U.S. Army Wants to Replace Soldiers With Robots

[StewShearerOld]

U.S. Army Wants to Replace Soldiers With Robots

The U.S. Army hopes to become more "lethal" and "agile" by reducing troop numbers and using more robots.

The U.S. Army wants to replace soldiers with robots. Not all of them mind you. That said, according to recent comments from General Robert Cone, the Army is looking to make itself a "smaller, more lethal, deployable and agile," something that he believes robots can help with.

The head of the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, Cone expressed the service's desire to lower its troop numbers in the coming years. This could, he said, potentially include a reduction in the brigade combat teams from about the current 4,000 soldiers down to about 3,000, with robots and machines making up for the lost manpower. "I've got clear guidance to think about what if you could robotically perform some of the tasks in terms of maneuverability, in terms of the future of the force," he said. "Don't you think 3,000 people is probably enough probably to get by [with improved technology?]"

According to Cone, the Army's potential efforts to robotize its forces would likely emulate those of the U.S. Navy. A decreased number of soldiers, he said, could also be helpful in reducing the cost of the armed services "given the fact that people are our major cost." Cone's statements, of course, ignore the potential dangers of a machine uprising, but then again he and the military wouldn't be the only ones doing that lately. In other words, ready yourselves folks because now we're not just <a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/131334-RoboEarth-Demoing-Intelligent-Cloud-Connected-Robots?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=news>making robots smarter, we're also someday going to be counting on them to make sure our guns work.

Source: <a href=http://www.defensenews.com/article/20140120/DEFREG02/301200035/US-Army-Studying-Replacing-Thousands-Grunts-Robots>Defense News


Permalink

 

[thiosk]

I say bravo. I look forward to the future of the US Space Marine Corps. The emperor protects.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

On one hand, it is incredibly demoralizing and terrifying to the enemy to fight robots. When the operator gets tired he is simply replaced by another. If you "kill" a robot the other robots won't be psychologically hurt by the experience etc. So yes, it's a good thing in a way.

But it can also be expensive. And the US already spends a lot of money on defense. If they tried to be nice for a change and offer food and things to those poor souls in the Middle East instead of bullets and bombs, maybe they wouldn't hate you so much to want to blow you up. The war on terror creates more terrorists than it deals with. Which is probably the entire point of not just the war on terror, but of these robots. There's a lot of money in war. The industrial military complex wouldn't survive without wars and technologies like these. I can't believe Hideo Kojima of all people predicted the war economy crap 20 years ago.

 

[james.sponge]

This can only bring good things....

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

Well, everyone get ready for a new wave of atrocities as robot operators torture people that they can only interact with via a computer.

 

[fix-the-spade]

So somebody played Black Ops 2 and thought 'yeah that looks like a plan,'

Hopefully they'll gain sentience and turn into OSX touting hipsters.

 

[Vaccine]

Hopefully the robots have more morals than the government.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

The thing is now they'll need to train soldiers in maintenance of their kill bots and have more specialists for major repairs. I think the cost effectiveness and technology behind this is still decades off. Still researching the best way to disable a T-800 just in case. Anyone know a good recipe for EMP grenades?

On one hand, it is incredibly demoralizing and terrifying to the enemy to fight robots. When the operator gets tired he is simply replaced by another. If you "kill" a robot the other robots won't be psychologically hurt by the experience etc. So yes, it's a good thing in a way.

But it can also be expensive. And the US already spends a lot of money on defense. If they tried to be nice for a change and offer food and things to those poor souls in the Middle East instead of bullets and bombs, maybe they wouldn't hate you so much to want to blow you up. The war on terror creates more terrorists than it deals with. Which is probably the entire point of not just the war on terror, but of these robots. There's a lot of money in war. The industrial military complex wouldn't survive without wars and technologies like these. I can't believe Hideo Kojima of all people predicted the war economy crap 20 years ago.

Yep, our politicians are in corporation's pockets. And, those execs see soldiers and civilians of any country including their own getting maimed and dying as a side effect of their war profiteering that doesn't affect them. We do have aid programs for the local people over there, but good luck getting the message through Big News' constant coverage of soldiers after a conflict, terrorist attacks in the EU, or domestic trouble they know generates ratings. It's sad that an evil few on both sides represent entire nations of good people.

