Audio as a weapon

I believe Elizabeth is referring to whether or not the technology exists to detect such a weapon, keeping the technology classified, the R&D involved, the government contracting and procurement process that would take forever.

If such technology does exist, there are military and diplomatic protocol issues surrounding the use and deployment of such technology in a foreign country or anywhere else for that matter.

Just because you’re a diplomat does not entitle you to know everything your government is doing.

Actually, let me step back a bit:

Let's say someone in our government, after some research and studies (feasibility of such technology) determines there is justification to explore technology X. 

Before technology x can get off the ground there has to be

1. A request (most likely a branch of the military) 

2. Written justification and  probably a conceptual design or theory

3. Green Light given to explore and develop technology x.  That means you gotta develop, produce and test a working prototype.

Then there is the question of money.  Whose Budget and how much.  Budget approval process.

Procurement and contracting process:  Who does it?  

Getting the picture?

Think about the Manhattan Project and the development of the first atomic bomb.   

Elizabeth- Are you saying the US Govt or the US military does not already have these types of weapons??? Or the capability to detect them? I would be curious as to what you know.

It's not Elizabeth that's saying. it's the US Gov't that's not saying.  Because to do so would be an admission. 

And sometimes the diplomatic corp talks too much or brings unwanted attention to themselves that have unintended consequences.