Slashdot Mirror


Low Frequency Active Sonar Gains US Gov. Approval

burntout writes "According to bbc online the US government has finally approved the use of low frequency active sonar. Apparently the navy has been granted an exemption from the marine mammal protection act for this, which is apparently 'necessary because of new superquiet Chinese, Russian, and German subs'."

68 comments

  1. Germans? by nosferatu-man · · Score: 3, Funny

    We taught them a lesson, in 1918,
    and they've hardly bothered us since then. - tl

    --
    To spur "enterprise Linux," Big Bang, the distributed two-phase commit.
    1. Re:Germans? by brsmith4 · · Score: 1

      Maybe i am missing the joke, but didn't they need a lesson in 1937-1945? I thought they were considerably more dangerous then as well.

    2. Re:Germans? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They got taught a lesson in 1966 as well.

    3. Re:Germans? by nosferatu-man · · Score: 2

      It's a quote from a Tom Lehrer song, actually. Maybe a bit oversubtle.

      'jfb

      --
      To spur "enterprise Linux," Big Bang, the distributed two-phase commit.
  2. I'd have to quote C&C on this issue: by wompser · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Save the Whales
    Save the whales
    Oh, funky momma, save the whales
    Yeah, Save the whales
    You just got to save the whales but believe me when I tell you,
    Kill the seals

    ------Cheech and Chong

    It's funny, see...

    --
    .....
  3. 1937... by alwayslurking · · Score: 1

    1939 methinks. I don't remember the allied powers doing much to stop the German involvement in Spain and that was about it for German military action that year. Of course, 1939 is only when the war started for countries that hadn't finished selling military technology to the fascists yet.... bad Big Blue, bad

  4. This is an overhyped issue... by duffbeer703 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Active sonar is only used in emergency situations.

    Using an active sonar array advertises your position to any other submarines in 30-90 nm radius.

    The most common use for active sonar is to acquire a definitive lock on a target after torpedoes have been launched.

    --
    Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    1. Re:This is an overhyped issue... by heikkile · · Score: 5, Funny
      Using an active sonar array advertises your position
      to any other submarines in 30-90 nm radius

      Who cares! Once they are within a micrometer, or even a whole
      meter from you, you are toast anyway!

      --

      In Murphy We Turst

    2. Re:This is an overhyped issue... by Yunzil · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Active sonar is only used in emergency situations

      Not entirely true. :)

      Sometimes it doesn't matter if you advertise your position. Active detective ranges are so much longer than passive detection ranges that sometimes it's possible to just ping like hell and hold the threat at standoff range until you are ready to kill them.

    3. Re:This is an overhyped issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I believe that's Nautical Mile when you are in an ocean.

    4. Re:This is an overhyped issue... by gonar · · Score: 3, Informative

      actually, on normal targets passive detecion range is much greater, but less precise. you know where he is, but not quite precisely where.

      however, today's submarines are sooooo quiet, that they make less noise then the ocean background.

      active is great for very high precision location at relatively short ranges.

      if you are banging out active pings, your nice quiet enemy, just outside your active detection range knows where you are and can fairly easily maneuver around you.

      the counter tactic to this is a team of subs, some pinging and some passive, with the passive guys in the gaps trying to catch the sneaky bastards....

      --
      The difference between Theory and Practice is greater in Practice than in Theory.
    5. Re:This is an overhyped issue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only problem is, the US Navy prefers that submarines operate alone. It's too difficult to coordinate operations between subs.

    6. Re:This is an overhyped issue... by Firefly1 · · Score: 1

      Quite so. In the trade of submarine warfare, as has been amply evidenced, stealth is everything. If you find yourself needing to use an active sytstem, it is fairly certain you have bigger concerns on your mind than its effect on local fauna.

      --
      - White Knight of the Order of Mihoshi Enthusiasts
    7. Re:This is an overhyped issue... by eyegor · · Score: 2

      That's true if you're on a sub, but not the case if you're a skimmer and your sole role is to drag an LFA array around.

      Also, as a sub, it's still best not to ping. If you do, it's to get a final range BEFORE you shoot. The torpedo will do a lot of pinging of it's own when it's closing on the target. If you're in the ball park with your firing solution, the torpedo will find it just fine.

      Something else to remember, you can be detected more than twice the distance than you can detect someone with active SONAR. Which is one reason we tagged the breakers OFF when we went on deployment.

      --

      Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
  5. Visual scan for marine mammals... by alwayslurking · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...how very sophisticated. Guess the Navy can add whale-watching trips to their recruitment literature now.

