Robotic killing machines

Here is an article I picked up on today in Reuters. This is an issue which is being treated with far too little thought and if this doesn’t shock you I will tell you why at the end in my comments

Killer robots and a revolution in warfare:

Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:04am EDT

(Bernd Debusmann is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own)

By Bernd Debusmann

WASHINGTON, April 22 (Reuters) – They have no fear, they never tire, they are not upset when the soldier next to them gets blown to pieces. Their morale doesn’t suffer by having to do, again and again, the jobs known in the military as the Three Ds – dull, dirty and dangerous.

They are military robots and their rapidly increasing numbers and growing sophistication may herald the end of thousands of years of human monopoly on fighting war. “Science fiction is moving to the battlefield. The future is upon us,” as Brookings scholar Peter Singer put it to a conference of experts at the U.S. Army War College in Pennsylvania this month.

Singer just published Wired For War – the Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century, a book that traces the rise of the machines and predicts that in future wars they will not only play greater roles in executing missions but also in planning them.

Numbers reflect the explosive growth of robotic systems. The U.S. forces that stormed into Iraq in 2003 had no robots on the ground. There were none in Afghanistan either. Now those two wars are fought with the help of an estimated 12,000 ground-based robots and 7,000 unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), the technical term for drone, or robotic aircraft.

Ground-based robots in Iraq have saved hundreds of lives in Iraq, defusing improvised explosive devices, which account for more than 40 percent of U.S. casualties. The first armed robot was deployed in Iraq in 2007 and it is as lethal as its acronym is long: Special Weapons Observation Remote Reconnaissance Direct Action System (SWORDS). Its mounted M249 machinegun can hit a target more than 3,000 feet away with pin-point precision.

From the air, the best-known UAV, the Predator, has killed dozens of insurgent leaders – as well as scores of civilians whose death has prompted protests both from Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The Predators are flown by operators sitting in front of television monitors in cubicles at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada, 8,000 miles from Afghanistan and Taliban sanctuaries on the Pakistani side of the border with Afghanistan. The cubicle pilots in Nevada run no physical risks whatever, a novelty for men engaged in war.


Reducing risk, and casualties, is at the heart of the drive for more and better robots. Ultimately, that means “fully autonomous engagement without human intervention,” according to an Army communication to robot designers. In other words, computer programs, not a remote human operator, would decide when to open fire. What worries some experts is that technology is running ahead of deliberations of ethical and legal questions.

Robotics research and development in the U.S. received a big push from Congress in 2001, when it set two ambitious goals: by 2010, a third of the country’s long-range attack aircraft should be unmanned; and by 2015 one third of America’s ground combat vehicles. Neither goal is likely to be met but the deadline pushed non-technological considerations to the sidelines.

A recent study prepared for the Office of Naval Research by a team from the California Polytechnic State University said that robot ethics had not received the attention it deserved because of a “rush to market” mentality and the “common misconception” that robots will do only what they have been programmed to do.

“Unfortunately, such a belief is sorely outdated, harking back to the time when computers were simpler and their programs could be written and understood by a single person,” the study says. “Now programs with millions of lines of code are written by teams of programmers, none of whom knows the entire program; hence, no individual can predict the effect of a given command with absolute certainty since portions of programs may interact in unexpected, untested ways.”

That’s what might have happened during an exercise in South Africa in 2007, when a robot anti-aircraft gun sprayed hundreds of rounds of cannon shell around its position, killing nine soldiers and injuring 14.

Beyond isolated accidents, there are deeper problems that have yet to be solved. How do you get a robot to tell an insurgent from an innocent? Can you program the Laws of War and the Rules of Engagement into a robot? Can you imbue a robot with his country’s culture? If something goes wrong, resulting in the death of civilians, who will be held responsible?

The robot’s manufacturer? The designers? Software programmers? The commanding officer in whose unit the robot operates? Or the U.S. president who in some cases authorises attacks? (Barack Obama has given the green light to a string of Predator strikes into Pakistan).

While the United States has deployed more military robots – on land, in the air and at sea – than any other country, it is not alone in building them. More than 40 countries, including potential adversaries such as China, are working on robotics technology. Which leaves one to wonder how the ability to send large numbers of robots, and fewer soldiers, to war will affect political decisions on force versus diplomacy.

You need to be an optimist to think that political leaders will opt for negotiation over war once combat casualties come home not in flag-decked coffins but in packing crates destined for the robot repair shop.

