Military Toyed With "Gay Bomb": This REALLY Is Funny

PittsburghAfterDark

PittsburghAfterDark

CAGiversary!
Pentagon reveals rejected chemical weapons

THE Pentagon considered developing a host of non-lethal chemical weapons that would disrupt discipline and morale among enemy troops, newly declassified documents reveal.

Most bizarre among the plans was one for the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops would cause a "distasteful but completely non-lethal" blow to morale, the proposal says.

Other ideas included chemical weapons that attract swarms of enraged wasps or angry rats to troop positions, making them uninhabitable. Another was to develop a chemical that caused "severe and lasting halitosis", making it easy to identify guerrillas trying to blend in with civilians. There was also the idea of making troops' skin unbearably sensitive to sunlight.

The proposals, from the US Air Force Wright Laboratory in Dayton, Ohio, date from 1994. The lab sought Pentagon funding for research into what it called "harassing, annoying and 'bad guy'-identifying chemicals". The plans have been posted online by the Sunshine Project, an organisation that exposes research into chemical and biological weapons.

Spokesman Edward Hammond says it was not known if the proposed $7.5 million, six-year research plan was ever pursued.
Linky Linky
 
the development of an "aphrodisiac" chemical weapon that would make enemy soldiers sexually irresistible to each other. Provoking widespread homosexual behaviour among troops
Click to expand...

The problem is that you would have those who would WANT the this bomb dropped in their area. :wink:
 
I know I'd want this bomb dropped in my area. Gay or not, after spending all that time facing death in the middle of a war, a little sex would at least give me something to smile about. :)
 
Interesting...so, if the Pentagon tried to develop this weapon, then they must realize that there are chemical--that is, scientific--reasons for homosexuality. In other words, the Pentagon acknowledges that there are at least SOME compulsory elements to homosexuality; that is, homosexuality is not a "choice". Interesting implications for gay marriage, in that case: if a gay man has no choice but to love another gay man, is it really fair to deny him the right to marry that man? Food for thought.
 
[quote name='RELmajor03']Interesting...so, if the Pentagon tried to develop this weapon, then they must realize that there are chemical--that is, scientific--reasons for homosexuality. In other words, the Pentagon acknowledges that there are at least SOME compulsory elements to homosexuality; that is, homosexuality is not a "choice". Interesting implications for gay marriage, in that case: if a gay man has no choice but to love another gay man, is it really fair to deny him the right to marry that man? Food for thought.[/quote]

I could pump you full of estrogen and make you grow a pair of boobs - it doesn't mean it's natural.
 
I could pump you full of estrogen and make you grow a pair of boobs - it doesn't mean it's natural.
Click to expand...
WHO TOLD YOU?? Those records were supposed to be kept confidential!!!

In all seriousness, it's obviously not natural for you (or a bomb, for that matter) to influence homosexuality. But the fact that there is a chemical trigger there that can be influenced at the very leasts suggests that this sort of think can occur naturally.
 
[quote name='Scrubking']
I could pump you full of estrogen and make you grow a pair of boobs - it doesn't mean it's natural.[/quote]

But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom.

Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York's Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now. They display classic pair-bonding behavior—entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest. They also have sex, while ignoring potential female mates. Wild birds exhibit similar behavior. There are male ostriches that only court their own gender, and pairs of male flamingos that mate, build nests, and even raise foster chicks.
Click to expand...
link

No it doesn't make it naturals, other animals engaging in it are what make it natural. There's homosexual sex in other animals, where otherwise heterosexual females or males mount each other. Bonobos do this, and this can even be observed in some pets, such as female rats mounting each other. And then there are homosexual animals, that ignore the opposite sex, such as described above.
 
Gay bomb...It's raining men, hallelujah, it's raining men!!!
There are so many jokes here I don't even know where to start. :D
 
Gay bomb...It's raining men, hallelujah, it's raining men!!!
Click to expand...
:rofl:

so, why do you suppose the Pentagon backed out on this? Probably because if it backfired they'd have to "honorably discharge" a whole platoon!
 
[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark'][
Spokesman Edward Hammond says it was not known if the proposed $7.5 million, six-year research plan was ever pursued.[/quote]


WTF, the government has no idea if they spent $7.5 million or not?!?! Ahh, its stories like this that renew my faith in our government.

Can you imagine the meeting for this.

"Like oh my gosh, Billy totally dumped Amanda because he said he fell in love with Susan" Pentagon official 1

"Wow, what a jerk. I wish we could make people like him gay." Pentagon official 2

"Yeah he'd never be able to be in the military again" official 1

"Like, it would be sooo cool if we could turn an entire enemy force gay. Then they could just go have sex with each other while we dominate them" official 2

"He He, you said we would dominate the gay country!!" official 1

"Oh my gosh, no I didn't." official 2
 
I read this a month ago, the sources are so bad I didn't bother pointing, put what is not news worry to one, is to anyother.

Its rather sad really, lets waste a ton of money developing something that will never work.
 
[quote name='RedvsBlue'][quote name='PittsburghAfterDark'][
Spokesman Edward Hammond says it was not known if the proposed $7.5 million, six-year research plan was ever pursued.[/quote]


WTF, the government has no idea if they spent $7.5 million or not?!?! Ahh, its stories like this that renew my faith in our government.

Can you imagine the meeting for this.

"Like oh my gosh, Billy totally dumped Amanda because he said he fell in love with Susan" Pentagon official 1

"Wow, what a jerk. I wish we could make people like him gay." Pentagon official 2

"Yeah he'd never be able to be in the military again" official 1

"Like, it would be sooo cool if we could turn an entire enemy force gay. Then they could just go have sex with each other while we dominate them" official 2

"He He, you said we would dominate the gay country!!" official 1

"Oh my gosh, no I didn't." official 2[/quote]

:rofl:
 
Pentagon Spurned Plan to Initiate Enemy Homosexuality
By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military rejected a 1994 proposal to develop an "aphrodisiac" to spur homosexual activity among enemy troops but is hard at work on other less-than-lethal weapons, defense officials said on Sunday.

The idea of fostering homosexuality among the enemy figured in a declassified six-year, $7.5 million request from a laboratory at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio for funding of non-lethal chemical weapon research.

The proposal, disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information request, called for developing chemicals affecting human behavior "so that discipline and morale in enemy units is adversely affected."


"One distasteful but completely non-lethal example would be strong aphrodisiacs, especially if the chemical also caused homosexual behavior," said the document, obtained by the Sunshine Project. The watchdog group posted the partly blacked-out, three-page document on its Web site.

Lt. Col. Barry Venable of the Army, a Defense Department spokesman, said: "This suggestion arose essentially from a brainstorming session, and it was rejected out of hand."

The Air Force Research Laboratory also suggested using chemicals that could be sprayed on enemy positions to attract stinging and biting bugs, rodents and larger animals.

Another idea involved creating "severe and lasting halitosis" to help sniff out fighters trying to blend with civilians.

The U.S. military remains committed to developing less-than-lethal weapons that pass stringent legal reviews and are consistent with international treaties, said Captain Dan McSweeny of the Marine Corps, a spokesman for the Pentagon (news - web sites) unit spearheading their introduction.

"We feel it's very important to offer our deployed service members and their commanders a greater range of options in dealing with increasingly complex operational environments," said McSweeny, of the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top