Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Laboratory >

Robot soldiers promise "cheaper, safer war"

13:52 / 05.03.02

From this site:

"The United States will this week choose a private contractor to develop the technology that will replace soldiers with robots on the battlefields of the future.

The new battle network, known as "Future Combat Systems", will enable sophisticated weapons to be deployed close to enemy lines with a minimum risk of casualties.

A spokesman for the Pentagon's Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency said: "The aim is to be able to do everything you would ever need to do on the battlefield, using a combination of manned and unmanned systems. They would be able to fire at things, defend themselves, do reconnaissance and find targets."

14:10 / 05.03.02

's funny. I recall similar claims about a certain "Star Wars" system. And before that, there was Teller's nuclear laser....

autopilot disengaged

14:22 / 05.03.02

dude, the future just happened. i'm 90% certain the US used robot fighters (as in attack aircraft) over afghanistan.

- this, despite the fact, during their long and involved R&D process they've proved to be pretty wayward shots at the best of times...

15:18 / 05.03.02

...mix "star wars" and this and you get...ta da...SkyNet. But then again...if all countries develop robots to fight each other, no one will get hurt and then people could resolve issues by keeping score. I think this has been delved into by some cartoons I saw...thinking the Jetsons...

16:21 / 05.03.02

This is not a throw away post. This is a vaild opinion... How the hell will wars be won?

The resistable rise of Reidcourchie

17:24 / 05.03.02

Originally posted by autopilot disengaged

"dude, the future just happened. i'm 90% certain the US used robot fighters (as in attack aircraft) over afghanistan."

Nope, I'm 100% certain they used robot aircraft for reconaissance as one was shot down. But for the actual bomb dropping, missle firing, people dieing stuff they prefer to fuck up human karmas.

autopilot disengaged

17:32 / 05.03.02

yeah - BUT - most countries - especially the ones the US tends to flex its adamantine military muscle over - cannot and probably will not ever (at least as long as there reeling from the economic war they're subjected to continuously) AFFORD unmanned war.

so what you actually have is - US unmanned attack craft on one side - broke-ass, virtually unarmed humans on the other.

yay for science. yay for videogame wars. three cheers for the world's mightiest nation hunting down its enemies like rats, and annihilating them with Full - Spectrum - Dominance.

[Homer] ...I'm being sarcastic, in case you couldn't tell... [/Homer]

autopilot disengaged

17:33 / 05.03.02

oh - and reid - i'll check - but, quite aside from the reconnasaince - which are global hawks, and have been in service since kosova and maybe before - i'm still 85% sure the generals got to test out their 'unmanned missile platforms'.

autopilot disengaged

17:56 / 05.03.02

quote:"Unmanned Predator aerial reconnaissance planes armed with hellfire missiles are also being deployed, joining heavy AC-130 Spectre gunships armed with howitzers, cannon and machine guns. The use of the Predator is a further indication that the US is confident it has complete supremacy of Afghan airspace, though it is having difficulty in flushing out Taliban or Bin Laden forces on the ground."

- from the guardian, october 19 2001

as i remember, these initial reports were followed with brief notes that the technology had been employed - though, obviously, since the US screened off the combat area, we have no way of knowing their effectiveness (or otherwise).

we do know they were rushed into service with incomplete testing, and had been generally haphazard up to that point - so, effectively, a real life situation with real life people on the ground became a final firing range.

fucking terminators.

17:57 / 05.03.02

reid - they had Predator reconnaisance drones that were armed with Hellfire missiles, that fired them off. Afghanistan was a testing ground for a lot of that sort of tech.

"Who cares if it works?"

It makes "collateral damages" excuses a whole lot easier if you can blame them on computers, rather than humans.

19:09 / 05.03.02

You've go to to take all this with a pinch of salt. Arms firms and the US government love to talk up their R&D. It's actually a scam to give lots of money to our friends in the private sector while at the same time making politicians look tough. I'd bet that the sort of technology they have is dodgy at best.

Did anyone else here about that anti ballistic missile test that they faked? All in support of son-of-star-wars.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

19:44 / 05.03.02

Yeah. They faked tests (using homing becons on the targets, stuff like that)... and the ABM system was still a bust!

You gotta laugh. Or else you'd go mad.

19:53 / 05.03.02

If it weren't about have the budjet of my sovereign nationality, 'twould be funnier.

19:55 / 05.03.02

I've just written up the Predator thing - apparently, yeah, a Predator armed with a Hellfire anti-tank missile did take out an al-Qaeda meeting, killing at least one of them.

The Predator is designed for recon, but there's a new Boeing that can carry a substantially larger payload and relies less on human operators - it can fly on autopilot and engage the enemy that way.

Flying robots.

19:58 / 05.03.02

Next up...GUNDAM Wing.

I got dibs on the one with the scythe.

