Talk:Michael Wynne

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces (general topics): Military biography task force Associated task forces (nations and regions): United States military history task force

This article is stolen from the bios pages off of af.mil. shouldn't the writing be at least credited?--Tbbooher 17:05, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't stolen per se, since the biography is in the public domain. You are correct that it should be referenced, though, for verifiability reasons. --tomf688 (talk - email) 02:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 01:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Controversial views?

Why are Wynne's views on nonlethal weapons so controversial? Isn't he exactly right -- if it turns out that that microwave weapons are unacceptable for crowd control use in the United States (as opposed to beanbag guns, tear gas, and other nonlethal weapons), then wouldn't that signify that those weapons also would not be acceptable for use against the citizens of foreign countries? Ketone16 (talk) 19:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? Weapons are developed to use against ENEMIES. American citizens are NOT enemies. They are us. Do we drop nuclear weapons on American cities before certifying them for use against an enemy? Do we shoot American citizens with every new rifle or handgun before issuing them to the troops? The difference between "us" and "them" should be obvious even to a child. dougw —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.175.105.191 (talk) 21:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Non-lethal weapons are touted as a humane option to killing the enemy. If they can't be proven to actually be humane, then why bother developing them? Just go on killing the enemy as usual. The U.S. doesn't test guns and nuclear bombs on citizens because they're not designed to be humane; they're designed to kill. The U.S. has signed treaties agreeing not to use weapons it (and much of the rest of the world) considers inhumane, such as chemical or biological weapons. It's kind of a dumb political move to deploy a "humane" weapon that you wouldn't tolerate having used on your own troops (say, if it had long-term or crippling effects, which is the worry). It will not be effective for its intended purpose, which is largely a political one. Ketone16 (talk) 13:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)