British Army tests their new Invisible War Tank

Have you heard about the latest technology from the British Ministry of Defence and physicist Sir John Pendry? Apparantly they have made a war tank invisible using cameras and projectors mounted on the tank itself. It's reported that onlookers from a certain vantage point could see nothing but fields of grass when actually a tank was making its way accross the plain.

Ok -- I have no trouble believing this. I can see how, at great expense, a development like this is possible although I don't believe that it could possibly be completely invisible from every angle. There would have to be areas of distortion and shadow. Plus, the signs of the tanks passing would be readily visible from above. But despite that I suppose it is a remarkable achievement. Now they just have to figure out how to keep the vehicle from leaving a footprint... (crushing grass, raising dust, emitting exhaust, making sound, generating heat.) Then they might have something that might not easily be defeated by infrared censors and heat seeking missles.

How many billions of dollars were spent on this project alone? When is it time to end the silliness? Whether it be in the UK or the USA or anywhere else in the world our respective governments are known for spending billions and billions of dollars on pointless projects and research who's ultimate goal is the efficient destruction of enemy forces. Now before I continue with this rant let me state that I am not anti-military or anti-government. I realize that as long as there are those in the world who seek to harm others it is necessary to maintain a force to protect against those aggressors whether it be on a local or global scale. No... What I am is anti-stupidity.

Here in the US our government daily proves their stupidity by spending billions of dollars subsidizing already profitable big business while increasing working class taxes to make up for it. They are also known for gross overpayment to government contractors and for materials and supplies. We tax payers love hearing about how our money was spent to send a group of our representatives to a resort in Can Cun for a few weeks to discuss fiscal responsibility. It's ridiculous when that money could be used to make a real difference.

There are an estimated 3.5 million homeless people in the US. For 2008 the US federal budget is $2,387 billion. Do you suppose we could skim 35 billion from a few useless pursuits and give each one of them $100,000? Except for the cases of homelessness attributed to mental illness, wouldn't that effectively end the homeless problem? Hmmm... Maybe, maybe not, but I think it would be a better investment than many that will almost certainly never bear fruit.

I don't know. I don't have any answers... Only questions. But I do know that I for one would rather spend money trying to save people than kill them.