21:50 / 06.03.02

A brilliant but arrogant scientist, Victor Von Doom was disfigured when one of his early experiments went horribly awry. Now -- his scarred countenance masked by a metal faceplate, his body sheathed in nigh-impenetrable armor -- Dr. Doom rules the small European country of Latveria with an iron fist. Not content with one nation, his ultimate aspiration is world domination...and the destruction of the fabled Fantastic Four!

In his armor, Dr. Doom can lift about 2 tons. One of the world's most brilliant scientists, he has amassed a seemingly endless arsenal of high-tech weaponry. At the very least, his armor incorporates a forcefield and concussion beams.

I'm living in a comic book, and not with the good guys.

10:07 / 07.03.02

Ah the military industrial complex still going strong. The stuff they do like to have pointed out is that there's tons of really easy and cheap ways to fuck around with this really expensive equipment.

Star Wars, simple add some decoy warheads and mix well, cost to the Russians and Chinese, $2.46.

And a bunch of people armed with AK47's firing up into the sky is pretty cheap in war terms. The 'filling the sky with lead' approach worked for Iraq in the gulf war and the Vietnamese. And that million dollar drone is just so much scrap. 'Where do they get all these wonderful toys?' Technowar Pr0n doesn't come cheap.

14:06 / 07.03.02

Star Wars, simple add some decoy warheads and mix well, cost to the Russians and Chinese, $2.46.

Not quite. Decoy warheads only work in the time between the RV's release and their entering the atmosphere, at which point differences in density make it apparent which are which. A great deal of research went into how to make better decoys to get around this and the conclusion reached was that it's simply easier to add multiple warheads to the bus. Which is still a bad thing.

The 'filling the sky with lead' approach worked for Iraq in the gulf war

Like hell. Anyway, I'm feeling obstreperous, so what exactly should the US do in the conduct of future war? Go back to muskets, or just plain give 'em a taste of the bayonet?

The problem is not that "we" can fight with technological superiority so it just isn't fair, the problem is that it can give us the impression that we can conduct wars with little consequence to ourselves. If the time for war comes, then it should be conducted as "safely" for us as we can manage. The answer is not to take the position of "We're really stupid, so it should be kept brutal in order to demostrate what it is", but rather to try not to be so fucking stupid in the first place.

pointless and uncalled for

14:51 / 07.03.02

Originally posted by Lionheart: How the hell will wars be won?

When one side runs out of mechanical resources and decides that sending pathetic bags of flash and blood against whirling death machines is a bad idea. As usual surrender, rout or complete annihilation will be the only options.

15:39 / 07.03.02

So...if its to be robots vs. robots one day, then one could assume that the wars of the future will be like SRL shows? I'm all for that, though somehow I doubt it will happen. Also, I think I recall seeing some recent news report about videogames and warfare that was somehow related, it reminded me of Orson Scott Card's "Ender's Game". Anyone else catch that story? I believe it was on ABC within the past week or so.

Oh, BTW, I'm new here. Swank board you've got. Ciao'.

Less searchable M0rd4nt

17:52 / 07.03.02

I've got an idea- let's just lock the head honchos of warring nations in a room with a Playstation, and make them Tekken it out.

17:53 / 07.03.02

Anyway, I'm feeling obstreperous, so what exactly should the US do in the conduct of future war? Go back to muskets, or just plain give 'em a taste of the bayonet? <snip> The problem is not that "we" can fight with technological superiority so it just isn't fair

Nope my problem is spending this sort of STUPID money on tech toys when they could be spending the money on something else. Even something military I'm not fussy.

Example from closer to home (UK), we have three nuclear submarines, the budget for which has crippled our military's ability to do just about anything else.

We have planes that are being mothballed, our army is one of the worse trained in the world (money and spending their time in Northern Ireland) and the navy can barely afford a bloody aircraft carrier.

I'm not against spending money on the military or even technical things for the military. Satelites, great idea, helicopters wonderful.
Unproven robot death machines, star wars systems THAT DON'T WORK and other expensive toys that GE and whoever else are trying to shuck onto the military.

Of course they could use some of that money that they save on stopping things from getting so bad in first place that they don't have to sent the robots in. But aid money just isn't sexy enough isn't it, and wheres the profit in it?

gentleman loser

18:03 / 07.03.02

Put simply, this is a bunch of typical horseshit Pentagon hype so that defense contractors can piss our tax dollars away instead of doing something intelligent.

1. For the time being, robots are stupid. We don't have AI yet and which would you rather field: a dipshit robot that cost hundreds of millions of dollars to field that breaks down half the time or one thousand guys with AK-47s and frag grenades? That's a no brainer. Soldiers can also operate on their own initiative.

2. Humans are maneuverable. Robots aren't. Human beings can function in just about any terrain if they have the right equipment, from the arctic to the equatorial rain forest. Modern electronics break down in all kinds of severe environmental conditions and no one has been able to make a robot that can walk or drive up a steep jungle hillside.

