The military is considering adding more robots to help aid the soldiers on the battlefield. Currently, robots are being used in the military for tasks that may be too dangerous for humans. For example, some may be used for destroying hazardous material, spying on enemy bases from the sky, or defusing bombs. Now companies are working to create machines that may serve as sentries, scouts, or even soldiers! These robots come equipped with machine guns and grenade launcher and are ready to pick a fight. If these robots become employed on the battlefield, the number of casualties would decrease dramatically (for those controlling the robots). These machines have also proven to be mildly cost effective. However, there are some controversies surrounding these robotic commandos. First of all, these machines do not discriminate. The robots will not distinguish the difference between a civilian and a treat. Others believe that, because these machines are cost effective, wars can be started very easily.
What do you think?
12 comments:
Though a machine war may seem like a good way to lower the casualty rates and be more cost effective, I am not a big fan of it. I think one of the reasons why many people advocate to stop wars is because people's lives are altered due to it. If the weight of endangering people's lives is removed by using machinery, I feel that it would allow countries to go to war without thinking about all of the consequences we think of today. I am for creating machinery to explore dangerous places but not for the purpose of taking other's lives. That is just putting the weight of murdering someone onto a non-living being who can't feel the pain of losing someone.
Imagine a war made entirely out of robots, it would be more like a real-life simulation of a video game. I think if the military can use robots to save our soldiers lives, I'm all for it. I do have to admit, though, there can be some nasty side effects if the robots malfunction.
The US army could start becoming unified iron men!
If anything the military will create iron man suits to put their soldiers in. Some prototypes are already out that let the wearer to lift 200+ pounds more then they usually can. If the Iron man suits were created in some sort of cheap, weightless, and strong metal then they will double up as human body armor.
"If you're a kid, here's one more reason to be a geek: when you grow up, you get to build indescribably cool stuff. Take the XOS 2, developed by Salt Lake City–based Raytheon Sarcos. An honest-to-goodness Iron Man suit, the XOS 2 allows even its least muscular wearer to lift 200-lb. weights without breaking a sweat and, as seen in demonstration videos that have gone viral, punch through slabs of wood that a person would be at pains to even saw through ordinarily. Raytheon hopes to roll out the XOS 2 first to the military, allowing soldiers in theaters of operation to lift heavy ordnance or other equipment with ease. The affordable home model, alas, is still the stuff of geek dreams."
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/0,28757,2029497,00.html #ixzz16ggYbW9y
From a robot, to iron man suits, to flying cars in the military, i wonder what they'll come up with next. I think that the idea of robots serving in the military is a good idea but there's a lot of downsides to it. First, there's a good chance that the machine will be destroyed in battle. Second, the cost!!! It's going to cost more money for the military budget to fund these machines to go into war. It's a nice idea, but it's just not necessary at the moment.
A robot with a machine gun and a grenade launcher. That sounds a lot like a T-600 to me. I'm not suggesting that the entire unmanned arsenal of vehicles and weapons in the world will turn on us, but Danielle does bring up a good point. If complications arise to a point where drones for instance don't take any commands by ground-based pilots, then an immediate and potent threat in the air will emerge which will have to be dealt with. Right now I think that robotic attack vehicles are where they should be; at the mercy of a human controller. I think we've had plenty of novels and movies to point out that if robots were to gain enough intelligence and self-awareness, then maybe we could have a catastrophe on our hands. And robots malfunction from time to time, so who's saying that such robots won't glitch and cause more harm? I just wouldn't want to repeat about 50 sci-fi stories in which we builds intelligent robots to aid us, only to have them turn on their creators.
I believe that, despite the cost associated with the robots, we should use them. If it will save human lives, I'll all in for the idea because you can't put a price tag on a life. Also, Ayaka, putting the weight of murdering someone onto a non-living being who can't feel the pain of losing someone isn't necessarily a bad thing. Thousands of veterans suffer from PTSD (post dramatic stress disorder). If war was to occur regardless of the robots, the least we can do is spare some soldiers from that.
I don't believe that this is in any way a good thing, though it may seem glamorous at first. Of course the big problem that makes me in disagreement of this aspect of new soldiers is that they cannot, as Aaron says, discriinate between who is who. I see this causing much unecessary damage to country civilians and we will start a war over a misunderstanding (kind of like the Spanish - American War to name just one)...and this of course will actually increase the amount of money we are spending and more lives being threatened...any war will do that, robot or human!
Uh..as fancy as this sounds, I think robots should probably stay away from the battlefield. It's the fact that the robot doesn't know how to distinguish who from who that makes this whole situation really sketch for me..think of the innocent people that would get killed and injured by these robots that are meant to help us. There's always two sides to it though; more of our soldiers' lives would be saved and the robots can be used instead of humans to take risks and spot the enemy. However, I do believe there are more consequences than benefits if we do decide to use them.
First of all, I think it would be silly not to support anything that takes people out of harm's way. Therefore, it'd seem like a good idea to try to use technology such as automated lifting robots and unmanned aircraft to reduce the human cost of war, which, sadly, will probably be inevitable even as we head into the future.
On the subject of robot soldiers, however. I think we're a long ways off from having the technology to build actual robot soldiers. That would require massive artificial intelligence programming. We are just starting to develop technology that would let cars steer themselves, and that's far away from making something that can even walk through a constantly changing (and exploding) environment on its own. Then there's the process of making not just a walking but highly mobile robot that can incorporate this technology, plus all kinds of heavy weaponry. By the time we develop this tech the entire nature of war might change (and likely will), such that these characteristics might not even be useful anymore. I think there's a much more immediate use for technology like unmanned planes or the "Iron Man" suits mentioned in a previous post.
And of course, since I brought up Iron Man suits...
I AM IRON MAN./ NA NA NA NA / NA NA / IRON MAN.
-Black Sabbath
To be honest, i know this is going to sound dumb but if robots do replace our human soldiers then i am afraid that the robots might take over, such as Terminator status. i know that the U.S military will have ways to make sure they have full control over these machines, but there will always be a chance for malfunctions.
I think anytime a new weapon comes out, there are going to be more caualties. If anything, the military should improve something that gives the soldiers better defense (i.e. armor), than give them machines that kill more people.
In a world with robots fighting robots, it becomes war as usual, not something anyone wants, or at least most people. In the short term, sure it is useful, but in the long term it makes war a more common thing than it is already. If no one dies but a few civilians here or there, why negotiate, we can just out produce them, so why stop earlier than an unconditional surrender, no one but insignificant civilians are dying, right?
Robot v Robots = bad
Mecha v Mecha = epic
Post a Comment