    1. Re:Visual scan for marine mammals... by Firefly1 · · Score: 1
      ...officials say they will require the personnel to use special protective measures such as a visual scan for marine mammals and shutting down the sonar if the animals are detected.
      Noble theory, but I do not see that happening in practice because it's a sure bet that sub captains will exploit this to the hilt.
      --
      - White Knight of the Order of Mihoshi Enthusiasts
    2. Re:Visual scan for marine mammals... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only a great fool would bet against you.

  6. re: overhyped issue by burntout · · Score: 4, Informative

    . . . good point DuffBeer; however, if you had read the article, you might have noticed that this is towed array sonar, based on ships. The issue here is not stealth, it is detection.

  7. Sonar and whale strandings by Peter+T+Ermit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Though this issue is a bit overhyped, once in a while, the Navy does kill a few whales. For instance, in March, 2000, 17 beaked whales died due to getting battered with sonar. (Link to NOAA press release here.)

    1. Re:Sonar and whale strandings by JabberWokky · · Score: 5, Funny
      And the Army probably mauls a few dozen rabbits, groundhogs and skunks under tanks and troop carriers. The Air Force nukes its share of birds with high powered radar.

      And a van full of PETA demonstrators recently hit a deer while driving to some protest.

      --
      Evan

      --
      "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
    2. Re:Sonar and whale strandings by eberry · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but whales are an endangered species. Rabbits, well they breed like rabbits.

      I used to be a Bradley driver. We would go out of our way to prevent harm to animals. If we were doing live fires and a deer crossed onto the range. We shut down until civilian officials verified the area was clear.

      Destroying the environment to protect ourselves is counter-productive.

      --
      Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Lois, this isn't my Batman glass. - Peter
    3. Re:Sonar and whale strandings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think of it like Aspartame poisoning... the damage is cumulative... And if that many huge mammals died, then I'll bet many many more smaller fish died.

      It's reasoning like this that caused the Buffalo and every other animal we reasoned like this with, to go all but extinct. "Gee Wolly, I only killed 17 bufallo, I don't see how that could have hurt..."

      It's also this reasoning that lets people go around in dazed and confused states as the oxygen levels on our planets fall proportionately with the slash and burn of the forests. "Gee Wolly, we have plenty of trees elsewhere, and look! There are more trees in America now than when we first got here."

      And last but not least, PETA(people eating tasty animals) never hits deers with vans. We shoot the bastards with high powered assault rifles, cuz you never know when a deer could be wearing a bullet proof vest.

  8. Enemy by pagercam2 · · Score: 2

    The Chinese, Russian, and German haven't reallye been developed the swedish, and dutch submarines are the really quiet ones using sterling engines, but this limits them to shallow, costal waters. Active mode is rarely used in historical systems, but this system is much lower in which a strong transmitter is used at a distance and closer sensors hear the echo so there isn't much chance of detection. I'm not quite sure how one knows if this is harmful to marine life, a loud noise to a creature that depends on sound for communications and navigation can't be too happy about someone yelling in thier ear.

    1. Re:Enemy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So far the subs China builds are not much of a threat. The Han is very loud the problem is that Russia and Germany SELLS there subs and they are pretty good boats.
      As to Sonar giving away your position. It is now worse than radar. The main US torpedo has a longer range than most threats if you shoot first and ourside of there range you will get a kill.
      There are other ways to use active sonar such as bottom bounce where you are less likely to give away your postinon.

  9. 235 decibels or greater ! by UranusReallyHertz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Holy sheeet! Anyone know how much juice that must take? http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/lfa.htm The shallow-water acoustics problem has risen in importance due to the increased salience of regional conflicts where the US Navy may to encounter slow, diesel submarines close to shore. The shallow-water, slow submarine is significantly more difficult to detect and classify acoustically than the cold war threat, due to the complex propagation, high clutter, and low target Doppler. Effective sonar performance requires new processing algorithms which cannot be implemented on current Naval platforms due the high processing requirements. A Hybrid Digital/Optical Processor (HyDOP) is to demonstrate the feasibility of using embedded scalable high performance digital and optical processing to solve this problem. This requires application of computationally intensive algorithms which cannot be implemented in real time using conventional processors. A high-speed optical correlator being developed by the Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) will act as a coprocessor to an Intel Paragon XP/S-25 computer.

    --
    Smoking is an expensive, slow, and unreliable method of suicide.
  10. War is good... by noxavior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    To provide excuses for any action. Destroying the world's most peaceful creatures because we want to kill each other is ironic and disgusting.

    --
    Karma:This parrot is dead! (and so is the joke.)
    1. Re:War is good... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      How else do you think morons get re-elected? They have to come up with a good war to boost ratings.

    2. Re:War is good... by amRadioHed · · Score: 1

      Who modded this a troll?
      It's interesting or insightful or something, definatly not a troll.

      --
      We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
    3. Re:War is good... by will_die · · Score: 1

      And if they had any brains they would do the same thing to us. Fictional story about real attacks.

