Many of you may remember my February 2005 diatribe on magnetic ribbons, the ones put on cars… Many of you may remember my February 2005 diatribe on magnetic ribbons, the ones put on cars to advertise support of troops or advocate a cure for a disease. I said things that implied they were an empty symbol and served no practical purpose but to make money for a small group of people who were capitalizing on world problems.

I must admit now that I am wrong.

It’s not like me, I know. I usually research columns exhaustively and respond to mail that says I am wrong. But I am now better informed on the fad that put colored strips supporting causes on cars across the United States. I originally thought that most “Support the Troops” magnets did not support the troops, and I must apply a correction to that statement.

The magnets do not support the troops, but they may protect them.

Ada Bennett, a medical secretary in Wichita, Kan., and her husband, Casey, head a group called Patriotic Magnets for Armor which collected tens of thousands of magnetic ribbons from donors around the country.

The idea was to show the Department of Defense they need to beef up armor on the 20,000-plus Humvees being used in Operation Iraqi Freedom, because a lack of high-tensile steel and other armor materials has soldiers at risk.

Soon, the Bennetts found themselves waist-deep in magnets, and they began sending them to the Department of Defense. So, what does the Department of Defense do with a large, heavy, metal-attracting protest?

To their credit, they began putting it to work. Experiments conducted by the U.S. Army Materiel Command in Fort Belvoir, Va., suggest that with sufficient density, magnetic ribbons stacked onto a Humvee would generate a force field capable of repelling small-arms fire and perhaps even projectiles from improvised explosives.

Force field?

You see, every self-respecting geek knows that force fields keep oxygen inside the U.S.S. Enterprise – the starship, not the aircraft carrier – and the daughter in “The Incredibles” uses them to stop people in their tracks. But unless this is science fiction or a cartoon, I cannot see a force field being a credible part of the government’s defense strategy in Iraq.

A U.S. Army official said that he “was astounded by the results of the test,” and I must admit I agree with him. The first thing I thought of while reading the test’s results was a Bugs Bunny cartoon in which a bullet fired by Elmer Fudd bounces off Bugs Bunny’s butt and turns around.

“What are you telling me, I can dodge bullets?”

“No, Corporal Neo. I’m saying that if you put magnetic ribbons on your Humvee … you won’t have to.”

Force field?!

Before any physicists get angry with me, I am fully aware that the concept is possible. I just don’t think that it is cost effective or practical. How many magnetic ribbons are needed to generate this force field? Multiply that number by 20,000, and we’re talking a lot of magnets.

Not to mention, many projectile weapons are made out of metals and materials that are not magnetic. Then the ribbons are merely padding.

So, why not just use more steel? Unless someone shoots a diamond at you, I think steel would stop things.

We’re short of it. Well, why not make more? We’re at war, so let’s act like it and get a wartime economy going. The effort to produce more steel domestically may even generate some revenue in the hard-hit rust belt, including Pittsburgh.

I support the troops with the best of them. I have friends in the Army and the Marines, and I want nothing more for them to serve with honor and to return home to their families.

Please tell me we can send them more than magnetic ribbons, and please tell me we can do more for them than put ribbons on our cars.

Michael Mastroianni asks people to put the money they would spend on magnetic ribbons into organizations such as the American Red Cross, the American Legion and others that can help those in need. E-mail him at [email protected].