weapon could harm or kill people if used irresponsibly, talk to us.

Anyway, the fact that a lot of modern technology from cellphones to drugs still have unknown long-term effects nullifies your argument. MMR jabs, tap water, meat, almost everything that we consume could be killing us. So instead of quoting dubious new sources about gimicky weapons that may or may not be used (let alone exist!) why don't you educate yourself instead of just making yourself looking foolish in your attempts to attack the USA.

Sparks

Originally posted by Raskolnikov
truthout.org, great source you've got there buddy.

A non-specific general disparagment. Wow. Well, that's it then I guess I'm totally discredited. Even if reading the first few lines in the page would point out that the original source was the Los Angeles Times and not truthout.org.
But maybe you could list specific problems with the site, to discredit me further?

When you actually have some proof that the weapon could harm or kill people if used irresponsibly, talk to us.

It makes a very loud noise.
There we go, job done. Or hadn't you heard that very loud noises have adverse and permanent effects on the hearing of soldiers and other humans?

Anyway, the fact that a lot of modern technology from cellphones to drugs still have unknown long-term effects nullifies your argument.

Ah, no.
See, there are unknown long-term effects in many things, but there are known long-term effects from this thing.

This is a sonic device, right? So if they produce enough power for it it can damage structures, people etc.

One other question. Whats the possible affect of such a weapon on people with pacemakers?

BattleBoar

Originally posted by klaz
One other question. Whats the possible affect of such a weapon on people with pacemakers?

What's the percentage of Iraqis with pacemakers, lol?

gandalf

Originally posted by BattleBoar
What's the percentage of Iraqis with pacemakers, lol?

Well theres bugger all in the last 10 years or so anyway