Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

XM1063: The U.S. Army’s Mystery Projectile

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 11:10 PM
link   


The US Army's XM1063 projectile is designed to be 'non-lethal' - but is it peaceful or hovering on the brink of illegality?


From external source

Have done a search for this and nothing showed up, so here it is, and what could it be?




posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 01:10 AM
link   
I am quite fine with this "stink bomb". That is if there are no permanent side effects on living beings. If that is true, then this weapon's non-lethality feature keeps from being classed as a deadly chemical weapon banned after WW1.

Maybe they should remove the nanoparticles if there are permanent side effects. Using this as an area denial against troops can still be effective on the battlefield.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 12:51 AM
link   
A friend of mine said they tested some of these in Jordan. He told me it "smells like death" pure horrible stink.
"imagine crap, vomit, and death in one sniff"



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:08 AM
link   
I went straight to Yahoo and found all these links:

search.yahoo.com...;_ylt=AhmB2SyEg.T5mkUCtRKRGldG2vAI?p=XM1063&fr=my-myy&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8

And yes! It does break the Geneva & Helsinki Chemical Warfare Acts.



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by guppy
I am quite fine with this "stink bomb". That is if there are no permanent side effects on living beings. If that is true, then this weapon's non-lethality feature keeps from being classed as a deadly chemical weapon banned after WW1.

Maybe they should remove the nanoparticles if there are permanent side effects. Using this as an area denial against troops can still be effective on the battlefield.


your right, givin that it is really NON-LEATHAL

it would be like tear gas on steroids , wow!



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 03:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by fritz

And yes! It does break the Geneva & Helsinki Chemical Warfare Acts.


does Tear gas break the Geneva +Helsinki Chem War Act?

if it doesnt, please explain to all of us , Why tear gas doesnt break the act,

and if this weapon is just doped up tear gas, why would it break the existing treaty?



posted on Oct, 1 2008 @ 07:26 AM
link   



posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Why let the lawyers determine what is legal and what is not?....fine make a deadlyl Beehive round and fire that at the crowds....



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 07:38 AM
link   
This item is legal, depending upon how it is used. The treaty which applies is the Chemical Weapons Convention, which makes it legal to use riot control agents (non-lethal type materials such as intended for this projectile) as well as even lethal agents (excluding nerve agents and mustard), for the purpose of Law Enforcement. The question then comes to - what is Law Enforcement? Riot control agents (RCA) have been used in Bosnia and Kosovo, under the assumption that these were international law enforcement - never disputed by the UN. So in theory these projectiles could also meet the definition. The only way to prove otherwise would be after the fact, once they are mis-used.



posted on Dec, 20 2012 @ 11:42 AM
link   
There is more on this subject today along with "real UFO artifacts" that have been found that were said to come from "not of this planet, or at least we can't make that stuff here" it talks about and ask:

The mystery of priorities:their apparent disinterest in an odd "alien artifact" that exhibits completely unknown characteristics when scientifically tested, is strange. Billy Cox explains the Mystery of priorities regarding the Atomic Testing Museum's most intriguing artifact. Wednesday, December 19, 2012 at 12:07 by Billy Cox

link:

devoid.blogs.heraldtribune.com...
edit on 20-12-2012 by RUFFREADY because: here kitty..





new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join