    4. Re:War is good... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      Um, a lot of whales are predatory, which isn't notably peaceful. (Actually, I think they're all technically carnivores, but I wouldn't call straining plankton from the water "violent," either. But killer whales, sperm whales, and at least a few others are fearsome predators.) I agree that we shouldn't wantonly kill them off, but the main reason they don't have weapons is that they don't have hands. If they did, I suspect we'd have found the ocean a much harder environment to exploit ...

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    5. Re:War is good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's pure conjecture. The fact remains man kind is the only creature dumb enough to invest his existance in the pursuit of technologies which destroys man, animal, plants, and the biosphere of our planet in general. It's worth adding that we're not the only creature on earth with hands either, but yet, we seem to be the only ones who plays this stupid little war game.

      D-uh, let's all go attack Afganistan for the attacks there is no evidence they were directly involved in. Make sure you straff the wedding parties, we want to show the world just how intelligent and civilized we are. While we're at it, let's f**k their native marine life...

    6. Re:War is good... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Interesting

      We aren't the only animals with hands, nor with big brains, but we're the only ones who have both hands and the brains to use our hands to develop much in the way of technology. (As one of the Leakeys pointed out, many other animals make tools; the critical distinction between us and them is that we _use tools to make tools_. After that, there are no limits.) But we're not the only violent animals, nor in fact are the only ones who fight wars -- read up on baboons some time.

      Look, I'm not defending killing whales, nor bombing wedding parties. But the idea that the rest of nature is gentle and peaceful and we're the only ones who destroy each other and/or our environment is romantic foolishness.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    7. Re:War is good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Destroy others.. no, a lot of species do that, but for territorial reasons.. not due to ideological differences.

      Destroy the environment.. Which animals do that? I am unaware of any animals that intentionally exploit the surrounding resources for personal gain, to the point of the exploitation being nonreversable

      Romantic foolishness aside, humans have the capacity to know the effects of their actions. Sperm whales eat squids. Orca's eat otters (or sea lions). Humans with active sonar arrays blast the hell out of those same animals eardrums.

      The animals eat because they have to to survive. Humans don't NEED the active sonar.

  11. Extremely sad by MrIcee · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This is on our front pages of todays paper here in Hawaii. This is a blow for the island and the marine creatures that surround it.

    Yes... it causes whales and dolphins to die. Much of the experiments were carried out in the water around Hawaii, thanks to the military idiots that abound here.

    And yes, they know that it cause havoc with the animals. It's sad, because whales travel thousands of miles each year to give birth to their babies off the coasts of our islands. Not only will this dissrupt their normal cycle of life, but also will drive them away (which also hurts our tourist industry as well as our scientific industries who try to study the whales).

    But, like everything else... our government has it's preverbal head up it's ass and only thinks of itself with it's MIGHT MAKES RIGHT mentality.

    I think personally, it is time for Hawaii to secceed the US... kick out the military, and bring back a balance to life on these beautiful islands.

    1. Re:Extremely sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think personally, it is time for Hawaii to secceed the US... kick out the military, and bring back a balance to life on these beautiful islands.


      That's an excellent idea.

      You're working on your conversational Japanese, I hope....

    2. Re:Extremely sad by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      I would love to see the Hawaiian islands returned to the Hawaiians. But US politicians don't have any morals, and the Hawaiians aren't likely to militarily defeat the US Army, so it's not really likely.

    3. Re:Extremely sad by pink_cup_and_hanger_ · · Score: 1

      I think personally, it is time for Hawaii to secceed the US... kick out the military, and bring back a balance to life on these beautiful islands.

      Boy, what an intelligent statement. Just 60 fucking years ago you would have been invaded by the Japanese, had your women raped, children murdered, been beheaded during sword practice, etc. if it weren't for the U.S. military.

      And boy, nevermind the fact these young guys volunteer to sit on g-ddamn Navy ships/subs for months at a fucking time to defend your ass. God forbid we kill a couple of dolphins or whales to defend ourselves. Unless you're a Dalai Lama-type and brush insects out of your path so as not to step on them, you have no reason to whine.

    4. Re:Extremely sad by p3d0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Can you imagine a sound so loud that it kills you? It's mindboggling. Not a nice way to die. I have heard estimates as high as 235 decibels. That's a hundred thousand times louder than pressing your ear up against a jumbo jet engine.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    5. Re:Extremely sad by MrIcee · · Score: 2
      Boy, what an intelligent statement. Just 60 fucking years ago you would have been invaded by the Japanese, had your women raped, children murdered, been beheaded during sword practice, etc. if it weren't for the U.S. military.

      And boy, nevermind the fact these young guys volunteer to sit on g-ddamn Navy ships/subs for months at a fucking time to defend your ass. God forbid we kill a couple of dolphins or whales to defend ourselves. Unless you're a Dalai Lama-type and brush insects out of your path so as not to step on them, you have no reason to whine.

