
'This is what an IED looks like. I took this photo near Kandahar.' - noheartanthony
http://trueslant.com/pjtobia/2009/07/13/this-is-what-an-ied-looks-like/
======
hyperbovine
I hate to be all Ron Paul-y here, but I can't help but point out that a much
simpler solution to this problem than anything posted thus far is to simply
not invade countries in the first place.

~~~
alexgartrell
Afghanistan was the war we started to get rid of the Taliban and cripple Al
Qaeda after they (Al Qaeda) blew up the towers.

People pretty much universally agreed (and continue to agree) that going there
was a good idea.

edit: I don't mean to sound rah rah about war, it sucks that we're there and
it sucks that we will be for a while. All I'm saying is it wasn't unjustified
and there's no reason to sit back with the benefit of hindsight and say "We
never should have gone in in the first place." Time is better spent figuring
out how to fix the problem and get out. Any suggestions there?

~~~
bint
That's absolutely untrue.

The papers authorising war in Afghanistan were on the President's desk on the
_10th_ September 2001, waiting to be signed. This is completely documented and
in the public domain.

The war had nothing to do with 9/11. It was completely pre-planned. The
Taliban were promised a "carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs" if they didn't
cooperate with the pipeline project. They didn't cooperate.

I could say a lot more -- especially about 9/11 -- but this isn't the site for
it.

~~~
eppla
MSNBC: "Afghanistan war plans were on Bush's desk on 9/9/2001"

<http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4587368/>

Some people just _wont_ open their eyes. It hurts too much.

------
vaksel
So why don't they get a few planes in the air, loaded up with cellular
transmission equipment, and have them "call" every cell phone in the area?

Would blow up all the hidden IEDs and all the IEDs that are being worked on.
Would clear out a lot of the area, and might blow up a number of terrorists in
the process.

~~~
Kadin
I've been looking at the photo, and I think the description is incorrect. I
don't think it's a cellphone. It looks to me like a 2-way radio.

I can't see any keypad, and it has what looks like a very small display,
stubby antenna, and PTT switch on the side. It looks very much like the cheap
Chinese FRS or GPRS radios you see in some import stores here in the 'States.

Some of those radios can be set up with squelch codes (similar to PL tones or
CTCSS) so that a receiver won't break squelch unless a transmitter set to the
same code uses the channel. That would be a fairly reliable short-range
detonation mechanism, and it would explain why the Coalition jammers work
without setting them off.

At any rate, it sure doesn't look like a cell phone to me.

~~~
aarongough
I was thinking the same thing when I was looking at the photo. Glad to see
someone else thought the same...

------
omouse
Small correction: should say just "NATO" not "US and NATO". US is part of NATO
isn't it? I'm tired of Canadian and other NATO countries getting the shit end
of the stick. The US didn't start to pull its weight until this year because
they were side-tracked by Iraq...

~~~
jwb119
i think its referring to the command structure rather than making a political
statement. if the US troops are operating apart from NATO command then they
should be referenced that way

~~~
omouse
They're operating as part of NATO, but this NATO mission just happens to be
led by a US commander.

Canadian troops go on missions alone too, and I assume the same is true of the
other NATO members.

------
kirubakaran
_US vehicles have cell-phone jammers_

What if they wire it to detonate on a jam? I hope the army has taken this into
account (seems obvious that they would have.)

~~~
jackdawjack
Seems like that would entail something in the phone that could see if it's
connection to the base stations had unexpectedly fallen to almost zero.
Assuming this is how being jammed works. This is probably quite hard to do on
any non-sdk'd phone, so it might not have come up yet. Iphone prices probably
need to drop a bit more...

Cleary a dedicated radio detonator could be programmed to work like this, but
then we are talking improvised here.

~~~
stcredzero
Radio detonators are not so easy to improvise. So you end up buying off the
shelf parts. But since there are many fewer radio controlled devices, this
means your signal is a lot easier to trace. The nice thing about cell phones,
is that there are a _lot_ of them. And activation can be on a ring. How do you
distinguish a hostile call before it has even been answered?

------
deutronium
Rather than using a jammer I wonder if it'd be possible to use an EMP to fry
the cellphone's semiconductors.

I'd also be worried if using a jammer, if the device was programmed to
detonate itself, after prolonged lack of contact with a cell tower.

~~~
pmorici
What would keep you from frying your own equipment?

~~~
deutronium
Apparently specially hardened vacuum tubes aren't that susceptible to EMP
pulses

~~~
ramidarigaz
So you're saying we should switch all the electronics that the military has on
the ground over to vacuum tubes?

------
torpor
How to not get blown up by an IED in Afghanistan: Go home to your own country
and fix its problems.

~~~
omouse
Could say the same for Russia w.r.t to Chechnya, or with China w.r.t to
Tibet...

~~~
torpor
Could: AND SHOULD.

