Pentagon Confirms. It saught out a GAY BOMB!

They must have accidently set one off in San Fransisco.

Hey, Can I get a reverse Gay bomb and set it off at the Victorias Secret fashion show?
The possibilities are endless.

This is the strangest thing I've ever heard.

Originally posted by Shadowflux

FACT: Gay guys will fight as hard as straight guys

FACT: A well disciplined soldier will do his job regardless of sexual orientation

I don't disagree with those statements, but, one must consider the very real possibility of an enemy using knowlege of a soldiers homsexual activity against him, especially if he is not "out".

A soldier could be blackmailed into giving away or revealing confidential information dealing with matters of national security. He may risk losing his wife, family or career if exposed. That could be an even greater incentive to cooperate with an enemy than the promise of financial gain.

[edit on 13-6-2007 by Sparky63]

Originally posted by Shadowflux
They should invent an "ATS Bomb". Drop it on the enemy and they start bickering and arguing over the most asinine things.

Oh, that was hilarious!

They should have an award for the funniest one-liner of the day...you'd be the winner!

Guess they understood the meaning of "make love not war" lol. No really this is funny, what twisted mind came up with this idea ... what did they want kill the enemys with aids or something ... thats gay bomb was a messed up idea.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
FACT: Gay guys will fight as hard as straight guys

And I never said otherwise. What you're doing here is called assumption and we all know what that does. What I said was that this could create tension between members of a military unit which would reduce their effectiveness.

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: A well disciplined soldier will do his job regardless of sexual orientation

Agreed, but again this is not directly against anything I said. I'm talking about morale and unit cohesion.

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: They spent YOUR money researching this

Good. I'm all for money spent on a possible non-lethal way to conduct warfare. It's certainly a better spend than a majority of the projects that are funded every year.

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: No scientific study or analysis has ever proven the ability to change someone's sexual orientation against their will.

That may be true, but in the animal world it happens all the time. Certain smells trigger instinctual reaction. It may not be a permanant change, but it certainly works at the time. So again, if you believe in evolution, it is at least plausible that we still have functionality for pheremones to work.

You should check out the article below.

A study...pay special attention to who's study it was

Spitzer's research has been republished in the current issue of Archives of Sexual Behavior.

The 200 subjects, mostly from the U.S. and Canada, participated in "self control" therapy which entailed avoiding tempting situations, stopping erotic thoughts from developing or mixing socially with straight men and women in non-sexual situations.

According to the findings, all 143 men and 57 women claimed the therapy altered their view of the same sex to some extent. All reported maintaining the change for at least five years.

"The current, politically correct view is that this therapy never works. I think it doesn't work a lot of the time but in some people it does," said Spitzer. "I do believe that people who are bothered by their homosexuality have a right to have this therapy."

Spitzer is considered an authority on the subject. In 1973, he was instrumental in having homosexuality removed from the American Psychiatric Association's list of mental illnesses. He maintains most homosexuals are happy with their sexual preference, but a minority are not and seek to change.

Critics of "reparative therapy" pan the study as flawed and argue the technique is only effective in getting people to resist their instincts.

Spitzer disagrees.

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: When a homophobe feels threatened by an unusual urge he'll generally do something super macho to compensate.

That makes sense I guess, but again this has nothing to do with my argument. My argument was that this would cause tension within a unit, which would reduce morale and effectiveness. A military unit out in the field needs to have cohesion or they are inferior to any equivalent trained force that does.

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: A terrorist is probably more afraid of blackhawks, .50 cals and snipers than he is of suddenly waking up gay.

Not necessarilly true, it's a culture thing. Have you ever researched how middle eastern cultures view homosexuality? Homosexual acts in that region of the world are not only frowned upon, they are punished by significant jail terms, huge amounts of public lashings, and sometimes even death. In that part of the world, it's a shame on a person and his/her family and I'm sure there are certainly those that would take death over bringing shame and dishonor to their family.

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: Your knowledge of homosexuals seems pretty limited.

Probably true since I'm straight. Your ability to even consider anybody else's opinion seems pretty limited.

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: I promise you one of your friends is gay and you don't know and every time you make some kind of remark, even if you don't think it's offensive, they have to bite their tongue and just play along.

FACT: I promise you one of your friends is straight and you don't know and every time you make some kind of remark, even if you don't think it's offensive, they have to bite their tongue and just play along.

Seriously though, I do have two gay acquaintances (not close friends, but I see them at least a few times a month) that I know of and 2 co-workers. I am in no way, shape, or form a homophobe. I'm not gonna claim that I don't make offensive comments occasionally, but I generally do not make jokes regarding race or sexuality for the very reason you mentioned above. I believe this is yet another case of assumption on your part. Since I'm arguing against you, I must be a biggot homophobe that hates gays, right?

Originally posted by ShadowfluxFACT: This is, without a doubt, the dumbest military idea I've ever heard

That's a bold statement. I'd certainly rank Operation Northwoods above this and that's just off the top of my head.

