With some activists warning that the advent of armies of vicious killer
robots could be just 3-4 years away, a large number of nations are
trying to get out in front of that, with an eye toward a global ban on
such robots.
The EU and UN both heavily support such a ban, and Germany is seen
as a major proponent. Yet several nations seem keen to resist the idea,
as they envision powerful armies of metal men crushing their enemies.
The US and Russia, unsurprisingly, are leading the opposition to the global ban,
calling it premature. In practice this really just means they oppose
any limitations that would prevent them from building killer robots.
Britain, Israel, and Australia are also opposed.
These are the usual suspects whenever people are opposing a global ban
on something that would be used to commit war crimes. While Britain’s
Defence Ministry denied any plans to build any “fully autonomous” killer
robots of their own, they announced this week that they are in the
process of developing killer drone swarms with theoretically full
autonomy.
The US is sure to be the leader in the field, at least early on, with
America’s huge fleet of attack drones likely to eventually be modified
to take out the need for a “button pusher” to authorize strikes, and
simply letting the drone decide who lives and who dies.
Since the US provides little oversight in how they decide on drone
strikes, the near-term difference may be negligible, just someone else
killing indiscriminately with no consequences. Yet human ethics are
always at least somewhere at the far end of the spectrum a limiting
factor to how many people the fleet can kill. Given the Pentagon’s
proclivity for high body counts in recent air wars, simulating that in
the AI of the new killer robots will certainly be a low priority, or one
eschewed entirely in the name of a more efficient, and therefore
merciless, killer.
Ah, yes, killer robots would seem be the ultimate sanitizers of war crimes and tools of exculpatory warfare.
Its not clear that deployers of robots are free of their crimes, though.
Putin summed up the religious-psychological position on warfare best; martyrs go to heaven as the victim, sinners go to hell as the aggressor. The Russian ‘dead hand switch’ is the ultimate and last deterrent and a real problem for the dark side of Anglo military tradition.
https://www. businessinsider. com/putin-delivers-threatening-sermon-for-a-possible-nuclear-holocaust-2018-10
As much as some may religiously want the Apocalypse, most understand they can’t be on the aggressing side, a check the secular faux-progressives lack. The Evangelical VP Pence, for example, may not mind scoring a touchdown with the nuclear football, but he’d have to do it in retaliation to something he would likely have our side provoke.
Gaming righteousness and blamelessness is as old in America as Indian Wars, when the settlers provoked Indian attacks to ‘win’ the right to unlimited retaliation.
Nuclear Winter looks like our best chance to save the ice caps. I oppose all lesser weapons.
Hasta la vista, Baby.
I really should start drinking.
Machine guns on wheels could kill everyone’s mother and father, grandparents and children without getting pissdee. Then Russian, Israeli, and US oligarchs could kick back and enjoy life.