Future War
Non-Lethal Weapons in Modern Warfare
-
- $11.99
-
- $11.99
Publisher Description
The nature of warfare has changed! Like it or not, terrorism has established a firm foothold worldwide. Economics and environmental issues are inextricably entwined on a global basis and tied directly to national regional security. Although traditional threats remain, new, shadowy, and mercurial adversaries are emerging, and identifying and locating them is difficult. Future War, based on the hard-learned lessons of Bosnia, Haiti, Somalia, Panama, and many other trouble spots, provides part of the solution.
Non-lethal weapons are a pragmatic application of force, not a peace movement. Ranging from old rubber bullets and tear gas to exotic advanced systems that can paralyze a country, they are essential for the preservation of peace and stability. Future War explains exactly how non-lethal electromagnetic and pulsed-power weapons, the laser and tazer, chemical systems, computer viruses, ultrasound and infrasound, and even biological entities will be used to stop enemies. These are the weapons of the future.
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
In a thoughtful examination of the future of military doctrine, Alexander takes a hard look at what options might be available to the American military in a world in which the rules of warfare have changed. Non-lethal weapons, he argues, will become more important for both political and practical reasons. Americans have grown increasingly aware of and sensitive to all casualties on any side in even the most just wars. At the same time, the armed forces increasingly are expected to play a constabulary rather than a military role (as in Bosnia and Haiti). Alexander, a retired U.S. Army colonel who was involved in research on non-lethal weapons at Los Alamos National Laboratory, discusses the use of non-lethal weapons in a series of well-developed near-future operational scenarios in which conventional weapons would be counterproductive. One is a peace support operation. Another involves technological sanctions against a rogue state aimed at disabling its communications systems. A third projects the paralysis, by non-lethal means, of the military capacities of a hostile government. The fourth postulates hostage situations resolved by non-lethal alternatives. Alexander covers technologies ranging from low-kinetic weapons to chemical options, acoustic systems and "conventional" electronic warfare. Such weapons, Alexander demonstrates, are not necessarily humane. They inflict pain; they may permanently disable; they can severely disrupt entire societies. Their sole merit is that they are not designed to kill. Alexander's case for non-lethal weapons may be disputed, but it shouldn't be dismissed.