I heard about this in Japan, they had a jacket that had little microfilaments that change color, but it was for civilian use or something.

Kastere, that sounds like...something completely and utterly different.

But yeah, resources should be on something more productive.

Interesting how we 'civilian' forumers seem to know what we're doing more than most people on this planet.

I think this tech will be used more on stationary targets, like artillery, important buildings and stuff like that. Moving targets would create to much distortion in the image...

You would think, with all this technology, that we could invent a way to not go to war at all.

That's why we keep on building bigger and bigger bombs; they're so powerful that no-one would ever go to war with us. And if they have big bombs too, we won't go to war with them.

See, peace by default.

Yea, you don't attack a country that can wipe out every major European and Russian city in a matter of a few hours. Just like the school nerds won't ever pick a fight with the school bullies.

Unless you're able to wipe out every American city in the same amount of time...

This is getting a bit recursive, no?

It isn't, though, the jacket uses technology similar to the tank, but niot EXACTLY the same.

for example:

X= color changing fibers
O=Nano camera

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xXxOxXxOxXxO
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

See what I mean? ata ll?

Yea but... no one can do that...

I've seen somthing like this a couple of years ago, reminded me of the "stealth" from metal gear solid, while you can still see them, from a distance it would be very diffcult

Your faith in America sickens me. Are you saying that Russia could not wipe out every city in the US? I'm pretty sure they can. But it isn't the Russians the US should be wary of if you ask me. It's them in that big country with lots of people a bit south of Russia.

I hate America, I'm a bad guy. I support America, I'm a bad guy. Make up your damn minds! :P.
The reason I said it was because Russia doesn't have any nuclear subs that carry over 12 nuclear warheads.

Don't really need subs when your countries are at the closest point about 25 miles apart.

If they had a 25-mile-long pole, they could poke you in the eye.

Who needs nukes when you got pokers?

You win the prize for the most random comment ever! Congratz!

...what?

A suit with coloured changing fibers on it is somewhat different to a reflective tank with images beamed onto it if you ask me.

Yeah, but we were discussing nuking every single major city in the US. None of those in Alaska, I'm afraid.

Does anyone else get the feeling like the NSA is suddenly paying a strong attention to the Oddworld Forums?

True, but crippling oil supplies out there would certainly fuck America.

Hi NSA agents!

There are far more nuclear weapons than major cities in the world. What ever do they expect to use them on?

It's not about that. It's about the threat.

If this aspect of our governments were personified as a human, they would be locked away in a very secure mental illness wing.

This is not Sparta...

This is what happens when the plastic rises over the swing set.

Well, anyway, this invisibility thingy sounds cool.
"Hey! I just rode over here on an invisible tank!"
"Sweet! Wanna go for a ride?"
"Sure! Uh... I'm sure i left it over there..."
"Crap."

Well, until one of us starts with the 'DURKA DURKA DIE AMERICANS' I think we should be safe.

What I got from the tank thing was that the cameras reproduce the images on the tank with filaments or fibres all over it, or screens maybe.

i thought the biggest threat to the world would one of those mental countires who don't give a shit about everyone else and have acces to nuclear arms e.g North korea and Iran