      First of all, you moron, the main reason the islands were attacked was BECAUSE THE US MILITARY WAS HERE. Second, you moron, the US took over hawaii ILLEGALLY, and even this year the world court sided with the hawaiians on the issue. Thirdly, you moron, you can stick your GUN back in your pants. We don't need your fucked up american viewpoints - your *without the US you will die* mentality... that is EXACTLY the type of viewpoint that makes the US hated world wide.

      Finally, you moron, your fucking military bombs our lands and our waters... kills our fish. Your mainland corruption drains our resources and money from the islands. We do not need people with your mindset. So just stay on the mainland and play battleship in your little bathtub with your little toy gun.

      Aloha

    6. Re:Extremely sad by blablablastuff · · Score: 1

      first of all, you moron, without the us military being on the island 60 years ago, you wouldn't have been bombed, you would have been invaded and siezed. go ask a few koreans how that trick works. the primary difference is, native hawaiian women tend towards being overweight, and hawaiian men are slow and tend towards laziness, so unlike the koreans you wouldn't have made good whores and slaves. you wold probably have been suitable for being marched off a cliff at gunpoint though.

      second, you moron, a 90% popular vote in favor of statehood sounds like something that was really twisting arms out there. whatever your non-existent "world court" was babbling about, the US for some reason, let your worthless island in, and now we're stuck with you.

      thirdly, you moron, as a previous post pointed out, without the US you pretty much will die. There are damn near a million people on those rocks with pretty much no identifiable sources of income aside from tourism and leeching from the us government. Little things like all your food, drugs, spam, toilet paper, refrigerators, school textbooks (however little good they seem to do you), cars, tires to put on them, gasoline to put in them, a stable, world respected form of currency to buy everything with, laws, airplanes, roads, building materials, are you getting the picture yet? comes to you courtesy of the shipping facilities on the west coast of the US. Take this all away, and you go back to living the way you were found, a bunch of wild savages living hand-to-mouth and cudgel-to-brain. Please don't tell me you've bought into the disneyland image of the great enlightened culture you try to sell to the tourists. Before the english found you and started educating the people there, stacking a few rocks on top of each other and hooting at people while waving stick-spears was about the height of advanced civilization there.

      You have a million people packed into a bunch of islands with exactly 3 natural resources. Rocks, pineapples and Fish. Rocks are common, and you will not be able to earn enough money to feed your million overweight people by exporting rocks. Fish are common, and you will not be able to earn enough money to feed your million overweight people by exporting fish. You may be able to feed a million overweight people by catching all those fish....until your waters become depopulated and you have destroyed your precious little environment. Pineapples can be grown elsewhere, and almost certainly are. I just don't feel like looking right now. While pineapples may provide you with some sort of income, it would probably be difficult to grow them effectively without the fertilizers and pesticides you get from the US, and the money and regulations the FDA and USDA provide to ensure they're safe for consumption.

      Finally, you moron, our military bombs our lands. Plain, boring lifeless piles of volcanic rock. Not much point in bombing water, is there? Our "mainland corruption" (just out of curiosity, are you one of the idiots who called into the radio stations on september 11th last year saying the WTC problems were "mainland crap" that weren't important to you) can't possibly drain resources from the islands, as there are no resources to drain. The reverse, hoever, is quite obviously true, as your island consumes many resources that could be much better used in America. As far as draining money from the islands, without the US you would have no identifiable form of currency other than cracked seashells and shiny bits of coral. It is the Hawaii that drains money from the United States, by leeching hard earned money from tourists who fell for the vast amount of overstated hype and bullshit about how beautiful and perfect everything is out there. If you, moron, want to see a drain of money, Please go ahead and try to secceed, and start counting the cashflow when all our tourists decide not to bother getting visas and passports, and spend their time on the beautiful beaches and islands of Florida, parts of California, the Gulf Coast, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Caribbean islands, all of which are US states and/or territories, accept US dollars happily, are significantly cheaper than your overpriced crap, usually have friendly, polite, happy people, and beaches more than 20 feet wide with fifty thousand people crowded onto them.

      Although bitching about how horrible the US is is the official pastime out there, you really should think about what you're talking about. While I know that isn't something you're used to, it does have benefits. Hawaii needs the US a million times more than the US needs hawaii. If you go, no one here will notice, or care. A few people will have to change their vacation plans, but they'll be happy to do so when they get to St. Johns, USVI and spend a few days on the beautiful beaches, with some of the best snorkeling in the world (vastly superior in every conceivable way to Hanauma bay, that really is a dump) , enjoying some fine domestic rum. Until California can pick up the slack in the pineapple industry (they can grow everything else...) maybe a few people will have to suffer to eat their ham without pineapple for a few months. The military could give a shit, most of them are disgusted with hawaii, and bases in America and on Guam can provide the support they need.

