Apathy Curve: Highly Visible

<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d9924031\x26blogName\x3dApathy+Curve\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://apathycurve.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://apathycurve.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-8459845989649682690', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

Monday, July 09, 2012

Highly Visible

The camouflage pattern the U.S. Army fielded in 2004 was not just ineffective, it actually had the opposite effect of what camo is supposed to accomplish. They're just now getting around to fixing the problem. No telling how many soldiers have been killed over the last eight years because their uniforms made them stand out like a girl at a comic book convention. Oh, and did I mention this fiasco cost us $5 billion?

I'm just wondering what was wrong with the standard tri-color camo I wore twenty years ago. It seemed to work just fine, thanks. Oh wait, I know: it didn't cost $5 billion. The military-industrial complex strikes again. $2,000 hammer, anyone?

0 Comments: