Instead of trying to build newer and bigger weapons of destruction, we should be thinking about getting more use out of the ones we already have. - Jack Handey
This, of course, is meant to be sarcastic. But it's also a bit terrifying. This morning, I read this:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150715-killer-robots-the-soldiers-that-never-sleep
I've written earlier about how we've become so separated from the battle fields... It is troubling for me to think of the way warfare has evolved - from basically hand to hand combat, where you were looking the person in the face as you killed, to now, where a person may not necessarily be involved at all. On one hand, as a person who served in the military, and who has family members still serving, I appreciate the protections such distance affords our guys. Let's keep them safe, while affecting our foreign policy on others. This is generally a good thing.
And yet, as we become more distanced from these encounters, as the battlefield becomes ever more virtual for us (while still remaining horribly personal for those on the other end), I worry that we are sensationalizing it, making it so disconnected from any kind of reality on our end, that it becomes surreal.
Maybe that's a good thing too. I'm not sure if PTSD is experienced in the same way by the folks who man the drones... But then, shouldn't they?
I don't know. All I know is that it's unsettling. If we become so detached, will it make it easier to kill? And if we are so insulated from the direct, human costs of such killing, will we be more likely to take other's lives? And how will this impact those in the societies we war against? And how will it impact our own?
Tough questions in our rapidly evolving landscape of battle.
I heard about this guy in Texas:
http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/mike-schoby/2007/09/remote-control-hunting
And who could forget this memorable scene:
Victor Hugo said that death belongs to God. How dare we, as fellow human beings, remove that which only God can provide?
This, of course, is meant to be sarcastic. But it's also a bit terrifying. This morning, I read this:
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150715-killer-robots-the-soldiers-that-never-sleep
I've written earlier about how we've become so separated from the battle fields... It is troubling for me to think of the way warfare has evolved - from basically hand to hand combat, where you were looking the person in the face as you killed, to now, where a person may not necessarily be involved at all. On one hand, as a person who served in the military, and who has family members still serving, I appreciate the protections such distance affords our guys. Let's keep them safe, while affecting our foreign policy on others. This is generally a good thing.
And yet, as we become more distanced from these encounters, as the battlefield becomes ever more virtual for us (while still remaining horribly personal for those on the other end), I worry that we are sensationalizing it, making it so disconnected from any kind of reality on our end, that it becomes surreal.
Maybe that's a good thing too. I'm not sure if PTSD is experienced in the same way by the folks who man the drones... But then, shouldn't they?
I don't know. All I know is that it's unsettling. If we become so detached, will it make it easier to kill? And if we are so insulated from the direct, human costs of such killing, will we be more likely to take other's lives? And how will this impact those in the societies we war against? And how will it impact our own?
Tough questions in our rapidly evolving landscape of battle.
I heard about this guy in Texas:
http://www.outdoorlife.com/articles/mike-schoby/2007/09/remote-control-hunting
And who could forget this memorable scene:
Victor Hugo said that death belongs to God. How dare we, as fellow human beings, remove that which only God can provide?
Comments