Dogs of war parachuted into Taliban land

reply to post by GogoVicMorrow


Again, dogs can't go inside the houses, you have to give me an explanation how you think the dogs would get in the houses?

1. Afghans mostly don't like dogs.

2. Afghans have doors too, and their doors are never open.

3. It would be pretty obvious if you see a dog with a camera. I don't think the insurgents are that stupid to allow a dog with a camera on his head to roam around freely, or let them in their house.

Dogs have never been used for surveillance, yes dogs have been used as guards, yes dogs have been used to bite, for terror etc, but never for surveillance.

It is just not viable.

I suspect it is more than surveillance, I suspect it is either for terrorism, or to trick the insurgents in to killing the dog and taking the camera back to their hideouts etc..

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

Heard of a satellite

Technology has advanced.

There is no tech as good as a dogs nose... Not yet

reply to post by HunkaHunka


Yeah I know, but what is a dog's nose gonna detect?

Second line.

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow

 

1. Afghans mostly don't like dogs.

What?

Every nation likes its dogs like they like their football...... even the Koreans!

Sickening.
Human beings choose to serve in the armed forces and are aware of the dangers that go along with it.
On the other hand, dogs or any other animals are not capable of nor afforded the dignity of choice.
My brother is a Marine because he chose to be a Marine.
Would I allow my 3 dogs to assist in life-saving measures? Sure. However, as a human being responsible for their well-being, I would never allow them to be in a situation in which I was acutely aware that their lives were perpetually at stake.
I'm not into PETA or granola or tree-hugging or whatever-you-wanna-insert-here, but it grieves my soul to know that this is the life, the sadly short life, that these dogs have which are chosen by humans on their behalf.

reply to post by oozyism


People have said this a number of times. A dog can sniff out IEDs from a pretty good distance, no other technology can do that as of yet. At least not any the public knows about. Also, if Afghans didn't like their dogs they wouldn't allow a bunch of stray, disease stricken dogs to run the streets; they would kill all of them. I may not really agree with it, I love dogs, but their is nothing I can do about it and I know they serve their purpose. There are plenty of species of animals that serve in the current military; hawks, pigeons, horses, dogs, rats, seals, dolphins to name a few. This is nothing new. A lot of people will never agree with it, but they have to deal with it. Why let it bother you if there is nothing you can do about it? They serve their purpose. They save plenty of humans' lives.

reply to post by stupid girl


Ask any Muslim what THEY think of dogs... (& not just you, me & the Jews btw)

Originally posted by HelionPrime
reply to post by stupid girl

 

Ask any Muslim what THEY think of dogs... (& not just you, me & the Jews btw)

I asked 'em and they love their dogs. You have been watching too many war shows.

Originally posted by Khaaaaaan!!
and they win awards and everything.

hahahahahahahaaahhaahahahahahahahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.......................
I'm totally not laughing at you, I'm just lauging at the idea of dogs being presented "official awards" & such nonsense.
It's like dogs that win dog shows-- they're completely oblivious to anything other than getting their instant treat from their trainer at any given moment.
The awards may be "given" to the dogs, but the dogs only care about and understand the REwards in which they get from their handler.
Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that service dogs are given recognition awards. However, the pomp & circumstance is more rewarding for their human counter-parts.

you guys act like using dogs in the military is a new thing? It never stopped we have used them for a long long time.. and they arn't treated like crap they get paid and have rank.. yes according to regulations if you meet an animal that has a rank higher than you. you treat it as you would a person. while they can't go any were with out their trainer they can go wear ever they want with him. also I've been to afgan as well as Iraq the comment about doors and housing is coming from some one who has never been their. they have very substandard housing a dog could open their door just as easy as I can lets see a 100 pound dog jumping on a door. vrs. a 100 pound army guy doing it.. it works I've seen it lol.. and the dogs have trainers so yeah the guy will get the door open for the dog.

The German Shepherds are strapped with video cameras, which relay images to control rooms.

