There are many ways to blow up stuff and the military has plenty of options. Yet, if one is interested in interesting weapons blowing and militaria in general then blowing up stuff is not where it’s at; non-lethal technologies is where things range from weird to nightmarish and all in between.
For example, the gay bomb which the Pentagon has admitted at least as a conceptual weapon would be a chemical weapon that would disperse an aphrodisiac pheromone that would cause the enemy forces to get distracted by sudden feelings of strong, shall we say, attraction towards their comrades.
We previously reported on a system that would holographically cause the image of a deity to appear over enemy troops and would urge them to give up the fight, see:
Now, Patrick Lin reported Could Human Enhancement Turn Soldiers Into Weapons That Violate International Law? Yes (The Atlantic, January 4, 2013 AD).
He notes that some “real military projects currently in various stages of research” are:
Half a world away from the battlefield, a soldier controls his avatar-robot that does the actual fighting on the ground.
Another one wears a sticky fabric that enables her to climb a wall like a gecko or spider would.
Returning from a traumatic mission, a pilot takes a memory-erasing drug to help ward off post-traumatic stress disorder.
Mimicking the physiology of dolphins and sled-dogs, a sailor is able to work his post all week without sleep and only a few meals.
Herein we see a concoction of transhuman (which Lin calls, “Human Enhancement Revolution”) genetic manipulation, high tech militaria and mind control (by any other name).
Lin’s focus is the, “serious ethical, legal, social, and operational issues in enhancing warfighters.”
He also notes:
Throughout history, humans have employed animals in the service of war, such as dogs, elephants, pigeons, sea lions, dolphins, and possibly rhinoceroses.
Dogs, as the most commonly used animal, undergo rigorous training, validation, and inspections…If rhinos cannot reliably discriminate friends from foe, e.g., a rhino may target and charge a noncombatant child in violation of the principle of distinction. A similar charge would apply to autonomous robots in such a general environment in which distinction is important, as opposed to a "kill box" or area of such fierce fighting that all noncombatants can be presumed to have fled.
If autonomous robots are clearly regulatable weapons, then consider the spectrum of cyborgs -- part-human, part-machine -- that exists between robots and unenhanced humans. Replacing one body part, say a human knee, with a robotic part starts us on the cybernetic path. And as other body parts are replaced, the organism becomes less human and more robotic. Finally, after (hypothetically) replacing every body part, including the brain, the organism is entirely robotic with no trace of the original human. If we want to say that robots are weapons but humans are not, then we would be challenged to identify the point on that spectrum at which the human becomes a robot or a weapon.
In fact, armies have also enhanced their fighting forces, their weapons, etc. by spiritual means which range from praying to their gods/goddesses for victory to actually performing human sacrifices to said gods/goddesses.
In India the Deori “used to make a Narbali (human sacrifice) in terms to win the war, battle.”
When the king of Moab saw that the battle was too fierce for him, he took with him 700 men who drew swords, to break through to the king of Edom; but they could not. Then he took his oldest son who was to reign in his place, and offered him as a burnt offering on the wall. And there came great wrath against Israel, and they departed from him and returned to their own land (2 Kings 3:27).
The “art” of war is not simply to put soldiers against each other on a battle field but includes psychological operations, financial manipulation, political intrigue, propaganda, occult practices, etc., etc., etc.