 

[Jamieson 90]

How long before we've got 12 year old kids acting as operators as they play on the latest console?

What's that you've suicide bombers have you? Yeah well we've got a generation of potty mouth tweens who make the Call of Duty crowd look good. They're so bad they'll make your suicide bombers want to kill themselves faster...

 

[Waraddict]

Problem is, when most people hear 'Robots', they're thinking of your C3POs, iRobots and Terminators, in reality the term 'Robot' has been applied to both automated and remote-controlled robots. Of the automated robots, even the most advanced ones that go a long way beyond a couple of simplistic instructions are a long way away from their self-aware Sci-Fi counter parts.

It would be expensive, unreliable and dangerous to completely remove the human element from the decision-making process to fire on a target. You might highlight examples to automated weapon systems like some AA systems, but even these weapons require an active or non-active (decision not to abort) decision to execute.

What they're probably considering here is the use of more remote-controlled robots, only.

 

[Tireseas_v1legacy]

Spoiler: In related news, the US Army is also adopting a new anthem.

 

[Mahorfeus]

Reminds me of that one scene from Surrogates.

Spoiler

 

[Auberon]

Now it is Men of Iron, next we'll see Astartes and third it has already turned into 41st Millennium.

 

[Falterfire]

On one hand, it is incredibly demoralizing and terrifying to the enemy to fight robots. When the operator gets tired he is simply replaced by another. If you "kill" a robot the other robots won't be psychologically hurt by the experience etc. So yes, it's a good thing in a way.

But it can also be expensive. And the US already spends a lot of money on defense. If they tried to be nice for a change and offer food and things to those poor souls in the Middle East instead of bullets and bombs, maybe they wouldn't hate you so much to want to blow you up. The war on terror creates more terrorists than it deals with. Which is probably the entire point of not just the war on terror, but of these robots. There's a lot of money in war. The industrial military complex wouldn't survive without wars and technologies like these. I can't believe Hideo Kojima of all people predicted the war economy crap 20 years ago.

I'm not sure how much more expensive it will be. You don't have to feed a robot. You don't have to train a robot. You don't have to spend lots of money encouraging robots to enroll in your army. Sure, you still need people operating them, but if you can get a good enough people-robot replacement ratio I'm sure you can end up spending less money total.

That said, this is just the pure technical aspect of it. The Middle East is not a problem that will be solved by generals, I don't think.

 

[mechalynx]

One question - how the hell do they intend to power these things? Oil is too inefficient. The solar power is not yet harnessed to the levels required to feed warmachines. Are we talking nuclear devices here?

 

[Kaihlik]

So have we beaten the "machine uprising" joke to death enough. Can we have a story now about AI or robots that doesn't mention robot overloards or Skynet because its really stupid and has been done to death, literally every story about these subjects, get some new material guys.

 

[omega 616]

One question - how the hell do they intend to power these things? Oil is too inefficient. The solar power is not yet harnessed to the levels required to feed warmachines. Are we talking nuclear devices here?

Extension cords, miles and miles of extension cords! Buy up stock quickly!

More on topic. I'm not up on my war crimes but this has to breach something ... "were killing you like fish in a barrel with our toys!" ... it reminds me of that very short flash game, you play as a giant magnifying glass burning people, cars and eventually a tanker.

Though, if the enemy builds some kind of emp ... they win.

When did war become fucking genocide? WW2 had it more or less even but now the cost of a single missile costs more than the city it is destroying makes in a year! It's like a kick boxer fighting a guy in a wheel chair ... now, it's like the kickboxer is saying "man, I'm getting tired of hitting this guy. I'm going to build a robot to do it for me!"

 

[Pyrian]

I can't believe Hideo Kojima of all people predicted the war economy crap 20 years ago.

I see your "20 years ago" (that's not even "prediction", that's observation of something that had already been going on for decades) and raise you 1961:

Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peacetime, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
- Dwight Eisenhower [http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html]

 

[Genocidicles]

So how long until we get protests because of robots taking away the soldier's jobs?