Originally posted by oozyism
A dog VS an Afghan insurgent with AK47.

Who do you think will win.

The guy in the control room who is about to launch a hellfire missile up the Taliban's rectum.

This is BS. I for one would rather be among a bunch of dogs than people. Dogs are your unconditional friend. Will give their own lives to protect you. Rarely complain unless in great pain. People on the other hand are a bunch of whiny assed, manipulative, and violent beings. They should have used convicted rapists to do this, not innocent dogs.

oh geez you people never give up us westerners are murderers,rapists killer of men and women and children and now were cruel to animals.

thanks for my laugh today

and yes animals have been used for centuries in warfare horses,elephants(hannibal) dogs and their carcasses its a fact of the technological development of mankind.

hate to burst your bubble but there is no satellite that can see inside a house they do not exist and technology only goes so far in modern warfare sooner or later you need to have boots on the ground to make a situation awareness assesment that can only be given with human or canine eyes.

Originally posted by neo96
animals have been used for centuries in warfare horses,elephants(hannibal), dogs

I am aware of that. However, the simple fact that it has been done throughout history doesn't serve to justify it.
IMO, a beast of burden such as a horse serves an entirely different purpose through usually different circumstances as well.
The point, if I'm understanding correctly, is that these dogs are being sent into known-and-expected harms way in LIEU of soldiers. As cheaply replaceable expendables.

and their carcasses

I would venture to say that actually, more human carcasses have been used as weapons of warfare throughout history-- namely as biological & psychological warfare

its a fact of the technological development of mankind.

lol....no, it's a fact of the LACK of technological development. That's why we're sending dogs, because our technological capabilities at the moment, are apparently less than that of a dog.

hate to burst your bubble but there is no satellite that can see inside a house they do not exist

actually, yes there is. we have infrared capability

boots on the ground to make a situation awareness assesment that can only be given with human or canine eyes

or rat, or monkey, or cat, or hamster, or pig, or squirrel, or bird, or remote-control insect, or (insert the plethora of additional miscellaneous possibilities here....)

reply to post by oozyism


Brilliant tactical effort. Lets get rid of all the Taliban anyhow!

reply to post by oozyism


Brilliant tactical effort. Lets get rid of all the Taliban anyhow!

I've got a great Ideal why not send stupid girl and the other peta members and others like her.. they hate seeing animals put in harms way so if we send all of you people the dogs and such will be safe I see a win win situation here lol..

reply to post by Reaper2137


my point is that there are other animals that are also capable of stealth activities in a warfare situation.
there are other animals that could be used in a situation such as this, where they are being deployed with the virtual expectation of mortality.
why waste the life of a dog, when you can do it with an animal that is generally less sentient insomuch as self awareness and potential human companionship?

the dogs are being deployed under the notion that their lives are less noble than human life. By that rationale, there are plenty of alternative animals in which their life would be considered less noble than a dog's life.

Nonetheless, the fact that these dogs don't have the luxury or dignity of choice is disturbing in & of itself.
I think any human being with a shred of compassion would have to at least consider that.
And I know that any human being who shares their domicile with a dog, or has had some type of emotional bond with a dog on any level would find it extremely disturbing, regardless whether they were involved with PETA or not.
And in my case, I explicitly stated that I'm not of the mindset of PETA.

Originally posted by stupid girl
the dogs are being deployed under the notion that their lives are less noble than human life.

Are you certain of that? Have you ever spoken to a military K9 handler? Obviously, you haven't, or you wouldn't have written that.

reply to post by signal2noise


I suppose I should have highlighted the fact that I said "notion" with italics.
Having said that, I'd like to point out the fact that I said "notion"--- a notion I happen to disagree with.
If you had read my earlier posts, I would hope that you noted I have three dogs and could deduce that I have a particular heartfelt affinity towards their rewarding companionship, not to mention their countless other noble attributes which far exceed that of many human beings.