(You can contact the author at
(Editing by Sean Maguire)
What do you think this all means?
Well to me this is simple because I have studied the methods of the Elites for a long time now. Part of the technique of changing society is acceptance. This is done through pre-emptive brainwashing and mind control techniques that have been finely honed over the last 100 years.
The idea of robotic warfare was introduced to us decades ago through their media outlets. Movies like Robocop or Terminator were designed so that when this technology was finaly released as planned we would not be shocked by it. Do not doubt that this technology has been around for decades or even longer but is only phased in once we are conditioned.
It has been estimated by insiders that military science is hundreds of years ahead of what they release into the public domain. Look at Obama’s recent announcement that he will open the secret files on anti-gravity technology to the public, even though we all know this technology is already 90 to 100 years old. How much further do you suppose they are now?
Basically any new technology or ability you see pertrayed in movies, more often than not means that the technology actually exists far beyond what you are being glimpsed, and is being suppressed until the Elites want to roll it out for their use. This includes everything from mind control, energy, travel, interdimentional movement, as well as events to come like terror attacks and assassinations, wars or disasters. Once the idea is planted in your minds, when they finally “happen” you are accepting of them
That is the reasoning behind this, but why they do it this way is so they can convince you or spin the story so that you accept these things are for good reasons not bad. If for instance robotic soldiers were introduced without any prior conditioning of your minds and even if they were promoted as in this article, to “save lives” (oh the irony), then the natural instinct of everybody would be disgust and horror and anyone who proposed such a thing would be run out of office. Look what is happenning though, nobody is losing their job.
Why am I making a noise about this?
Simply because it is unethical. It is unethical for a nation to attack another nation’s people with machines. Gates wants 40 % of the forces robotic asap. So you have initially the playstation generation operating drone soldiers or battle machinery in warfare with a TV screen and a joystic in Nevada killing real people like it was a game of Halo. Next you have programmed robotic soldiers without controllers killing people. Next you have artificial intelligence in robot soldiers killing people. Where does this stop?
Eventually you have another robotic arms race and two sides sending out robotic armies to fight eachother. What is the point of war at that stage apart from making trillionaires out of robotics manufacturers?
How is it ethical to fight a war with robots? If you choose to kill a man, should it not be only ethical to do it with the risk of your own life? Is it ethical to be able to kill a man and not have to see the person you have killed. See that they are a man just like you with a family and people who love him? Just another man who doesn’t want to be there like you? Why should we be allowed to commit the worst act a human being can commit and not have to deal with the consequences of that action? That is what makes us human. As my grandfather said about his time in World War II, None of them wanted to be there and because they could see the men they were shooting it made tthey never want to fight again and ashamed of what you had to do to other men
People inside the forces have commented that the technology that is currently availlable but not in the public arena is literally light years ahead of what we are told, things that even frighten them. I have read accounts of planned robotic control systems that would bring the terminator movie to life. I cannot possibly tell you if they are all true, but they are numerous and from whistleblowers inside the system
Where does it stop people, when do we say enough is enough? Will we have to be faced by a robotic security guard at an airport who points a gun at us because it interpreted our facial expression as threatening? Will we wait till we hear reports of thousands of Pakistanis killed by drone aircraft bombings? (oh I forgot we already heard that and it had no effect on you). Will we then have to wait for the sight of robotic troops gunning down civilians in China? or do you need something worse to wake you up?
It’s time we remembered something. . . .
This is just WRONG and we need to say so.
I ask you all, do you as human beings really and truly want robotic soldiers or robots of any kind in our world. I certainly don’t. I just want people, people looking after eachother and helping eachother. Who really wants to be monitored and controlled by an ever more mechanised grid system of surveillance and control with less and less human input or initiative. Even our human police are starting to act roboticly in the way they behave and interpret their job. They have lost humanity as have most of you, through the de-humanising of society by the mind control of the Elites.
Who here really wants WAR? Why are they being fought? It isn’t my doing, it isn’t your doing. I don’t know anyone who wants war, so why do we have them and why do we now have robotic war foisted on us as another step in our de-humanisation. It is the slow process of de-humanisation of the population of this planet to accept something much bigger to come. Death on a scale never before imagined
What happens when these maniacs who run the world now can roll out this kind of technology in your own country, what do you think they are capable of using it for? They have already killed millions of Persians with the technology they have, so what happens when they get this new and improved technology and use it on YOU?
Of course you believe that is UNTHINKABLE why would our government do that? Well so did 60 million Russians and then 80 million Chinese

4 Responses to “Robotic killing machines”

  1. Door32 Says:

    It is scary but I still get up every day and laugh. We will stay aware and stay in the clear and look after our own and survive for now. Their day of reckonning will come. All tyrants fall eventually. Like all tyrants they will get paranoid and kill the ones closest to them and it will all fall apart. Bloody psychos

  2. Bear Hugz Says:

    Given my blog for the day… we may be needing some non-human fillers in the near future.

    Dude – this shit is getting scary.

  3. Door32 Says:

    I agree Cosmo, I would have written a whole lot more on ethics of Killing and war at all (especially pre-emptive) but the blog was already too long so I stopped there. However please people comment further on the subject.

    My point was more into the un-natural in-human place we are being taken

  4. ←COSMO→ Says:

    so if I catch your drift, you’re saying that war is becoming unfair..rather than our country’s man besting your country’s man, it’s now our country’s machine besting your country’s machine..I don’t see killing as being an exercise in ethics..kill or be killed is the way it works..each nation seeks the upper hand using new technologies..UAVs save the lives of troops who would otherwise be forced into reconnaissance my way of thinking,unless attacked, war is morally wrong so to say it is unethical is to say it’s okay to kill someone but how you kill that person is the important thing. Seems to me nuclear weapons aren’t fair. Was the gatling gun fair when it first appeared and mowed down thousands of people? Or those first planes that dropped bombs on unsuspecting people,was that fair? The first revolver or repeating rifle..were they fair?

    sadly, technology has brought us to where we are today and technology will return us from whence we came

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: