TexasCHLforum.com

People are clamouring to become the future subjects of others.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... -hand.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I have often wondered about this. Why not implant biochips in military people? Aircraft could identify friendlies by the signatures, reducing friendly fire incidents. (This is what killed my cousin in Vietnam.) Artillery could get a heads up display of the troops in the area they are firing on, avoiding shooting their own troops.

Soldiers lost in battle could be located and their bodies retrieved or they could be rescued. Heat signatures mixed with biochip signals could identify all the enemy in the area in relation to the friendlies and give commanders a better view of the battlefield, improving combat decisions and saving lives. It makes sense to me. As a part of mustering out of the service, you could have the biochip removed and disposed of.

The chips would have to be designed in such a way that they are only injectable once. That way the enemy couldn't use them to deceive the friendlies.

Baldeagle, Not sure if your comment is serious or in jest. The type of chip this guy implanted doesn't have anywhere near the capabilities or range to accomplish what you suggest. NYC transponders only work within very close range, usually inched.

mojo84 wrote:Baldeagle, Not sure if your comment is serious or in jest. The type of chip this guy implanted doesn't have anywhere near the capabilities or range to accomplish what you suggest. NYC transponders only work within very close range, usually inched.

And military aircraft already have IFF transponders. Sometimes they don't work or a particular aircraft doesn't get the proper code installed.

C-dub wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Baldeagle, Not sure if your comment is serious or in jest. The type of chip this guy implanted doesn't have anywhere near the capabilities or range to accomplish what you suggest. NYC transponders only work within very close range, usually inched.

And military aircraft already have IFF transponders. Sometimes they don't work or a particular aircraft doesn't get the proper code installed.

Are they the size of a grain of rice and implantable under one's skin?

mojo84 wrote:

C-dub wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Baldeagle, Not sure if your comment is serious or in jest. The type of chip this guy implanted doesn't have anywhere near the capabilities or range to accomplish what you suggest. NYC transponders only work within very close range, usually inched.

And military aircraft already have IFF transponders. Sometimes they don't work or a particular aircraft doesn't get the proper code installed.

Are they the size of a grain of rice and implantable under one's skin?

Relatively, kinda. I worked on Tomcat's and this equipment. But, otherwise, not so much.

C-dub wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Baldeagle, Not sure if your comment is serious or in jest. The type of chip this guy implanted doesn't have anywhere near the capabilities or range to accomplish what you suggest. NYC transponders only work within very close range, usually inched.

And military aircraft already have IFF transponders. Sometimes they don't work or a particular aircraft doesn't get the proper code installed.

Yes, my comment was serious, but I was not referring to the chip the boy put in his hand. It would have to have a lot more capability than that.

IFF only identifies friendly equipment. I'm talking about the capability, for example, to identify a six man team on a recon mission and know where they are at all times. To detect their movements and identify by heat signatured both them and any enemy in the area by the lack of a responding biochip matching a heat signature.

Seems a GPS type device on a belt would work and be big enough to carry the battery and technology.

baldeagle wrote:

C-dub wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Baldeagle, Not sure if your comment is serious or in jest. The type of chip this guy implanted doesn't have anywhere near the capabilities or range to accomplish what you suggest. NYC transponders only work within very close range, usually inched.

And military aircraft already have IFF transponders. Sometimes they don't work or a particular aircraft doesn't get the proper code installed.

Yes, my comment was serious, but I was not referring to the chip the boy put in his hand. It would have to have a lot more capability than that.

IFF only identifies friendly equipment. I'm talking about the capability, for example, to identify a six man team on a recon mission and know where they are at all times. To detect their movements and identify by heat signatured both them and any enemy in the area by the lack of a responding biochip matching a heat signature.

It would be nice to have that capability. I'm also sure you already know, but IFF stands for Identification Friend or Foe. True, it really only positively identifies friends and does so with a foe by not responding with the correct code. The same would happen with these microchips unless our foes were also implanted and we had those codes.

As for a recon mission, that too would be nice for recovery or rescue, but otherwise I think they, like submarines, prefer to remain undetectable as much as possible.

Back on topic. I've thought something like this would be great for children that could be removed when they are 18 if they choose to do so.

baldeagle wrote:

C-dub wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Baldeagle, Not sure if your comment is serious or in jest. The type of chip this guy implanted doesn't have anywhere near the capabilities or range to accomplish what you suggest. NYC transponders only work within very close range, usually inched.

And military aircraft already have IFF transponders. Sometimes they don't work or a particular aircraft doesn't get the proper code installed.

Yes, my comment was serious, but I was not referring to the chip the boy put in his hand. It would have to have a lot more capability than that.

IFF only identifies friendly equipment. I'm talking about the capability, for example, to identify a six man team on a recon mission and know where they are at all times. To detect their movements and identify by heat signatured both them and any enemy in the area by the lack of a responding biochip matching a heat signature.

Based on the news of hacks, including our military computers, perhaps the technology could be used as effectively in reverse? When we fought unsophisticated enemies, technology was on our side and still is in those venues. My concern would be that many of the unfriendlies (N. Korea) seem to be able to acquire technology and share it. While they are far behind us overall, a breakthough in the chip detection (especially if we don't realize that it happened) would go very badly.

Yeah... "Chipping" our soldiers would only result in pretty much everyone trying to figure out how to detect it. And when (not if) someone's successful, our soldiers become very easy targets. Seems an especially bad idea with ISIS specifically targeting them here.

It also might result in the reverse...cloning clips or taking them off dead or wounded soldiers in order deceive and infiltrate.

And then, the government decides we all need them so they can track us, our purchases, who we associate with... no thanks.

Interesting how some think implanted micro chips are a good idea but complain about NSA collection of metadata.