    7. Re:Extremely sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      hahahahahahahahah

      Your funny

      First, I'm not hawaiian, but I side with them. If they secceded and said I had to leave, I would go gladly - and you can be damn sure I wouldn't go back to the mainland.

      The rest of the world has done nothing but destroy these beautiful islands. The islands would survive fine, especially without people with your mindset.

      Sure... would the islands have been invaded long ago? Probably... so what. That was then, this is now.

      The islands can self-sustain. It's the crap that is imported that make the hawaiians fat. It's the fucked up american education system that makes them stupid. They didn't used to be stupid, nor fat, until the GREAT WHITE MISSIONARIES came over and totally destroyed everything... then the GREEDY AMERICAN BUSINESMEN came over, and took the rest. Rape and pilliage is all that have happened here for generations. Good job jerks. It was a CORRUPT AMERICAN GOVERNMENT that thought it could just snatch up the islands by lieing and corruption (and they did just that).

      America the great... HAHAHAHAHHAHAHA. America the destroyer... now that's true. America consumes more than any nation, pollutes more than any nation... but you all seem to think that is just fine. Crush the indians, Crush the hawaiians, Crush the afgani's, Crush anyone who dares to question your motives. Crush Crush Crush. And then, have a god damn haughty view of yourselves -- claim that the only reason people exist is due to your GENEROSITY and OUTPOURING.

      Please, crawl back under the rock from whence you came. We don't need your money, we don't need your views, we don't need your military or bombs, we don't need you killing more innocents, be they whales, dolphins, or people.

    8. Re:Extremely sad by pink_cup_and_hanger_ · · Score: 1

      First of all, you moron, the main reason the islands were attacked was BECAUSE THE US MILITARY WAS HERE.

      Yeah, like you aren't in a strategic position or anything. Japan would have _never_ bothered you.

      Second, you moron, the US took over hawaii ILLEGALLY

      Well, you know, human history is full of injustices. I could moan about my Welsh ancestors having their homeland being invaded by the Anglo-Saxons. Does it _really_ effect me? Does it _really_ effect you? Appreciate what being part of the United States politically and economically has brought you. You'd be much worse off, and probably had been taken over by another county with _much_ less regard for human dignity and freedom.

    9. Re:Extremely sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Wow, nice rants in here. Let's bring a bit of lucidity to this discussion with some facts... it might help:

      (I'm responding below, to several of the larger rants... no ranting here, just some facts to help set the record straight).

      1) Can Hawaii be self-sustaining
      Certainly. Remember, before the advent of the white man coming to the island there were a couple of million hawaiians living here (at the peak). Starvation was not known on the islands.

      Hawaiian islands have all the ecosystems except artic and desert. The elevation on the islands (such as the Big Island) goes from sea level to 13,400 ft. Almost any crop can be grown here.

      Also, do not forget, almost 100% of the seafood consumed in hawaii is caught from the local waters (or grown in local fisheries).

      Also, the Big Island, for example, has the largest (privatly owned) cattle ranches in the country. That, coupled with wild boar (which is consumed in quantity) and wild goat, mean that the island has pretty much all the resources it needs.

      Keep in mind, if Hawaiians *were* to seceed, most americans would leave the islands. THe hawaiians themselves have said that anyone here before 1975 could stay if they wished... but that means MILLIONS of people would leave. That reduces greatly the amount required to self-sustain.

      2) Tourism
      One of the rants indicated that if Hawaii seceeded, it would lose the tourists who would *rather vacation in florida*. This view seems to assume that the majority of the tourists to hawaii actually come from america. That is not the case. The majority of tourists come from places other than america (such as japan, europe, china, etc).

      Considering the tone of current american travel, what with strip searches, loss of privacy, suspicion of foreigners, I suspect that tourism would actually increase to hawaii if it removed itself from the US, not decrease.

      3) On the issue of the US saving us from Japan
      One poster made the comment that if it was not for the US, the japanese would have raped our women and killed our children (or some other nation). Well, that's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is... so japan didn't rape and pillage, america did instead. Who cares who does the raping and pilliging... it happened regardless.

      Additionally, there are more japanese living here than non-japanese. So quite frankly, we are highly japanese already.

      4) On the issue of security
      The statements that we can kill whales and dolphins for the sake of security is not very forward thinking. First, killing whales and dolphins (remember, the experiments are carried out here on the islands) hurts our tourist industry... so the very thing you say is protecting us, is harming us.

      Second, american military has done, and continues to do, unbelievable damage to the islands and environment, and never has to pay for the damage (though the governments here are catching on and starting to complain).

