Air Force Planning New Drone Fleet For Pakistan

mattnyc99 writes "With tensions high on the border, a new commander in Afghanistan, and complaints of civilian deaths from robotic US strikes in Pakistan raising anti-American sentiment, the Air Force is sketching out concepts for new robotic hitmen, reports Esquire.com. Among the new drones (which are all very small) are the Suburb Warrior (loaded with four or five mini missiles for semi-urban environments), the Sniper targeting system ("that can lock on to multiple targets, allowing a single drone pilot to coordinate the attacks of a squadron of robots"), and a backup fleet of flying buggies that act as suicide-bomber snipers. From the article: 'Picking through the dozens of systems in this briefing, many of which will be flight-tested within five years, there's a clear set of goals: build smaller, even microscopic drones with smaller weapons that can hunt in swarms and engage targets in the close quarters of urban battlefields. And hunt as soon as possible.'"

Comments

Re:I for one welcome our robotic overlords

[GodfatherofSoul]

The more "harmless" wars start to look, the easier it will be for politicians to convince the public to go to war. Look at how itchy a trigger finger our "all volunteer" army has given US Presidents. "What do I care? It's not MY kid."

Re:loss of ressources

[MichaelSmith]

Civilian space development is just an excuse to do military development on the sly. Consider the Chinese manned space programme. Their Government wants the capability but not so they can plant a flag on the moon eventually.

Re:I for one welcome our robotic overlords

[giorgist]

So with no soldiers to kill, it will be who runs out of money or civilians or infrastructure ...

I agree it's better. Until now we were watching war on TV between mercenaries.
Now we will hear our little Johnny at school got blasted away war may not be a great spectator sport.

only a matter of time

[rastoboy29]

It's only a matter of time before anybody, anywhere in the world can be picked off by a robot without any warning.

It's modern technology, Bobby!

Re:only a matter of time

[radtea]

It's only a matter of time before anybody, anywhere in the world can be picked off by a robot without any warning.

Correct, and the vile idiots designing and deploying these systems for the United States should be asking themselves, "How will I feel when one of them kills an American president?"

Because they will. These are assassination machines, and the only thing that has kept assassination at bay as a first-line political tactic is the certainty that the assassin will die or get caught, and therefore be traceable back to their handlers.

The incredible thing, to me, is that we are still so far from a world of ubiquitous political assassination. The writing has been on the wall since the early '90's. And as is usual with these things, once the cycle of tactical violence has begun, it will be very, very difficult to stop. Even in cases where it is screamingly evident to absolutely anyone with two brain cells to rub together that more violence will never under any circumstances improve the situation, people on both sides keep doing it (I'm thinking of the Palestinian-Israeli situation, ON BOTH SIDES.)

So after the first presidential candidate dies, say around 2020, the urge to retaliate will be overwhelming. After that, it's tit-for-tat, all the way to hell.

It won't be the parties doing the killing, either. These things are, or should be, relatively cheap, and the programming is not that difficult. The only reason they are currently expensive is that it is the US government doing it. An "open source" killer robot drone would cost at most a few thousand bucks (use an off-the shelf 1/10th scale RC model as the basic platform).

How would you like to live in the world when any nutjob with a few thousand bucks to spare can assassinate anyone? Because that's the world you'll be living in, soon enough.

Re:I for one welcome our robotic overlords

[CosmicRabbit]

Besides robots don't have feelings. They don't ever testify about the horrors of war, refuse to commit atrocities when ordered to do so, or have to deal with PTSD afterward.

Re:loss of ressources

[L3370]

Its also worth noting that war has driven technological advances much faster than any other single reason, so I wouldn't go as far to say science has been wasted on war. One example...Emergency room trauma techniques and equipment were perfected on the battlefield. millions of lives have been saved because of the millions that were killed or maimed in war. some of the coolest gadgets we use today came from the research done in finding ways to kill eachother.

Re:I for one welcome our robotic overlords

[couchslug]

"Look at how itchy a trigger finger our "all volunteer" army has given US Presidents. "What do I care? It's not MY kid."

That statement ignores the many and frequent interventions, wars, and military actions before the advent of the Volunteer Force. Google ye some Smedley Butler for examples. :)

There isn't evidence that the politicians sending the military to war don't care about the troops, even if they mismanage them sometimes due to situational ignorance. The military itself during the pre-volunteer days often treated troops badly, and now that it must compete for recruits standards of living have _greatly_ improved.
Casualties are far more controversial than during the Cold War, and vast amounts have been invested in protecting troops. (Going into Iraq under-armored was provably and specifically the fault of the military, not the politicos. The Army refused to learn from Mogadishu years before.)

It's all fun and games until....

[Ozlanthos]

Almost all scientific break-throughs/developments go through a clearly observable cycle. 1. Theoretical, 2. Experimental 3. Prototypical, 4. Militaristic 5. Commercial 6. Entertainment. Granted that a very few developments skipped a step or two, but for the most part, the cycle holds true. Which makes me wonder....how long it will be until we can be watching drones "police" us on Cops????

-Oz

The biggest issue of the 21st century...

[Paul Fernhout]

The biggest issue of the 21st century is post-scarcity technology wielded by people still preoccupied with fighting over perceived scarcity.

Nuclear power, biotech, AI, robotics, nanotech, the internet, and social bureaucracy -- each of these technologies could make the earth a paradise if developed for humane ends.

Albert Einstein said: "The release of atom power has changed everything except our way of thinking...the solution to this problem lies in the heart of mankind. If only I had known, I should have become a watchmaker."

The same is true for robotics, biotech, and the rest. Even smart networked watches. :-)

Re:I for one welcome our robotic overlords

[ceoyoyo]

It's a continuation of the changes that began with the first mechanized warfare, and robotic warfare is indeed worse than what we have now.

When soldiers fought one-on-one the only way to pacify your enemy was to kill, capture or otherwise eliminate his soldiers. When we started fighting wars with machines, industrial power and the civilians that were responsible for it became more important. You could still win by killing or capturing the other guy's soldiers, but now you could also win by depriving them of the machines they needed to fight effectively. That means taking out factories or convincing the civilians that work in them that they don't want to be at war anymore. When we fight with only machines, no men involved, the only option will be to destroy the civilian's will or ability to fight.

Re:I for one welcome our robotic overlords

[EdIII]

they will do so without any hesitation, because machines do not hesitate.

Unless they run on Microsoft :)

This stuff...

[Anachragnome]

This stuff needs to be treated like nuclear weapons in terms of international condemnation. It is much harder to determine if a rogue country is trying to build such technology and is therefore MORE dangerous then nuclear weapons.

Drone weaponry, especially the microscopic crap they are dreaming about (but seriously working on), are just as dangerous as biological weaponry. Borders will mean nothing to the people that have this capability.

I don't care if it IS us that will have this technology. It needs to be stopped before we have ourselves another Cold-War, or worse, a real war.

I don't trust ANYONE with this tech.

Re:I for one welcome our robotic overlords

[h4rm0ny]

Yep. It's even easier to dehumanize your enemy when they exist only on a computer screen. And dehumanizing your enemy is what it's all about. They're not "people", they're "terrorists" or whatever word you've conditioned people to use as a substitute for thought. The article says around 650 people have been assassinated in Pakistan by US forces so far. No trials, no declaration of warfare, not even a tactical need to seize a position. Just US drones flying into another country and shooting people who are inconvenient. Disgusting.