United States Army « Dr Alf's Blog

Sergeant Jason Mero describes the capabilities of the Special Weapons Observation Remote Direct-Action System at the Washington Auto Show. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)





View image | gettyimages.com

Dr Alf brings us an article from the Japan Times, which ponders the question of the ethics of robots being used to kill people.

The implication seems to be that robots will dispatch people without human involvement, and since they are machines nobody can be held accountable. This, at the moment, does not apply because robots are made by humans are controlled by humans, and lack sufficient artificial intelligence to make decisions on their own.

Since the Opium Wars, in which 100 million people died, we have had: 50 million dead from World War; 2,50 million killed in India when Pakistan broke away, largely due to religious infighting, which Lord Mountbatten did little to stop; 66 million killed in the Gulags by Stalin; 10 million Congolese killed by King Leopold of Belgium; the Holocaust which killed 6 million Jews, 1 million gypsies and another 1 million assorted people; the Armenian genocide by Turkey, in which 3 million died,; Rwanda and Cambodia in which a total of 4 million died; plus, of course, the 70 million Chinese dispatched by Chairman Mao the so called “Great Helmsman”. Each of these events were financed and instigated by a small group of people, often based on events which never happened, like the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which became the trigger for the Vietnam War, which for the Americans officially lasted from 1963 to 1976, and in which 1 million people died, 225,000 North Vietnamese were missing in action, 58,000 American soldiers perished and 2,100 ended up missing in action.

In every one of these wars, no robots were used, so with or without them, we clearly have a predisposition towards violence.

The next phase, before the widespread disposition of fighting and storming robots is perhaps the ekoskeleton and the Pentagon’s dream of a liquid metal “Ironman” suit similar to the one depicted in the film of the same name. That still relies on a human but a human with capabilities not available to a normal human.Robots and the Skynet system of automated nuclear warfare, as depicted in the second Terminator film, starring Arnold Schwarzenegger, do pose a problem because to make them accountable you would need an override system. The Pentagon allegedly has plans to launch a real live version of Skynet but naturally has not said when or what manual override system they envisage.

The public in the West want to be protected but are not prepared to pay higher taxes for defense, and are too squeamish to demand really robust action against terrorism. Here robots could perhaps be used to provide “boots on the ground”, and thus save the lives of our young fighting men and woman, whilst efficiently and relentlessly dealing with the escalating threats.

Similarly, with drones, other threats to our way of life can be dealt with in areas, where other methods would cause collateral damage.

Thus for me, there is a sound financial and practical case for using robots to remove dangerous threats to our way of life, wherever they may exist.

Open this link for graphical examples of the latest robots

John Gelmini





#137087479 / gettyimages.com





#171720720 / gettyimages.com

Dr Alf says he is angry but what has happened is part of a strategy devised a long time ago, which is and was, to reduce the Tri-Forces to 100,000 people, merge the RAF into the Army Air Corps and bring back the troops from BAOR in Germany.
Then, the plan calls for all forces housing stock to be sold off, the sacking of more regular Army troops and their replacement by the Territorial Army, which represents the newly re-badged “Reserve”.

The UK has some Trident submarines and they represent a deterrent to small countries with no nuclear weapons but beyond that the UK has no deterrent worthy of the name.

We have just 17 escort vessels for our shipping, a figure which Lord West, a former Admiral and First Sea Lord, says is a dangerous disgrace.

We have no control over our own borders and permit traitors and seditionists to campaign for a Caliphate, commit atrocities in other countries and return to this country. So far, 250 have returned whereas anyone with an iota of common-sense would have had them eliminated with “extreme prejudice” before they got here.

The plan to recruit reservists to replace sacked soldiers is failing, which means that we should be looking at National Service once more.

Dr Alf rails against 36 year old planes, I worry about our lack of a single coastal protection vessel and the fact that we are little more than a “plug and play ” component in America’s global military. It means that we are totally reliant on them for defense and are incapable of projecting power in pursuit of our own interests. Relying on others in this way is dangerous. We should stop pretending that we are a great power and re-equip our forces properly, re-introduce National Service and modernise the forces we have with Stealth ships, Stealth aircraft, invisibility suits for our troops and thermobaric weapons, capable of producing the explosive power of a Hiroshima style nuclear bomb but without the harmful radioactive fallout.

ISIL/ISIS cannot be destroyed by air power alone. It requires action against the countries which fund it by removing and replacing their regimes. It requires the application of the Treason Act 1318 against them and their sympathisers here in the UK, the deportation of imans not from here who preach sedition or treason. Mosques where this dangerous nonsense is propounded need to be closed and the sites cleared for building essential worker housing.

In the end, we are probably going to have to reintroduce conscription, raise an army of millions and go after ISIS militants wherever they are. This is because we have left it too late to remove them whilst Western leaders procrastinated, especially President Obama.

John Gelmini