      5) Seceeding
      While I agree that it is unlikely for the hawaiians to seceed (and remember, there are very few of them left, in the thousands), Clinton, during his presidency, officially appologized to the Hawaiians and acknowledged that indeed they had been taken over illegally. Additionally, the world court (as the original poster pointed out) did favor the hawaii position (though america consistantly ignores the world court unles they rule in americas favor, of course).

      6) The hawaiians
      The hawaiians are not stupid. They were not fat either, until the advent of the white man (except the Ali, who were supposed to be fat because that was a sign of royality).

      However, once hawaii became a part of america the hawaiians were put into a forced poverty, which continues to this day. Land was taken from them, public schools were denied to them. Their culture was deemed illegal (hula, for example, was illegal even into the early 1900's). Even today, hawaii homeland that is reserved for native hawaiians is given out unfairly. Often, the land is assigned as far away from the person it is given to as possible - under the assumption that they will not want to leave friends and family to take possession of the land, and thus it sits empty (and some of the land is just plain worthless, though others are in very nice areas).

      The upshot? Yes, if they were to seceed, and keep their heads about them, it would probably work and work well.

    10. Re:Extremely sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Please refer to my post here that brings some facts into this discussion.

      Your analogy to Welsh etc... is a bit misplaced because the US has strict laws about how it is to take on new land/states. Those laws were broken when hawaii was taken illegally. Clinton appologized to the Hawaiians during his presidency and acknowledged the fact.

      Additionally, like it or not, the united states has not, over all, helped the islands. Sure, one can point at some improvements, but one can also point at many many many disturbing things that US has brough.

      Anyway, please read the other discussion because it points out, in a non-rant manner, quite a few of the issues and what they mean.

    11. Re:Extremely sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MrIcee,

      My only complaint with your post is that I'm not certain you emphasized enough what a moron that person is. In the future, I would hope you would make extra efforts to present this fact in as unmistakable terms as possible as it helps other morons realize the reality of their being. Thanks!

    12. Re:Extremely sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Appreciate what being part of the United States politically and economically has brought you."

      Yes, like having every bit of tissue of every organ in my body exposed to radiation! Thanks US politician jerkoffs and corporate selfserving as****es.

      "You'd be much worse off, and probably had been taken over by another county with _much_ less regard for human dignity and freedom."

      I know. It's a good thing the US doesn't practice genocide(native americans). Okay, so it does, but at least they don't cowardly use biological weapons against people(giving plague infected blankets to native americans). Okay, well at least they protect their citizens(exposed everyone who has lived here since 1950 to radiation due to above ground nuclear tests which were decried by the scientific community and backed by political and economic interests).

      But you know, you can't focus on the bad...

    13. Re:Extremely sad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      THe hawaiians themselves have said that anyone here before 1975 could stay if they wished... but that means MILLIONS of people would leave.

      Oh, that's very kind of them. And as for the 2 generations born after 1975? And to where would these millions go to? And if they refuse to leave? Forced off at gunpoint maybe?

      Look, this ain't gonna happen... so all this rhetoric does is to fuel hatred and anger. And at worst, it fires up idiot radicals to start killing innocent people. And no, past history doesn't justify present-day revenge.

      How 'bout we all learn to live with reality, work hard and honestly, teach our children the same and to respect and honor their ancestor's culture (whatever it may be).

    14. Re:Extremely sad by Vuarnet · · Score: 2

      How 'bout we all learn to live with reality, work hard and honestly, teach our children the same and to respect and honor their ancestor's culture (whatever it may be). And save the whales and dolphins.

      --
      Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earth-bound misfit, I
      Learning to fly, Pink Floyd.
  12. Alaska too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Sitting here in Alaska reading this reminds me of recent articles here about the Salmon industry dying due to the lowest Salmon runs ever, the killer whales going nuts slaughtering the local seal population, and sharks showing up where no sharks have ever been seen before. Then I follow the links and find out that they were testing this thing in the Gulf of Alaska. Hmmmmm....

  13. be my guest, bye bye by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    after suffering through 2 and a half years on that miserable little rock, i've thought for quite some time that it would be hilarious to see them do just that.
    phase one: secceed
    phase two: ?
    phase three: mass starvation, death, or begging your knees for the US to take your worthless rock back from you.

    you see, if (oh please god) you secceed, you run into a slight little problem. you lose everything the US gives you, and it is considerable.
    we feed your 850,000 bloated braddahs, since there's no way in hell you're gonna grown enough food on that scrap of gravel.
    you could try to buy the food from a real country, but being a country with no natural resources in the middle of nowhere and a huge population skilled only at overcharging american tourists, and bitching at the military while begging them for jobs, scraping up the $$'s might be difficult.
    Every single thing you require in life would be charged tariffs to leave this country. any company still willing to do business with you would have to go through all the trouble of getting the trade with a foreign country approved.

    your illiterate, halfwit, gibberish "pidgin" babbling kids? doomed, now that they have to get a student visa to get out of there and attend a real college, where people speak english as though they were more than 3 years old and expect you to learn something.

    and all that tourism money? kiss it goodbye. why should people waste good money on bad islands when the US Virgin islands are prettier, nicer, and dont require a passport, unlike the Free Republik of Blubber out there.

