Autonomy In Weapons

The changing face of conflict has brought about an evolution on how we conduct and even think about warfare. Gross (2010) states that assassination was once prohibited under the statutes of international law but has increasingly become common in the modern day battlefield. A dilemma is presented when we question is there any ethical basis of using assassination as a tool of modern warfare. There is increasing realization that one cannot engage in war using the conventional means. Terrorism and insurgence being the new methods employed in modern warfare mean fighting using conventional rules puts one at a major disadvantage. The killing of Osama Bin Laden according to White (2012) can be termed as an assassination; it was executed by a special

Besides developing their nuclear weapons or any other heavy lethal weapons, many states are also developing their high-tech weapons. Thus, so called autonomous weapons, have finally introduced in this modern era. Many people must not familiar with the term ‘autonomous weapons’, many scholars have defined that it is a weapons which are select and engage targets without human intervention. This autonomous weapon is a killer robot in any possible forms, and very ideal for task such as assassinations, destabilizing nations, subduing populations and selectively killing a particular ethnic group. It is locked the target, and attack, no intervention no halt after it is

It is not in human nature to kill one another and for this reason soldiers must be trained to shoot on instinct (173). In fact, only one-fifth of all American soldiers in WWII ever fired their rifle (Quittner 52). For that reason, simulators similar to video games such as Doom and Quake have been used to train soldiers how to kill without thinking. This may be true, but the simulators used show real soldiers in enemy uniforms, and users are told to take a single head shot at all enemies in the room. Games like Quake and Doom however similar require numerous shots to kill an enemy and do not distinguish between where the enemy is shot i.e. a shot to the foot equals a shot to the head (Quittner 173-4).

The Defense Science Board’s 2016 Summer Study on Autonomy is a wide-ranging discussion of how the department can more quickly and effectively adopt autonomous capabilities in support of rapid decision making, performing dangerous missions, and handling high volume data. The recommendations address technical engineering, design, and acquisition challenges, but also less structured issues such as governance for systems, relationship to the Law of War, and trust. Out of 26 major recommendations, one stands out as fundamentally distinct—the need to develop an autonomy-literate workforce. It is an acknowledgement that “American military forces, formerly equipped with largely electro-mechanical platforms, are now fielding systems that are dependent on software for combat effectiveness. This technology shift has placed a huge demand on education and training to provide qualified people…”

counterproductive to the mission of our war fighters and disastrous to the mental health and stability of our warfighters.

Since prehistoric times humans have learned to build and use weapons. The first archeological evidence of the use of blunt weapons and spears was around 400,000 BC (Newscientist.com, “Timeline: Weapons Technology”, Michael Marshall, July 7, 2009). Most of these were built for hunting and gathering food and to defend themselves against large, fierce animals. It was a matter of survival. Eventually humans turned these weapons on each other. The first organized record of warfare comes from Greek and Roman times (Griess, Thomas: Ancient and Medieval Warfare. Page 1, 1984). Since then, weapons have advanced steadily over the years. Each new significant advancement has changed the way battles are fought. As described below, these weapons changed warfare during ancient times, the 20th Century, and during the modern day.

Most of you are familiar with the M16 rifle, Caliber 5.56 mm. The first version was designated the M16A1and entered into the United States Military arsenal in 1963. It was an ideal weapon for jungle warfare.

“There is no honorable way to kill, no gentle way to destroy. There is nothing good in war, except its ending” (Abraham Lincoln). When I look at the world today, watch the news, or listen to the radio – I am often disheartened by the amount of violence I witness arise in our society. Recently, acts of hate and hostility have been exhibited all around, and alas have become a common occurrence. With the world so filled with violence, is it necessary to implement and build new weapons that make murder less difficult? A recent invention entitled a drone has sadly become a general weapon used in war. A drone is a human operated aircraft that makes killing impersonal and blinding to the pilot. When drones are utilized in violent situations, there are many civilian casualties. Drones should not be used as a weapon in warfare because they are an immoral and unsentimental device used to take away human life.

In order to understand autonomous weapons, one must understand the basis of artificial intelligence (A.I.). At their very core, A.I.s are algorithms (a step by step procedure based off of mathematical data) that can handle tasks which human intelligence requires. This means they are able to do reasoning tasks like problem solving, prediction, diagnosis, and so forth. On the contrary, the A.I.s portrayed in films and fantasy novels often involves machines that demonstrate human-level intelligence. To put this into perspective, there is a scenario where an A.I. is assigned to drive a car from point A to point B with a separate car accident between the points. A realistic A.I. would still try to drive the car from point A to point B because its

On a daily basis courageous service member’s risk their lives to serve the United States of America. Armed forces ensure that a country is safe, such that every person can live in peace acknowledging that he or she is protected. Through the approaches of weaponization, military prevention methods have changed over the years. However, the goal remains to safeguard the land and be strong to fight in warfare with the best approaches available. Previously, armies used swords, knives, shields and spears to safeguard themselves during the battle, but today they use heavy machine guns, missiles, pistols, and bulldozers. Clearly, most of weaponization methods have changed over the years, indicating the changes that have steadily developed within the

In the last century, warfare has made leaps and bounds and progressed at a rate many thought unobtainable. In the last century alone, our world has developed the airplane and developed it to the point where it can be controlled from a trailer on the other side of the world. While much of our progression has made killing more precise and we have become less likely to inflict the horrors of civilian deaths, we still must consider the moral implications of our weapon systems. Much of our current basis for just war is rooted in traditional weapon systems. With the advent of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs, or drones), countries are able to place their warfighters in a state of zero self-risk. While incredibly advantageous for the countries with

The automation of the modern battlefield and the proliferation of unmanned systems to conduct war is a reality and imaginably it will only increase in the future. As these new weapon systems make their way to the battlefield it will require leaders to decide how to responsibly employ these systems and how often they will be used in substitution of actual Soldiers. The benefits and effectiveness of drones cannot be denied. The use of drones does limit the exposure of American Soldiers and the accuracy of drones to kill the enemy and limit civilian casualties does and will continue to improve.

You’re in an unstable bunker that goes to only the top of your shoulders. You’re in Iraq, a land you have studied yet still feel as unfamiliar with as a never-ending desert. Your drill sergeant is screaming at you to fire at your enemies. You freeze. This was not what you remember signing up for. You came to this foreign land because you wanted to defend yourself and because you love America. When aiming at stationary targets not firing back, you felt in control. You didn’t really think about what you are doing then. Now, though, when looking through your scope at the “enemies”, you cannot differentiate them from you. Army sergeants have attempted to teach you to bypass the moral process of killing, but you are unable to easily do

“Killer Robots” - or, officially, “Lethal Autonomous Robots” (LARs), are robots that - once activated - can operate without any further human intervention. This new weapons system is capable of identifying and attacking a human target on its own. Delegates should note that these robots differ from non-autonomous, armed robots, or peaceful, autonomous

Morality and moral decision making add yet another dimension to the already complex nature of warfare. A key tenet of warfare and combat is one human taking another’s life. Bloodshed is the main factor which differentiates warfare from diplomacy. However, warfare is never black and white. Modern day insurgent warfare requires incredibly difficult labeling and differentiating between combatants and civilians, that far surpasses the complexity of traditional warfare, making moral decisions all the more difficult. However even when the enemy wears a uniform and the battleground is not in a neighborhood, killing another human being is hardly ever a morally straightforward task. The graphic novel, Watchmen, written by Alan Moore, explores