U.S Guard Considers Replacing Thousands of Soldiers With Robots

Singer describes Iraq operations as they were being performed in 2008 with the threat of Improvised Explosive Devices, IEDs. “The Explosive Ordnance Disposal, EOD, teams were tasked with defeating this threat, roving about the battlefield to find and defuse the IEDs before they could explode and kill.” 3 Robots such as Packbot and Talon were used to disarm IEDs which save lives of Soldiers and civilians. The proliferation of technology in the battlefield can be seen in today’s combat environment on the ground, sea and air and will continue to grow. He states that “man’s monopoly of warfare is being broken” because digital weapons such as Packbot, Talon, SWORDS, Predator, Global Hawk and many others are a “sign” that “we are entering the era of robots of war.” 4 He supports his theory of the proliferation of technology in weapons by looking at industry growth by providing quantifiable data of rapid growth in industry to meet demands. As he states “in 1999, there were nine companies with federal contracts in homeland security. By 2003, there were 3,512. In 2006, there were 33,890.” 5 Mr. Singer then provides a history of robots, trends, and what we can expect in the future. The book also provides a glimpse of what the author believes can be expected on future battlefields and changes that he thinks U.S. policy makers and military leaders need to address. Some of the changes that can be affected concern law of war, robots role in war, level of robot authority to fight wars and robot

The quick evolving military environment, needs the US Army redouble its efforts to reduce the uncertainty associated with the downsizing. There are some predominant principles that can guide the Army’s efforts in minimizing the impact of uncertainty during the force reduction. Even with major political and legislative challenges, keeping balance among the different proportions of readiness is a goal of US defense policy. During the budgetary preparation, downsizing of the armed forces often becomes one of the first victims of fiscal reduction. This was true of the years between World War I and World War II, when the Great Depression made military preparedness a very low national priority. The Army’s downsizing effect put its readiness

The most critical issue that we face when it comes to downsizing the army is the readiness and security of our nation. Politicians say that downsizing the military brings back the nation’s financial stability. Army leaders do not see it that way, but weakens our nation 's defense capability and our commitment to the rest of the world. General Odierno, the Army Chief of Staff (2013), states that “In his professional military judgment, that the projected end strength and force structure levels would not enable the Army to fully execute 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance requirements to defeat an adversary in one major combat operation while simultaneously denying the objectives of an adversary in a second theater. Additionally, it is unlikely that the Army would be able to defeat an adversary quickly and decisively should they be called upon to engage in a single, sustained major combat operation” (Chief, Congress and DoD hammer out Army 's future manning levels, par.18). The military is not just weakened by the numbers, but by experience and

In response to the article, my reaction is agreeingly concerned yet optimistic. Moreover, I look forward to improving our armed forces and benefiting our military by making performances less time-consuming and facile. In contrast, we need to perform countless tests and additionally add ethical programming to these automated

The United States military is downsizing, becoming a more fit and agile military. Due to this action the Army has come up with a program to place Soldiers in a field that they can perform at their maximum capacity physically and mentally. This program is called Soldier 2020, it is in its final testing stages even though parts of this program have already been integrated into TRADOC.

In recent years technology has begun to grow at an astounding rate. Within the article “The Pentagon’s ‘Terminator conundrum” one such advancement in technology is discussed, describing the utilization of autonomous weapons within the military and the possibility of utilizing them to supersede human soldiers. While such technology seems like it wouldn’t be feasible till the distant future, the concept is presently being tested in military based drones within the pentagon. Some people disagree with the notion of giving machines the competency to make autonomous decisions on the battlefield, particularly the use of lethal force, believing machines aren’t trustworthy and could result in greater loss of life. If we were to ask an ancient philosopher

The face of how Army Reserve Soldiers mobilize to support contingency operations around the globe has changed very drastically in the last half century. In their report titled, Reserve Component Personnel Issues: Questions and Answers (2013), Kapp and Torreon noted the increased pressure on reservists and employers:

On August 2, 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act (BCA) of 2011 which cut $487 billion from projected defense spending over the next 10 years.1 The act also established a system of sequestration, which would cut an additional $495 billion from the defense budget.2 Altogether, the BCA would cut almost $1 trillion dollars from the Department of Defense (DoD). The passing of the BCA and the subsequent loss of funding mark an end to a 13-year period of robust budget allocations to support the global war on terrorism. From 2001 to 2013 over $1.6 trillion has been allocated to the DoD to support preparations for and execution of operations in various overseas areas.3 Within this $1.6 trillion, 94% of the funding was allocated to support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.4 This robust amount of funding cultivated a culture within the DoD that there would always be funding available to cover costs at home and abroad. This culture is deeply entrenched within the United States Army due to large budgets provided to the Army over the past 13 years. In today’s environment of shrinking budgets, this culture can no longer stand true and must be changed. Establishing a cost-conscious culture (CCC) within the Army is critical to our ability to sustain the current Army force structure and make the needed modernization investments to ensure our capability to fight and win our nations wars.