    Since my last job had me endure an exile to that third-world country masquerading as a US state, i've been dreaming of the day when the Separationist idiots out there get their wish. Maybe when you "kick us out" we could arrange to help you get things started by blasting some of those nice 8 lane highways and the port facilities we gave you into gravel, just to get you started on that whole balance of life thing.

  14. Sonic Shadow by duffahtolla · · Score: 1

    What ever happened to the sonic shadow left by super quiet subs. This would detect super quiet subs, leave the wild life alone and not advertise it's location. Wouldn't this be the best option?

  15. Whoppin subwoofers by Pelam · · Score: 1

    They just wan't to show who's the boss to those pesky
    teenagers with huge subwoofers and extra-amps in their cars.
    Is bad for other mammals though.

  16. Sub Sonar by ThereIsNoSporkNeo · · Score: 1

    Isn't there a single hard-hearted individual out there that is willing to speak out "against the whales?"

    Frankly, I'm all for the sonar. If it saves a few lives (Well, at least lives on -my- side), to hell with the whales.

    Whales are -animals-. That doesn't mean I advocate going about and randomly slaying them, but put your views in perspective. This sonar isn't going to be in action all the time, only when there is the possibility that there is an enemy submarine nearby.

    Personally, I don't feel like being nuked by an off-shore sub, just because we didn't want to deafen some wet mammals.

    --
    With my dying breath, I curse Zoidberg!
    1. Re:Sub Sonar by Rob+Riggs · · Score: 1
      This sonar isn't going to be in action all the time, only when there is the possibility that there is an enemy submarine nearby.
      Bullsh*t. The military spends far more time (orders of magnitude) in training than it does in actual combat. And the only way the Navy will be satisfied with the combat readiness of it's sub hunters is by practicing with live sonar.

      So, the Navy will be killing marine mammals regardless of whether any actual lives are saved.

      --
      the growth in cynicism and rebellion has not been without cause
    2. Re:Sub Sonar by ThereIsNoSporkNeo · · Score: 1

      Yep, that's entirely true. The military kills mammals. The only reason you're protesting so strongly is the fact that they are whales, and since your childhood you've been told:
      "Whales are gentle creatures, who never hurt a fly and are hunted down by cruel humans"

      Well... cows are gentle mammals too. (Well, most cows). Would you be offended if the military killed some cattle in order to be ready to
      -Protect your life-?

      Get your priorities straight.

      --
      With my dying breath, I curse Zoidberg!
    3. Re:Sub Sonar by Niksie3 · · Score: 0

      cows are far from an endangered species.

      --
      Sig you!
    4. Re:Sub Sonar by ThereIsNoSporkNeo · · Score: 1

      Very well, we'll use a more rare example then. Let's say the army was forced to kill a couple of kangaro mice (They are endangered) in the process of defending the country. Would you be o.k with that?

      Would you consent to wiping out all the kangaro mice to save a family member? How about to save your own life?

      --
      With my dying breath, I curse Zoidberg!
    5. Re:Sub Sonar by Niksie3 · · Score: 0

      if in the process of actually defending the damn country, yes

      if during training, no.

      the anolagy with saving my own live is flawed because of the instinct of self preservation

      --
      Sig you!
    6. Re:Sub Sonar by ThereIsNoSporkNeo · · Score: 1

      So, what you're saying is you don't mind if they use devices in war, but you don't want them to know -how- to use them when it comes to that point.

      Soldier #1 "What's this button do?"
      Soldier #2 "I don't know... try pushing it"

      And when they clean up the fragments, they discover that the explosion caught a family of field mice too. And the nation grieves.

      How is the instinct of self-preservation affect it in a negative way? Every human being has an instinct of self-preservation... if it came down to it, the soldier in question would almost undoubtably choose to kill some cute little mammal in order to save his own life. And I hold that this is absolutely the correct decision.

      --
      With my dying breath, I curse Zoidberg!
  17. Fuck radar by billcopc · · Score: 1

    Why don't we just destroy all subs and weapons and just get the fuck along ? It seems every day the US Army is looking for a fight and it's just pathetic.

    Save the whales, save the money and most importantly save the PEOPLE!

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Fuck radar by Valdrax · · Score: 2

      Why don't we just destroy all subs and weapons and just get the fuck along ? It seems every day the US Army is looking for a fight and it's just pathetic.

