Building a Better Bomb

dr who and the darlix writes "There is a nice article here about carbon composite warheads being tested. They destroy their targets while minimizing collateral damage."

Comments

Well, we're all screwed

[LittleGuy]

Thanks to this story, all of ./ can be accused of deep linking to terroristic activities. I guess we need to disassociate from changing the government or society....

Re:I hate it..

[Frank of Earth]

"And we wonder why terrorists are trying to kill us?"

Argh. I was trying to think of the right way to say this, but all I can up with is, "You're an asshole".

I guess that about sums it up. Have a nice day.

Re:Collateral damage

[Cordath]

I'm sorry, but the latest little invasion had some stunning examples of verbal sanitizing. "Self Inflicted Difficulties" for casualties from friendly fire. "Shock and Awe" was also used instead of the more accurate term for intimidating a foe with bombs: "Terror Bombing". Of course, I can certainly see why the Pentagon would not want to say they were conducting a "Terror Bombing" campaign in their "War on Terror", especially since it was the Nazi's who pioneered the tactic during the spanish civil war.

This terminology came straight from the Pentagon spokesperson. You could tune into CNN several times a day and watch journalists lap that BS up and it would be in every paper on the continent the next day. It's not precision. It's propaganda. Not all of us bought it.

Re:Collateral damage

[donnz]

That's nice and alright then. Trouble is it's rather like computer geeks talking techno babble to non-geeks. Meaningless and misleading and in this case very conveniently misleading.

If they mean "hey, we accidently hit all this shit, killed a few folks by mistake and maimed a couple of others" then that's what they should say.

A much more interesting story for /., BTW, would have been the use of the internet by frontline troops.