The United States military has never been as weak as it is under Barack Obama. In a time where the world is getting more dangerous every day, whether it is the growing threat of ISIS, Russia or North Korea, the current president insists on continuously making cuts to the military. According to an independent panel appointed by the pentagon and congress, “the shrinking U.S. armed forces, which are being downsized to fit that strategy and budget cuts, is a serious strategic misstep on the part of the United States and is inadequate given the future strategic and operational environment.” This essentially means that these cuts are weakening the military so much, that it will be ineffective to deal with global threats.

With the new president in office, there is sure to be new defense policy in place. The biggest concern in the matter of what is going to happen to defense funding. In recent years the budget for defense has been decreasing steadily. That in turn has cut down the number of soldiers the military can recruit because of funding. This can be massive to the entire department. The fewer soldiers the more at risk the country is. From a deeper point of view, the less soldiers you have can be detrimental to intelligence as well. There will not be any one to man the drones, or control the UAV’s if funding is continually cut. The country will take a huge fall depending on the ways funding is cut. There are worse case scenarios that lead the United States to recalling the

If we are having difficulty getting recruits into the army; let's hire some robots? General Patton's famous quote goes "...an army moves on its stomach" and if you look at the needs of humans to complete a mission they require much in the way of logistical support, where as robots do not, sure some, but much less and we are not just talking about chaplains, psyche councilors, medics, recruiters, human resource personnel and cooks. Any component under the Joint Chiefs is full of a complexity of needs. Yet often it has been philosophized that a nation needs to do something with its young males to continue the civilization without undo disruptions. There is a lot of testosterone involved in the human spirit, a component during the younger years

What I have found out that you guys do lose a lot of men and women on the front lines almost every day. One idea that someone can invent and that’s a robot that they can walk behind and be safe when in battle, just make the robot really wide from the sides and make it heavily armored. So that way when they are trying to get someone to safety they can use that robot to get there faster. If you have ever seen the movie Chappie then you would know what I mean. But that would be a great thing to have for our troops on the front lines.

One of those significant problems that the Army faces is grappling with Talent Management - how to systematically plan for and implement a modernized integration of personnel accessions, development, employment, and retention to get the right Soldiers and leaders ready for the right jobs at the right times to meet the Army’s requirements.1 John McHugh served as Secretary of the Army from 2009-2015, and along with Chief of Staff of the Army (CSA) General Ray Odierno, focused no small part of their efforts during their terms to reinvigorating the Army as a Profession, highlighting “The upcoming challenge is not just attracting and selecting the best available candidates to be Army professionals but developing them to be as good as or better than our current professionals.”2 As Ashton Carter assumed the duties as the Secretary of Defense down the hall in the Pentagon in 2015, the Army’s approach was a natural fit into Carter’s “Force of the Future.” In order for the

Moreover, the Army is not the only who has experienced decreased readiness, for example, there have been budget cuts across the board which have resulted in “The Air Force is the smallest and oldest it has ever been”(Cooper). “80 percent of United States Marine Corps or (USMC)  do not have the minimum number of aircraft they need for training and basic operations”(Cooper). “The Navy’s fleet is the smallest it has been in nearly 100 years”(Cooper). Accordingly, all parts of the Armed forces have experienced budget cuts due to lack of attention and the fact of a president who does believe in the armed forces. The BCA has forced liquidations and sequestrations on the armed forces which has caused them to seriously decline in the past 5 years under the Obama Administration. Notwithstanding, to fix this problem we will need to provide more funding for the armed forces and repeal the BCA and other military sequestration

The U.S. Navy will continue to develop new strategies in counter-piracy operaitions. The experience gained gives an opportunity for Sailors to train and prepare for these situations while at sea. The teamwork and effort from the CTF and ships becomes a standard for suture Sailors to emulate. These experiences link the strong naval heritage of combating piracy in the past with todays technology and partnership to build the in the strupon the experience gained