      It's about time someone said it! I mean, really, we've put with the ruse long enough. It's no longer funny. We should just end all these shennanigans and get back to the peace, love, and well-being that was all of human history before the Illuminati talked everyone into starting up the Great Generational Gag of 1937. Come on, soon no one will be alive to remember that it was all just a big joke, and people will think things like hunger, famine, and disease were meant to be taken seriously or, even worse, were the natural order of human history!

      Let's just put an end to it all.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  18. PETA demonstrators recently hit a deer by ZahrGnosis · · Score: 1
    And a van full of PETA demonstrators recently hit a deer while driving to some protest

    That's hilharious... this is OffTopic, but I thought it was worth seeing. From http://www.nmagriculture.org/shear_wisdom2.htm

    PETA Staffers Kill Deer With Car, Sue NJ Department of Game and Fish for Damages -- According to a news release from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, (PETA), the organization plans to take action against the New Jersey game management agency for damages caused to the car driven by two anti-hunting campaigners when it hit a deer on a New Jersey highway. Rather than slow down, or be thankful they weren't hurt seriously, as thousands of drivers in all states do every year, they faxed Bob McDowell, director of the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection's Division of Fish and Wildlife, and John Bradway, chairman of the Fish and Game Council, a notice of intent to sue them as a result of the collision late last November.

    PETA maintains that this accident--as well as thousands more that take place every year-- was caused by the state's mismanagement of the deer population, which includes purposely increasing herd sizes in order to provide more live targets for hunters and so jeopardizes the well-being of people who use the roads. In 1999 alone, there were more than 14,000 deer-vehicle collisions reported in New Jersey.

    PETA argues that by placing the interests of hunters, who amount to barely more than 1 percent of New Jersey's population, above the safety of the more than 8 million New Jersey residents and countless out-of-state travelers who use the roads, wildlife agencies are violating the state's constitutional mandate to provide protection and security to its people. PETA also opposes the fear, the disruption of herd members' relationships, and the bloodshed suffered by the deer on grounds of cruelty to animals.

    Plan to Protect Deer Backfires -- In a related story received by email, a PETA plan to protect Ohio deer from hunters brought different results than were intended.

    An Ohio safety law requires hunters to display at least 400 square inches of hunter's blaze orange on their person when in the woods. Capitalizing on the fact that hunters do not usually shoot orange because of its identification with hunter's garb, PETA bulk purchased blaze orange vests and affixed them to live-trapped deer in Youngstown suburbs.

    According to PETA spokesperson Katie Reese, a total of 405 vests were successfully put into circulation on deer by mid-December, and the anti-hunting group was still catching and vesting more deer.

    Youngtown entrepreneur Guy Lockey, of Guy's Outdoors then offered rewards for returned vests. Hunters who successfully bagged a vested deer could register for a drawing for random and biggest animal awards. Some 308 of the vests were recorded as bagged, based on returns by most of the hunters registering for Mr. Lockey's drawing.

    "It's so easy, you can see them coming a mile away" said one first year hunter after checking in his first spike buck. "

  19. 230+ decibels by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 2
    Explosions and loud noises are fun, especially when they are far away, but the sea is not empty and water carries sound much beter and further than air.

    Though obviously half baked it's hardly overhyped. It's very different from past sonars. Did you look at the decibel level of the output? The frequencies are also the same the ones the whales actively uses. ie. their ears are best tuned to.

    Whales and many other large sea animals depend on having good ears / sonar to go on living. As an urbanized human you technically don't need your ears for survival, but having the sound equivalent of jet engines go off unexpectedly behind your ears would have adverse effect on your fitness. In a worst case, this will mung the ears of large groups of animals rendering them unfit for survival. In the best case it will drown out or interfere with their communication (mating and food finding) and lower their survival fitness.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  20. Life on the USNS Impeccable by Leonard+Crane · · Score: 1

    A few years back I came across this low frequency active sonar technology and realized that the physics associated with it would help make for an interesting side story in a thriller I was writing. The first LFA towed-array sonar ship due to be commissioned in the series was the Impeccable, and so I sketched my guesswork of how the navy might use this vessel in a combat scenario. In the end the writing turned out to be some of the more interesting stuff in the book. It would be hard to imagine how marine animals would not be affected by 230 dB of noise when the beam hits them. On the other hand, it also seems like a technology that the navy couldn't possibly give up. The book is Ninth Day of Creation if anybody wants to see how this LFA sonar works (or possibly does) in practice. I did have to make some conjectures--it's not as though the navy was very forthcoming in its answers to queries about the ships!

  21. You miss the point. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "other submarines"?

    The LFA sonar is going to be used by ships not submarines, and it might also be used by fixed structures. For such uses, keeping your position secret from "other submarines" isn't really that important, since the submarines already know where you are.