In summary...it sure seems like you're on the defensive here. Both by tone and content, you seem to assume that I'm some gay hater and you're way off base. I couldn't care less what anybody else does in the bedroom and I don't recall attacking you or gays anywhere in my posts. The whole summary of my idea was that homophobes would find themselves in an unusual situation and morale would drop. In warfare, if you don't trust the guy next to you, you're as good as dead. And if they could make something like this work, that's exactly what would happen.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by BlueTriangle]

Originally posted by Shadowflux
You can't turn people gay... well, not with a bomb anyway.

Yep. This is impossible.

Originally posted by dgtempe
the genius who came up with this new technology?... He wouldnt happen to be gay himself, would he?

Now THAT would be a conspiracy!! Someone in the gov't ... a gay man who is frustrated with the lack of potential partners ... uses our tax $$$ to create a gay bomb in which to 'explode' (pardon the pun) the homosexual population so he has more to choose from.

Oh .. that would be funny!

Well you could make an aerosol bomb of vaporized Viagra... you explode it over the enemy and while it wouldn't turn them gay as it were it would definitely make the battlefield more...ahh..... interesting.

Originally posted by Shadowflux
I guess what I'm trying to say is, why would a gay soldier be any less effective than a straight soldier?

My vision of it is this. The "bomb" goes off. A few soldiers in the unit are highly affected and start to act odd. Taking into account that I have no military experience, I imagine the environment to be similar to professional sports such as the NFL and NBA where homosexuals are outcasts. These are bunch of men in the best shape of their lives, trained to kill, and testosterone is going wild. Soldier A notices Soldier B checking him out. Soldier A tells Soldier B very adamantly that if he doesn't quit the f@%%0t crap he's going to kick his butt. Soldier B is now angry at soldier A for yelling at him, Soldier A is keeping an eye on Soldier B making sure he doesn't sneak up on him and grab him or something. In the mean time, the same thing is happening to the rest of the unit. Pretty soon you have two factions within the unit, one faction that is wondering why the heck half the unit seems to be gay all of the sudden and the other half wondering what the heck is going on in their brains. Come fight time, you have half a unit that is confused as hell and thinks something is wrong with them. The other half of the unit is watching their backs because they don't know what the heck is going on with the Soldier B crowd. They're attacked by an unaffected force of highly trained soldiers working as a cohesive team. Who wins the battle? Seems to me like the unaffected unit has a huge advantage over the unit that is confused as hell and no longer trusts eachother.

a GAY BOMB !!! its official this is one of the funnest things ive ever heard. I guess it oculd work though

would this not constitute cruel and unusual punishment? would there be a counter-measure? an anti-gay serum of sorts?

how does the Geneva accords come into play with a weapon of this type. could this be considered a Weapon of Mass Orientation?

I can't see this doing much during war time, but if it was done covertly to targetted enemies before a war it might have it's benefits. If they didn't know that the bomb was what made them gay they'd be more willing to accept their feelings and urges, reducing population of a country, creating dissent among military ranks, and increasing the popualtion's risk for deadly sexual diseases.

Now, if the the Gay bomb was known about I don't think it would be all that effective. The people would suspect their feelings are unnatural and fighting those feelings would be fighting the enemy.

Yes it's a non lethal weapon, but it's just equal to using psychological warfare on the battlefield. I mean if it permanently screwed up the soldiers' sexual orientation then they're pretty ruined aren't they? Imagine all the soldiers with wives and kids, and they have to go home and not feel any attraction to their spouse!

There's just something a bit scary about that. Coming home a dead hero is one thing, but coming home a ruined man is a whole different story...

Originally posted by Shadowflux
They should invent an "ATS Bomb". Drop it on the enemy and they start bickering and arguing over the most asinine things.

I heard that they scrubbed that project when they discovered that the “PMS Bomb” could achieve the same results at a much higher yield, over a greater range, and it would last a whole week.

Either way though, I though this was old news, I recall hearing about it years back. I think there was even a thread on it back then.


[edit on 6/16/2007 by defcon5]

So is this like the 28 days later virus type thing, only rather then extreme rage, it's extreme sexual desire?

HEHEHE, made especially for this subject:

Originally posted by SteveR
COWARDS


S'all I gotta say bout it.

yep , americans are cowards...

What if it backfired and made them all fight like Spartans.

Originally posted by vK_man

Originally posted by SteveR
COWARDS


S'all I gotta say bout it.

yep , americans are cowards...

If US are cowards what does that make the UK? The bidders of cowards?

AAC

USA is not a bunch of cowards. Its government is.

Originally posted by Gorman91
USA is not a bunch of cowards. Its government is.

yup ... and don't forget crooks as well.

How many wars do you think we'd be fighting if the administration and congress were to have to reside in the conflict zone until the events were resolved?

I'd say, not many.

Originally posted by tyranny22

Originally posted by Gorman91
USA is not a bunch of cowards. Its government is.

yup ... and don't forget crooks as well.

How many wars do you think we'd be fighting if the administration and congress were to have to reside in the conflict zone until the events were resolved?

I'd say, not many.

I intend to lie myself into the socialist regime, gain their trust, become president, then stab them in the back and arrest them all. Don't shoot anyone running for presedent with my name in 15-20 years. HEHEHE, first law? Presedents are not allowed in the homeland until a war is over. Their comanders in chief, not sit-on-your-ass-and-watch-the-ship-go-down in chief!