I know the U.S. strategy. We don't want to send a bunch of soldiers to fight because we're run by bunch of wussies that can't handle any serious casualties on a political basis. Technology just can't beat a disciplined and determined foe, short of dropping nukes on them. Just ask the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. On paper they shouldn't have won the war, but they did, didn't they?

UAVs are here to stay, but that's a totally different affair than fielding a robot grunt! Have UAVs kept troops from being killed on the ground? Not really.

One axiom of modern warfare is that airpower cannot conquer, control or hold ground. You need human soldiers to do that.

War is a bloody mess. This hasn't changed in over five thousand years.

[ 07-03-2002: Message edited by: gentleman loser ]

Less searchable M0rd4nt

18:49 / 07.03.02

Or maybe some of that lolly could be ploughed into, I don't know, a US national health service? Or into helping out developing nations, say, so that they don't get completely fucked up and end up being run by sociopathic warlords? Just a thought.

19:43 / 07.03.02

I feel like I'm in a satirical novel. Is this real? Am I dreaming? Have I finally achieved Book Zen?

05:34 / 08.03.02

Originally posted by doubting thomas:I'm living in a comic book, and not with the good guys.

I hear ya' brother. But what is worse, I sometimes fear that there are no "good guys" beyond a few lone individuals and networks of more or less disconnected people (like the one here in Litherland).

Yarr Mordant, they might as well do the Playstation thing, it'd be hella' cheaper than *billions* and perhaps all that dough could go to better projects, ya? Of course, it'd give the "enemy" the unfair advantage of a level playing field wrt the technologies of death.

{0, 1, 2}

13:55 / 08.03.02

“Forever Peace”, Joseph Haldeman.

16:37 / 11.03.02

The robots will probably be controlled by.. remote control. So if somebody hijacks the frequencies they can turn the robots against us. It'll be a war against...the ROBOTS!

We are D00med!

Less searchable M0rd4nt

23:04 / 11.03.02

quote:Originally posted by modthree:
Of course, it'd [the Playstation solution] give the "enemy" the unfair advantage of a level playing field wrt the technologies of death.

Well, of course. The whole plan is for the Good Guys (the US military and their pals du jour) to have steaming great git'ard robots, and for the Bad Guys to have twelve-year-olds with AK47s. And possibly the odd camel.

The problem with this is that the pals du jour, having been supplied with any spare material that happens to be lying around, unaccountably tend to end up as Bad Guys a couple of years down the line. And oh, look-didn't those used to be our git'ard robots?

04:42 / 12.03.02

quote:Originally posted by Mordant C@rnival:
Well, of course. The whole plan is for the Good Guys (the US military and their pals du jour) to have steaming great git'ard robots, and for the Bad Guys to have twelve-year-olds with AK47s. And possibly the odd camel.

The problem with this is that the pals du jour, having been supplied with any spare material that happens to be lying around, unaccountably tend to end up as Bad Guys a couple of years down the line. And oh, look-didn't those used to be our git'ard robots?

Um...yeah, but that itself is pretty clear, ya? I mean, we've seen it before, and we know we are going to see it again. Of course, the pally-wellies don't get the top of the line stuff, but they get some pretty hefty stuff none-the-less.

Um, the whole "...unfair advantage..." was sarcasm, right? I mean, I think you read it as such, ya?

As an aside, I'm startin' to think that sarcasm and satire, especially subtle occurrences of these, are really hard to pick up with this medium. <sigh> I've gotta' lot to learn!

m3

Less searchable M0rd4nt

04:42 / 12.03.02

Ummm. Yes. Not missing joke! Getting joke, picking joke up and running with it in order to highlight related point, sort of thing.

10:52 / 12.03.02

Actually, maybe there is some hope in all this. Human nature being what it is, we'll probably make robots to satisfy our "needs". (Robot Buffy, anyone?) I can confidently say that when I can get a working robot version of the borg queen is the day I stop interacting with the rest of reality. So maybe the end of civilisation will come in a completely different way...

15:59 / 12.03.02

Hey, ever read, I think it's called, "Blood Music" by Greg Bear (the short story--I haven't read the novel of the same name). It is sorta' about machines and the end of the world, but not in the way you might think!

16:08 / 12.03.02

No, I haven't. But you are right that its an idea that has been inserting itself into our consciousness for quite some time.

18:52 / 12.03.02

I was going to post saying this thread was totally mis-leading but modthree got it spot on. Read Blood Music by Greg Bear. The story it tells is much more likely than the 'Robot wars' as descibed so far.

The big leap in warfare (unless the bomb drops) will be small scale. Biological or nano technology or more-likely both. How would you stop an army of robots the size of mosquitoes? Blood Music goes a bit strange at the end but the premise is spot on. Can't really go into details without spoiling it tho'...