Welcome May God Bless Our Fellowship

[buckthesystem]

This is old news. The story came out before Easter, but I joined in a discussion on another board and it is still being discussed. Apart from the expected "mark of the beast" views, some say that this could be dangerous, even fatal, if something goes awry with device.

What do you think?

http://www.mobiledia.com/news/134354.html

The U.S. military plans to implant soldiers with medical devices, making them harder to kill with diseases.

The military's Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, announced plans to create nanosensors that monitor soldiers' health on the battlefield and keep doctors constantly abreast about potential health problems.

DARPA's plan for nanosensors reflects a larger trend, as scientists are trying to harness technology to improve health care across the globe. Doctors are already quickly adopting mobile technology to improve patient care, carrying around iPads to better explain procedures and inventing smartphone apps to oversee drug users' progress and watch for signs of stress in at-risk patients.

DARPA called the implants "a truly disruptive innovation," highlighting how healthier soldiers would change the state of modern warfare because most medical evacuations occur due to ordinary illnesses and disease, not injuries. If the U.S. can lead the way in this kind of high-tech monitoring, it could give the military another leg up on adversaries still beset by everyday illness.

Nanotechnology continues to find a place in the medical field as well. Stanford University researchers are developing tiny robotic monitors that can diagnose illnesses, monitor vital stats and even deliver medicine into the bloodstream, similar to the devices that the military plans to create. The two projects have yet to link up, but their similar goals suggest the military could benefit from coordinating efforts with leading university scientists.

The U.S. military regularly invests in the latest mobile technology, not only in healthcare but in its ground operations as well, as the military encourages app developers to develop apps for warfare. The Army is actively incorporating smartphones into battlefield equipment, recognizing the devices' ability to revolutionize combat.

Still, the U.S. is not the only country in on the action, as China developed an iPhone app to give the People's Liberation Army information.

The military runs on the strength of its soldiers, and this latest innovation holds promise to bolster the U.S. armed forces by decreasing preventable illnesses and keeping its men and women at the peak of their health.

[Ladypeartree]

::03:: yeah great .. trust computers cos they never go wrong do they and they cant have hackers inserting viruses into programmes can they ??????

[buckthesystem]

I realise that when you join the military you give up all your rights as a private citizen and become "the property" of the state, just like a prison inmate. Only the prison inmate is forced to do that, whereas the soldier/sailor/marine is deemed to have voluntarily "become part of the state". I guess this means that, in this case, your body is not your own any more, this is proved by compulsory vaccinations for troops and compulsory DNA testing. You have swapped this for 3 square meals a day and a roof over your head (temporarily anyway that is, until you enter a war zone). And I guess the advantage is that the military is portrayed (advertised) as a "glamorous, adventureous life".

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m605...t/ai_111027996/

I have found a couple of articles and lots (and lots) of discussion sites - which basically just proffer opinion and are short on facts - on the programme to "chip" soldiers, and I cannot find the answer to "will it be all troops? Or just some.

However, as a matter of interest, a WND article included the following:

She (Katherine Albrecht) said it was expected that captive audiences, such as prisoners and troops, would be the first subjected to the requirement, which would make it easier for the general populace to accept it as well. “It’s interesting,” she said. “I’m stunned how this younger generation is OK. They don’t see the problem. … ‘Why wouldn’t everyone want to be tracked?’”

But she said Americans will have to decide to say no to incremental advances, or by the time officials finally roll out the idea of chips for all, whether they want them or not, it will be too late to decide. “The analogy that I draw is [that of a train], and if I’m in California and I do not want to wind up in New City, every stop brings me closer,” she said. “At some point I have to get off the train.

I will never cease to be amazed at the attitude of our younger generation (the one that is having the babies and young kids at the moment). My son and daughter in law saw nothing wrong with vaccinations for their children, nothing wrong with a government department "indefinitely retaining" the childrens' blood samples (DNA) and they will see nothing wrong with any move that the government suggests to "microchip" their children. They wouldn't even need any bribes (someone suggested to me that might have their children "chipped" for a McDonald's voucher), they would just need someone to tell them that it would "keep the children safe".