Slashdot Mirror
Building Tomorrow's Soldier Today
FleaPlus writes "Wired reports on a glove developed by Stanford researchers Dennis Grahn and Craig Heller which combines a cooling system with a vacuum in order to chill blood vessels and drastically reduce fatigue. Besides the obvious military and athletics applications, the technology is also potentially useful for firefighters, stroke victims, and people with multiple sclerosis. The Wired article also describes a number of other human enhancement projects intended to advance battlefield technology. Examples include military exoskeletons, projects designed to increase cognition or decrease the need for sleep, and studies that may one day allow single soldiers to operate multiple aerial drones. Many of these were opposed by the President's Council on Bioethics."
Science and technology aside, this will sooner or later find commercial markets.
And why not? Human beings have made themselves to be more unhuman in every passing year. We have professional athletes whose exercise programs would be considered abnormal and pointless, (not including shaving eyebrows to achieve an iota of improvement in swim speed.) We have anti-aging pharmaceutical food and beverage offerings that cater to the Baby Boomers who felt entitled to look like 40-yos instead of 60. We have daily caffeine to boost our brains in the morning, no-dose to boost productivity in the evenings, Prozac to lift us when we're low, and even psychadelic drugs to boost creativity when we're dull. We design ergonomic chairs and keyboards while we sit in front of computers and in our cars for longer hours. We alter hormones and apply suntan lotions. We use AC's and heaters so that our habitats can include the most uncomfortable places on Earth. We give our children Baby Einstein so that they will be superkids and outcompete others when they grow up.
I'm not saying it's pointless for soldiers on the frontline to receive these booster-packs. They have a job to accomplish, and so do we. Maybe we're all trying to become Homo sapiens cyberneticus too. Maybe our environment self-selects.
This is an excellent example of why we as a society need fiction (especially science fiction).
We have to explore or ethics as a culture very carefully before making leaps such as these, and fiction lets us do that.
Now to get more people to read worthwhile books...
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain
projects designed to increase cognition or decrease the need for sleep
Yeah, it's called 'meth', and Nazi soldiers used it while conducting Blitzkrieg. Not a new development.
True. That may be solving the wrong problem.
The problem they're working on with this isn't one the US has. The "superhuman abilities" thing is useful when assaulting hard, heavily defended, hard to access targets. But the US military is very good at assaulting hard targets.
What the US military is lousy at is fighting guerrilla and insurgent movements. Those are about intelligence, not firepower. The opposition tries to avoid offering any hard targets. They don't fight pitched battles. It's classic Maoist doctrine: "The enemy advances, we retreat; the enemy camps, we harass; the enemy tires, we attack; the enemy retreats, we pursue." The US couldn't deal with that in Vietnam, and it can't deal with it in Iraq.
As an aside, I've come across your posts many times now, and I've been wondering why you chose your sig. I'm willing to concede that Kerry may have actually said such a thing. I'm also willing to bet that as a highly decorated veteran officer who actually served in Vietnam, that John Kerry knows quite a bit more about warfighting than George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, or you and I.
Is your sig an attempt to mock John Kerry, or President Bush?
I happen to agree with Kerry's quote. We *do* need more troops in Iraq, if we have any intention of actually accomplishing anything positive there. Unfortunately, not only is this a rather unpopular stance, it's also true that a "surge" of only 21,000 or so more troops isn't going to do the job. What we need is to go back to the original recommendations of people like Gen. Eric Shinseki, and send an additional 500,000 or more troops. Not that this will ensure success, but it's the only chance we have to make this all work out, unless we're going to take the standpoint that the situation is unsalvageable, and try to work it out by paying reparations.
We may have had no moral authority to invade Iraq, but we sure as Hell have a moral responsibility now to clean up after our mistake, no matter the cost to the United States of America. The only real question is, do we even have the ability to do it anymore?