Oddly enough, the link in the OP doesn’t mention that this proposal isover 10 years old.
Here’s a link to the full Air Force proposal (I’m no CBS worker, so take its veracity with a grain of salt.)
Someone set us up the gay bomb!
People People People!
The important question to ask is “Would this bomb work on women and could they test it on the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader locker room?”.
*mixes himself a grain alcohol and rainwater
Neither, but nice to see you’ve examined all the possibilities.
Okay, so we’re talking exposing someone to some theoretical chemical that makes them so horny that they will fuck the nearest moving thing, despite their wishes, or beliefs.
And it seems that what you are saying (paraphrasing a bit) is that you don’t understand why someone forced into such non-consensual sex would have a problem with it.
Am I missing something in my analysis?
*I’ve been playing a lot of, uh, military bases, too. Been traveling to military bases. I’ve noticed this: every time I play a military base the same thing happens. We start drinking, start talking politics, and they bring up gays in the military. I always tell them the same thing: I hope they put thousands of gays in the military, hundreds of , millions. Whoever wants to go, put 'em in there. In fact, if I’m ever in the military, I want to be in an all-gay platoon. They way I see it, if I’m in a foxhole and I’ve got a gun, the gay guy next to me, he has a gun. My theory is pretty simple: I want the guy covering my ass to think my ass is pretty cute. I want him fighting for more than just country here, you know what I’m saying? If I get shot, I don’t want somebody going and getting a medic, I want someone going, “They shot Louis!” BTHRHTRTHR! Yeah, see, if I’m missing in action, Chuck Norris might be be busy that week. You know, they call the volunteers to come find me, I want to hear, "Girl, we gots to go get him. "
*
-Louis Ramey
I can’t wait to see the episode of Tactical to Practical that will cover this miltary item.
As “Pappy” Boyington famously said, “War consists of long hours of boredom punctuated by brief moments of hot gay sex.”
So these aren’t weapons of mass destruction, but weapons of mass…? 
Wasn’t it the hippies who said Make Love, Not War>
Who knew they would listen?
I wonder what they would call the mission? Operation Boom-chicka-bomb-bow!
You are all missing the true hidden nature of this weapon. Sure they get have hot gay sex, but from then on the military will be able to easily track them with the new Gaydar system they’ve developed.
Blasphemer! Don’t you know that anything, ANYTHING stupid or immoral conceived by the government must be the fault of the Bush Administration? To post a link that claims that these stupid ideas came forth in 1994 is UNACCEPTABLE!
The Brotherhood of Bush Bashers (BoBB[sup]TM[/sup]) will be coming to your house about midnight tonight. They will erect and burn a wooden peace symbol in your front yard. You will be dragged outside, your right eye will be put out, and your right arm amputated. (The BoBB is big on symbolism)
A repeat of such folly will result in your right lung being ripped out and your right leg being amputated.
Don’t try to fight them, resistance is futile.
You should have that knee looked at; it seems to be jerking. Since you’re the first person in this thread to actually mention the Bush Administration, the “This is just mindless Bush-bashing!” charge is a wee bit premature.
The irrelevant pot-shots at CBS, on the other hand, are off to a fine start.
Weapons of ass destruction…
Maybe we should air drop some palettes of Astroglide before the attack.
Would saying “weapons of ass destruction” be going too far?
Just a FYI New Scientist is an extensively read and trusted UK popular sciense publication. It’s reputation would be somewhere above the reputation of Scientific America, about on a level with Nature. That said the report is about the contents of a declassified document, not reporting the scientific value of some aphrodisiac bomb, and so makes no comment on the quality of the research that the declassified paper mentions.
In summery, the bomb may be bull shit but the New Scientist most definately is not a bullshiting magazine.
Yes, I think so — skills at paraphrasing. What I wrote was, “What I don’t understand is how it would hurt morale.” Morale is hurt, as I see it, by divisiveness and bigotry. If all are engaged in the activity, then none can point a finger at others and declare them inferior or sinful.
You realize, of course, that there are far more factors to morale than just divisiveness and bigotry, right?
Okay, so let’s list some possible effects of such a weapon on a soldier…
• self loathing (just cheated on SO, committed act against one’s own religion, etc)
• shame (unable to control oneself, got jiggy instead fighting, acted unprofessionally as a soldier)
• embarrassment around fellow troops (I suspect two macho, homophobic marines who just had some hot man-love might have trouble looking each other in the eye)
• anger (being forced into sex against your will, I would consider that a bit of a violation)
If you think none of these are going to hurt morale, then I’ll just walk away, shaking my head.
You forgot one.
If while Pvt. Jones is give Capt. Dick a blow job, a US Marine comes in and shoots both of them dead, that’s pretty much a downer as well.