h a l f b a k e r yWe have a low common denominator: 2
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
If the US keeps saying that Iraq has WMDs, it may be safe to assume that it knows the whereabouts of at least some of them, through its intelligence agencies, only that it can't say ("state secrets"). If it knows where it is, why not do something about it?
Using technology incomprehensible to us
all and only available in top secret US labs, an aircraft can drop numerous robotic fleas/beetles/whatever unnoticeable mobile object carrying incendiary material on sites known to house WMDs. Said robotic objects would be controlled by 3|1+3 CS playas who think that they're just at another LAN party using the de_rats map. They can then target said WMDs, and well.... blow 'em up, Exploding Shakespeare style.
That would stop the whining, the name calling, the annoying threats... and shock the world into silence (you did WHAT?!).
Exploding Shakespeare
http://www.halfbake...oding_20Shakespeare
Exploding wha? [LoneRifle, Oct 05 2004]
[link]
|
| |
Electric ninja demolition hamsters ....... |
|
| |
Weapons of Miniature De/Con/struction. |
|
| |
Explosive-laden bumblebees..... |
|
| |
As a bonus, it shares the same radar signature as a B-2, so maybe them SAM sites would waste ammo trying to hit what they thought was a prime target... |
|
| |
in any case, i think the radar disregards anything smaller than a..... dog...? |
|
| |
(on the day the US launches an attack)
(Arab goes in and checks on hidden WMDs)
(finds it infested with hamsters)
Arab: What in the name of Allah...?
(one of them turns head round to face him)
Hamster: *blink blink* *squeak* |
|
| |
1) yes i do. i'm essentially tired of the sabre-rattling and wish the war is done and over with yesterday. This is just a little stab at satire implying that Bush should give up on the rhetoric and go ahead with what he wants to do. |
|
| |
2) One possible side-effect. Never came across my mind. Thanks for highlighting. |
|
| |
3) We could train the animals deployed in dismantling the warhead, rather than blowing it up. Even if we train them to blow them up, I suspect that we just send enough explosive to destroy the warhead (and perhaps the room in which it is housed in.) Since nobody knows where they are, it is unlikely that they would be at the site of destruction. |
|
| |
4)When the US Does-It-Itself and stops relying on Iraq/UN weapons inspectors. |
|
| |
Thanks for the points brought up anyway. Owe ya one... |
|
| |