Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

MightyMopar

(735 posts)
Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:25 AM Jan 2013

The irony is that the Bushmaster these RBKA fanatics claim to die to keep is already obsolete [View all]

Already i hear the RBKA fanatics whine it wouldn't be right for the government to use drones on them! Hell, papparazzi are chasing celebrities around with drones. Greenpeace is using an observation one on the Japanese whaling fleet. They're already using robots in combat. Google has won the right to remotely drive cars in several states. In a short time they'll have a robot tank in a bad guys driveway and it will release little antlike nanobots into your house and they'll make you surrender or come out your guts like shotgun. All this can mostly be done by remote control


The Turner Diary dream of fighting the government is almost dead! Sorry gun nuts your time is almost over.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Future nanotech weapons will disable, not kill

By Dick Pelletier

When scientists discovered that sickle-cell anemia could be cured by using nanotech to relocate a single amino acid in the blood that had erroneously wandered out of place, researchers from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency took notice.

DARPA scientists realized that nanobots – launched in the form of invisible, odorless, "space dust” – could alter a single amino acid in an enemy’s spinal cord rendering him temporarily incapacitated. Our soldiers (or robots) could then win battles without firing a shot.

In addition, researchers believe DNA-specific devices could be created that would target only a single person. Osama bin-Laden, for example, could be located by showering an entire country or region with billions of nanobots searching only for his DNA. On contact these ‘bots would alter his brain creating an irresistible desire for him to surrender.

Military strategists believe these futuristic weapons will change the face of war forever. Rather than risking lives by attacking an enemy who could respond, soldiers will simply wait for their adversary to fall "asleep” before moving in. Future war tactics, experts say, will no longer focus on which buildings to destroy, but which individuals to incapacitate – with virtually no collateral damage.

Eric Drexler, the "father” of nanotechnology, had this to say: "It is my hope that we gain such an overwhelming advantage that we dominate our adversaries in combat without causing anyone serious harm (beyond extreme frustration).”

http://positivefuturist.com/archive/24.html

56 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
We will shrink your penis EVEN MORE, Rush! Warren DeMontague Jan 2013 #1
Yes - The Dream Of Defiant Gun Owners Standing In Stoic Opposition To Government Is Dead cantbeserious Jan 2013 #2
Unfortunately, not for the stupid, i'm afraid they'll beg for a demonstration MightyMopar Jan 2013 #3
So be it AgingAmerican Jan 2013 #33
Can We Buy Tickets At A Sporting Arena - It Would Be Like Ancient Rome All Over Again cantbeserious Jan 2013 #35
That dream was dead a long time ago, so was the idea of happily farming and living off the land bluestate10 Jan 2013 #47
We lost a war to stone-age goatherds in Afghanistan. "Total dominance" may be some time off... nt Romulox Jan 2013 #4
We beat a nation of 32 million with just enough guys fill to a large football stadium MightyMopar Jan 2013 #5
We LOST in Afghanistan, and racked up so much debt it almost destroyed the world's economy. Romulox Jan 2013 #6
You'll have a hard time getting people to live like Taliban and they'll know they'll be no 72virgins MightyMopar Jan 2013 #7
You're obviously nothing more than a crappy disruptor trying to stir up divisions here. nt Romulox Jan 2013 #10
A majority of Democrats are for stronger gun laws and Obama is introducing them MightyMopar Jan 2013 #18
Your argument still doesn't make any sense. Romulox Jan 2013 #24
MightyMopar has been banned. NYC_SKP Feb 2013 #56
3-3 to leave yr post...nt msanthrope Jan 2013 #25
"You takes your chances!". nt Romulox Jan 2013 #27
Yyyyyyyup. +Infinity. cherokeeprogressive Jan 2013 #34
Yep - light up a few 'don't tread on me freedom fighter' militias with designating jmg257 Jan 2013 #13
Another bizarre dose of word salad. Two logins much? nt Romulox Jan 2013 #14
Was it that hard to understand? Hmm...seemed easy enough to comprehend. jmg257 Jan 2013 #22
Log back in as Mopar. This name is too hard to remember. nt Romulox Jan 2013 #23
Isn't Mopar a car part? nt jmg257 Jan 2013 #26
Problem is that the only people today's gun cultist patriots can defeat are innocent citizens. Hoyt Jan 2013 #52
The second amendment doesn't say anythign about who someone "can defeat". Try again. nt Romulox Jan 2013 #54
No, but gun cultists like this plan to be in control when revolution comes. I'd prefer they aren't. Hoyt Jan 2013 #55
Your celebration of the invincible power sylvi Jan 2013 #8
A smartphone is more of a weapon against the state than a Bushmaster MightyMopar Jan 2013 #9
Reality has proven you wrong, to the point you have to pretend we won in Afghanistan. nt Romulox Jan 2013 #11
Yeah, if you want give up your nice home and family to fight for an obsolete weapon MightyMopar Jan 2013 #16
A smartphone is a weapon against the state like a leash is a weapon against a dog's owner. JVS Jan 2013 #12
I would fear the phone too sarisataka Jan 2013 #20
The bulk of my gun collection consists of obsolete weapons slackmaster Jan 2013 #15
One can still kill family and neighbors with obsolete weapons but tanks and drones, not so much MightyMopar Jan 2013 #17
What could possibly go wrong? Fumesucker Jan 2013 #19
I agree, piston powered AR's are the way to go. ileus Jan 2013 #21
Now they'll justify wanting to own one as a collector's item. no_hypocrisy Jan 2013 #28
DARPA....LMAO jp76 Jan 2013 #29
Pointing out that Busmasters are obselete fighting government makes you an unpatriotic wimp MightyMopar Jan 2013 #30
I don't follow. jp76 Jan 2013 #31
They did not, could not. oneshooter Jan 2013 #38
Micro Drones are a reality. They can navigate and perform tasks. They have not been programmed bluestate10 Jan 2013 #48
Pro RKBA people have been under attack by drones for years. Remmah2 Jan 2013 #32
I disagree, the civillian small arm would stand up just fine against tanks and drones... R_Flagg_77 Jan 2013 #36
Take a poll of Al Quead aand taliban leadership how they like those drones MightyMopar Jan 2013 #37
You aren't seriously advocating drone use against Americans on American soil? dairydog91 Jan 2013 #39
paparazzi using them right now to spy on celebrities, technology marches on, your gun is obsolete MightyMopar Jan 2013 #40
And here I thought militaristic fantasies of the unbeatable uber-army were a right-wing thing. dairydog91 Jan 2013 #53
Drones are often operated by pilots on American soil. R_Flagg_77 Jan 2013 #41
Now that's a fantasy, Next you'll be attacking area 51 MightyMopar Jan 2013 #42
How so sir? R_Flagg_77 Jan 2013 #43
Now if you can get Rambo, Swartzeneggar, Chuck Norris, theRock, to wear socks over their heads MightyMopar Jan 2013 #44
If you please sir... R_Flagg_77 Jan 2013 #45
But will you wear socks over your head while you do all this? MightyMopar Jan 2013 #46
I say, what about the standing army's level of brutality & ingenuity? jmg257 Jan 2013 #51
Do you mind if I ask, do you have any direct experience with the USAF "drone" program? MrScorpio Jan 2013 #49
Well. Solar powered Drones get past all of your stoppers. The issue ordinance is being worked out. bluestate10 Jan 2013 #50
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The irony is that the Bus...