At this point I can only paraphrase Treize Kushrenada: When war becomes a battle between machines, humanity cannot realize what the fighting means.
War is not a game and should not be seen as one. Automated weapons and remote controlled war toys should not exist because they deprive the fight of its meaning.
You can replace a live soldier with a robotic toy that does the exact same thing. The thing is, if the said live soldier died, you'll get people questioning the war and its implications.
It's sad that people blast Gundam Wing because they're elitist Gundam bastards. Some of the topics dealt with in the serie is awesome.
If no people die though, and it's just robots killing robots, then there's nothing being accomplished (aside from wasting money). Even using robotics to keep soldiers safer when fighting offensively, the ultimate goal will have to at least be able to threaten some human life to cause them to surrender.
The threat to human life doesn't just go away, because that's what war is about, threatening them with death. You could even go so far as to say that because there are less meaningless deaths that every death that does occur will just be seen as more important.
Now, as for my comment......kurisu7885March 29 2006, 13:35:46 UTC
you know Jack will claim some "pixelante will use this to commit murder," despite the fact that it's BRAND NEW military tehcnology, which make it cost a hefty penny, and it's probalbly well guarded, so not anyone can get their hands one it.
But, so long as a human being is always at the controls, I think it's a great idea, as it minimizes risk of life on the battle field, and this thing can be retrieved, repared, and re-deployed. Howeve,r as I said in my previous post, "no matter how advanced technology gets, there will be no subsitute for human beings." THen again, it'll be a little much for me if we start seeing things akin to Metal Gear or the Shagohod on the battlfield, even if the Shagohod is more feasable. Then again, robotics developers nowadays grew up with aniem and video games, so who knows what we'll see.
Re: Now, as for my comment......kurisu7885March 29 2006, 14:06:53 UTC
Hell, I'm a gamer, I'd never want to hurt anyone unless there wasn o other option, and I've never seen that kinda money. That a little over a quarter mil I believe.
The Tollwutig ReporttollwutigMarch 29 2006, 13:56:24 UTC
Anything that keeps our boys and girls over there safer I am all for. From the descriptions this sounds like a remote operated Sniper rifle which is being used to take out snipers and such without putting people in harms way.
Re: The Tollwutig Reportkurisu7885March 29 2006, 14:07:35 UTC
Considering that over there they have suicide bombers and such. Better to have a robot blown up rather than a human being. A robot you can easily repair, a human, not so much.
Re: The Tollwutig Reportsilver_derstinMarch 29 2006, 14:53:51 UTC
The problem in this case is the dehumanization of warfare. Its hard to understand how that would work, but if you never lost soldiers on the front, nothing would ever get solved in a war.
A Beautiful Dream7popugaeffMarch 29 2006, 15:09:50 UTC
Maybe if this works then all wars will be fought by robots till eventually war becomes more like a million dollar game of chess and no one actually dies.
Then eventually war would become pointless and no countries will do it.
I better hurryblitzfitnessMarch 29 2006, 15:10:42 UTC
I need to hire an engineer and electrician, et all, in order to complete designs on a car. If we can do this with technology today, we can easily remove the bulky steering wheel and replace it with a controller.
Comments 38
War is not a game and should not be seen as one. Automated weapons and remote controlled war toys should not exist because they deprive the fight of its meaning.
Reply
Reply
It's sad that people blast Gundam Wing because they're elitist Gundam bastards. Some of the topics dealt with in the serie is awesome.
Reply
The threat to human life doesn't just go away, because that's what war is about, threatening them with death. You could even go so far as to say that because there are less meaningless deaths that every death that does occur will just be seen as more important.
Reply
But, so long as a human being is always at the controls, I think it's a great idea, as it minimizes risk of life on the battle field, and this thing can be retrieved, repared, and re-deployed. Howeve,r as I said in my previous post, "no matter how advanced technology gets, there will be no subsitute for human beings." THen again, it'll be a little much for me if we start seeing things akin to Metal Gear or the Shagohod on the battlfield, even if the Shagohod is more feasable. Then again, robotics developers nowadays grew up with aniem and video games, so who knows what we'll see.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Then eventually war would become pointless and no countries will do it.
Reply
Well, a certain lawyer who will go unnamed would.....
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment