Commentary by Wayne German on 12 Nov 2010 as we form one or two committees
dedicated to coming up with AWECS Classification schemes:
This is long winded. Please distill it and
pass it on to the others. We need to side with those who promote
peace--not the mercenaries.
Moreover, since the Pentagon already has
the ability to monitor anywhere and everywhere, they want to by
satellites; adding this new Tethered Flight Technology may only be to be
able to monitor anywhere and everywhere simultaneously and/or at less
cost. But I think it is far more likely that their intention is to get
their foot in the door by looking as though their intent is to monitor
only. But they have already seen how these things go. They have
already seen how remotely controllable drones--that were once only
intended to monitor--have rapidly been approved to control and destroy by
deploying munitions and other weapons also. But the bottom line is that--whatever
reasons our military might choose to use Tethered Flight Technology,
it is clear that the other countries they choose to fly over would see any
or all flights of our military over their country without their approval
as being very destabilizing -- and rightfully so.
But now the potential is far worse.
Even North Korea can now make pleasing little nukes -- because we showed
them how wonderful it is to do so. But they suffer from missile fizzle. In
other words, all they really need is a good example of how wonderfully we
can bomb Afghanis, so they can see how wonderfully they can nuke us. At
that point the military might wake up to the fact that not all
demonstrations of our military might are good and appropriate -- unless
they are absolutely needed. Even now the government is saying that within
ten or fifteen years they expect a terrorist group is going to set off a
nuclear bomb in the United States. They also say that it is likely within
about ten or fifteen years that terrorists are going to let off biological
weapons in the United States also. I suggest that we set up signs
directing North Korea to Washington D.C. for having no clue that what D.C.
had developed against others would be used against us now. And yet they
persist in this same crazy vein by wanting to develop any and every
Tethered Flight Technology that can be monitored and controlled like a
computer game by teenagers, provided we buy them pizza and smuggle
in beer. They might even be able to pay real money to blow away real
people-- provided the military says it's okay. Now the military could have
their own source of funding. Wouldn't that be great? It would make great
military sense. So why not do it. At least until the teenagers on the
other side did the same back again. And this should probably be one of
the greatest fears-- even for those devoid of conscience.
Inevitably, Tethered Flight Technology would be the weaponry of choice for
people on both sides of a conflict who would likely be hunkered safely
down in their underground barracks eating stale pizza and warm beer as
they zap all the innocent sand unsuspecting bystanders on the top.
But perhaps the saddest thing of all
is that all of the applications for peaceful applications of
Tethered Flight Technology would likely also be shot down by one or more
people thinking they might be militarized versions of Tethered Flight
Technology disguised as though they were intended for peaceful purposes.
This would probably be the worst travesty of all. In effect, this
would probably prevent the deployment of Tethered Flight Technology
products for peaceful purposes. And, if it became obvious that peaceful
applications would be shot down, if they were deployed, there would
probably be far less effort to develop those peaceful applications--though
they are the ones that would truly benefit people--and help people come
together to benefit in their manufacture and deployment.
Discussion is welcome.