Robots at War

We already have a "man in the loop" system that says "(1) Start System, (2) Wait, (3) Win War." The nuclear capable ICBM does exactly that and has for some time. A robotic army only changes that system in a few minor ways.

First, it is cleaner on the environment.
Second, it is more discriminating in targets eliminated.
Third, it is less threatening to surrounding countries.

We are not "fighting fair" with terrorist, nor would we ever. Fair fighting in war died with accurate artillery. Of course they will criticize us for not fighting with sticks and stones, but if we took the field with swords, do you think they would give up their guns and bombs?

The sooner man is removed from war, the better. It is difficult for people to understand cost-benefit analysis when human lives are in the balance. However, is a trillion dollars worth five human lives? Obviously. Five hundered? Five thousand? Who knows?

When the worst thing an enemy can do is make war more costly to us in terms of money, then the decision to fight or not becomes clearer and easier. How disheartening it must be for terrorist to think that they can no longer strike even American soldiers, only the endless products of Detroit!

America will never war with Russia, China, or any other international power. The inevitable cost is too great for any gain. Likewise, they will never war with us.

Only those with nothing or too little to loose would ever try. When you strip the enemy of any hope of victory, you win. Since victory for America's enemies is now reduced to inflicting any harm on Americans, taking the Americans out of the loop offers real solutions to terriorism.

When you start giving human lives a monetary value, you stop accepting them as humans. Are you saying that you would kill yourself for money? When war is fought by robots, people will stop seeing war as a bad thing. War will happen all the time. The thing that keeps people from waging wars every day is the fact that in wars, people die. Every human taken out of risk makes it that much easier to order a war.

How disheartening when the terrorists start to take out their anger and frustrations on the civilian populations and their allies , can robots protect us then?

So it can shoot. I'd kick SWORD'S butt with a sword. Wussy robot.

Seriously, it seems to me that the ethics of using these pieces of equipment, the collateral damage caused by their use, as well as the inevitable technological advancement of those exposed to their use in the field-are all things we accept when we VOTED to put any other equipment or personnel into the field. There is no difference, except that we have a better record of the true events unfolding than troops in the thick of a situation; and who, after all, could be killed with no chance to report. If an enemy kidnaps a robot, we just track it to the bad guys.

Only a tiny bit less serious. PopSci, I know that our government monitors fine publications like this one and PopMech, (I receive both) and possibly our blogs. Nevertheless, individuals like Director Peter Singer, of the prestigious Brookings Institute are necessarily difficult to contact directly. Having known of his book, and through your comprehensive yet brief description of his obvious concern with the moral and practical issues that we must find our way through as we become ever more mecha-interactive, I decided I would like to work for him. I understand it is common practice for magazines of this caliber to have contact information of it's sources. I thought since you had published one of my blogs(under quasi43, regarding my hopeful skepticism with the B.C. "Cold Fusion" article), perhaps I might have a few other opinions worth considering. Maybe a guy could get any opinions you consider valid points forwarded, especially when you consider I do receive Both magazines, and seeing as how my subscriptions are coming due, according to my wife. Trying for inventive, humorous, and creatively taking the initiative here, guys. Did I mention I receive Both magazines? As well as staying up all night thinking and blogging different issues here. Can a guy get a job, or what? Thank you for any assistance you can give. N.L.

Oh Yeah, did I mention that I'd also be honored to write things for the prestigious Hearst Communications, and would be blissfully happy for life with a salary only slightly more valuable than the dryer lint that makes it's way into my empty wallet? I would, with your reader base, very much consider this work a public service in it's finest form. The bonds I've forged with new-found friends discussing developments published in these magazines have been very special to me, and the often surprisingly simple common sense solutions to problems I've encountered in life I am truly grateful for. Seems this would be the place where I sign out, and simply remain, hopefully soon to be employed, N.L.