Laptop-controlled landmines heading to Iraq

Article

I wonder if they are really needed now.

Originally posted by NWguy83
I wonder if they are really needed now.

It seems we are still having "surprise" attacks, so I would say, yes, we can use them. Anything we can use to protect our soldiers and our military missions, I believe we should, regardless of whether or not you believe in the reasons for the soldiers being where they are. When you are going to war, you must win or die, and these will give the U.S. one more tool to win.

Landmines are not pleasant, but they are effective. War is hell. I don't condone war, or any violence really, but I can understand the need for having as many options as possible.

I guess after the attack on Abu Garib the U.S. thinks its a good idea to lay mines around the perimeter. These mines are good and safe because even if ordinary people walk on them they won't blow up until US troops want them too. So if the Terrorists attack they will be blown up, if they don't attack, nothing happens.

I read the article, the system just doesn't seem right. Ever heard of a software glitch? Laptop? Microsoft? Install service pack three and say goodby to a Baghdad neighborhood. Or maybe not be able to detonate anything. Also uncool. Or, who knows, what if it can be hacked into. Then the adversary can trigger those as they are deployed or in storage.

That's something that looks cool on paper but in practice will be a lot of trouble, have dubious effect and will cause friendly fire accidents.

Its a lot more safer than using uncontrolled mines....its better to control what you can than to leave things to chance...

It is kind of interesting how Matrix got fielded so quickly. There's been a lot of discussion on Spider (another laptop controlled mine system), and the bulk of the discussion centers around the choice of Windows for the laptop OS. With all the scrutiny being given to Spider, it's interesting how Matrix kind of side stepped a lot of the safety review process.

Granted it's a different system than Spider, but the basics, control of the field via PC, is the same.

Can it be hacked into if its a closed loop or circuit system? I'm not much of a computer genius but if the system doesn't link to anything on the outside how can someone hack into it?

The system needs a computer to connect to the mines....wires wont work so you need a transmitter and receiver.
Those signals can be hcaked into.....eventually...depending on the level of security then it determines how long it will take.

Originally posted by devilwasp
The system needs a computer to connect to the mines....wires wont work so you need a transmitter and receiver.
Those signals can be hcaked into.....eventually...depending on the level of security then it determines how long it will take.

I'm sure the encryption used would be high, just look at civilian encryption. It wouldn't be worth an enemy's time and resources hoping to crack the encryption. Chances are, if encryption were used it would involve a rotating key, further decreasing any miniscule chance someone may have to crack it.

IMO the idea is sound and solves the problem of recovery - the minefield after use can either be removed, rendered inert or blown in place.

Originally posted by rogue1
I'm sure the encryption used would be high, just look at civilian encryption. It wouldn't be worth an enemy's time and resources hoping to crack the encryption. Chances are, if encryption were used it would involve a rotating key, further decreasing any miniscule chance someone may have to crack it.

Yes I agree it would be very high but cracking one would make it easier to crack another.
Besides I have no doubt it can be set to original mine settings and is probably lockable.

IMO the idea is sound and solves the problem of recovery - the minefield after use can either be removed, rendered inert or blown in place.

Yeah I agree it is a sound idea, hopefully replace ALL mines, but IMO mines are very sick weapons.

Originally posted by devilwasp
Yeah I agree it is a sound idea, hopefully replace ALL mines, but IMO mines are very sick weapons.

Sick because they cause civilian casualties after a conflict ?

Originally posted by rogue1
Sick because they cause civilian casualties after a conflict ?

Yes, I dont like them....

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by rogue1
Sick because they cause civilian casualties after a conflict ?

Yes, I dont like them....

But in a battlefield situation they are invaluable in protecting fixed installations. Now we know why the US didn't sign the landmine convention.

Originally posted by rogue1
But in a battlefield situation they are invaluable in protecting fixed installations. Now we know why the US didn't sign the landmine convention.

There are better ways to fight a war than leaving an explosive in the ground for some poor bugger to walkover.

Hmmm, you mean like ripping them apart with cannons, mortars, artillery and tank rounds ?

Originally posted by rogue1
Hmmm, you mean like ripping them apart with cannons, mortars, artillery and tank rounds ?

How many live tank rounds do you know of that 2 year old children play with?

DevilWasp we all agree that mines are horrible after a conflict because they kill civilians, but during a war they are very effective weapons. Now with these new remote controlled mines after a conflict you can shut them off and then collect them without getting blown up.

I think you are missing the point of the new mines Devil. I don't know of any kids who've dug up mines and played with them. I think you'll find that most people who have been killed by mines have been the victims of still buried mines from a conflict in the past - a situation which these new mines remedy.
Plenty of children have been killed by unexploded ammunition especially mortar ammo.
Unexploded cluster bombs seem to kill a great many civilians....should these be banned ?

[edit on 17-4-2005 by rogue1]

its the one thing is disagree with , landmines are terrible in this day and age and shouldn`t be used at all - even command detonated mines are dangerous , the factor of something going wrong is too great

Originally posted by WestPoint23
DevilWasp we all agree that mines are horrible after a conflict because they kill civilians, but during a war they are very effective weapons. Now with these new remote controlled mines after a conflict you can shut them off and then collect them without getting blown up.

They are effective, but I dislike them (not these ones the old ones) , I think of them in the same league of chem weapons and bio weapons.

Originally posted by rogue1
I think you are missing the point of the new mines Devil. I don't know of any kids who've dug up mines and played with them. I think you'll find that most people who have been killed by mines have been the victims of still buried mines from a conflict in the past - a situation which these new mines remedy.

The new mines I agree with, its the old ones I have a grudge against.

Plenty of children have been killed by unexploded ammunition especially mortar ammo.

Mortars are a real bad boy but are not used as frequently as mines, you agree?

Unexploded cluster bombs seem to kill a great many civilians....should these be banned ?
[edit on 17-4-2005 by rogue1]

Cluster bombs I dont know, I mean its a very effective weapon but far to dangerous to be used as much as they are now.

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]