 |
| Image: Pinterest |
Should we deny killer-robots?
The fact is that we should not make rules, what are not followed and this fact is very dominating in the weapon limitation talkings. The robot weapons or "killer robots" are effective weapon systems, and the effective weapon systems are the thing, what means in the military world. If we want to deny the killer robots, we must remember things like prohibiting nuclear weapons. The name "killer robot" is provocative, but if we are thinking robot as a weapon, we must know that almost every weapon is made for killing people or destroy the goods and infrastructure. So the mission of combat robots makes them killer robots.
In fresh memories are the contracts like prohibiting chemical weapons, and prohibiting the flame throwers and bullets which are chancing their form. Countries like the USA and the Soviet Union had more chemical weapons than any other country in the world, and all countries what are joined the Nuclear non-proliferation treaty owns nuclear weapons. So any military force would not abandon their most effective weapons.
The flamethrowers are classified in non-humane weapons, and that means they were prohibited during WWII but in fact, those brutal weapons were used in all fronts by allied and axis troops, because of their psychological effect. So the contracts do not affect if they are not controlled, and superpowers would not allow smaller countries to check their weapon stockpiles.
And the thing is that the robot weapons are making the conflicts easier to solve by using force is a sad thing. Every type of new technology is causing problems and the thing is that every type of new technology has been turned to a military system. The fact is that the tractor, what mission was to make work easier is the thing, that made it possible to create the tank(1), the moving bunker that was invincible until lightweight anti-tank weapons like a bazooka and hollow(HEAT) warheads were invented(2).
"The first use of tanks on the battlefield was the use of British Mark I tanks at the Battle of Flers-Courcelette (part of the Battle of the Somme) on 15 September 1916, with mixed results. Many broke down, but nearly a third succeeded in breaking through" (Wikipedia, Tanks in World War I)). And that success of the British (3) tanks made other nations to create their versions of this effective weapon.
But later in the WWII Germans created the tactics, where tanks were used in the large groups, and the "tank cutters" brought Germans success during the first years of WWII. And that caused the development of the new and lightweight anti-tank weapons, as I have written earlier.
Against those weapons is created the automatized machine guns, what mission is to detonate incoming missile in the safe distance(4). And the development of tanks is the race between improved armor and improved warheads. In most modern tanks has been planned to use microwave transmitters for exploding the incoming missiles, which means that the advantage goes to high-power laser cannons. And then there will be invented something new.
And the fact is that human-shaped robots, what is made for the rescue and other missions can change to the killer-robots by changing the programs. And that thing makes them extremely lethal machines. The fact is that the most brilliant brains are working in those projects, and the effectiveness is the only thing that matters in the world of the military. The counter-arguments are crushed by telling people, that the only reason why robots are facing resistance is that they are taking jobs from the soldiers.
(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_heavy_tanks_of_World_War_I
(2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-explosive_anti-tank_warhead
(3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_heavy_tanks_of_World_War_I#Mark_V_series
Comments
Post a Comment