18/06/2009 / USA
© U.S. Air Force
The upside of using unmanned air vehicles
is that they can reach into difficult terrain and stay airborne for long
periods of time, and they do not risk the lives of the military deploying them.
In the US Army's case, the aircraft are directed by someone with a games console
in Creech Air Force Base, Nevada.
This means that US Air Force and CIA operatives can carry out missile attacks
in Northern Pakistan with unmanned aircraft
and then go home for dinner.
Obama boosts joystick funding for war on terror
The Obama administration has just handed over five billion dollars to the armed forces to buy more robots. The country's ongoing "War on Terror" employs more unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for its operations in Pakistan and Afghanistan than it does manned planes. Our Observer and expert in robotics tells us that the ethical concerns behind the programme have gone unnoticed.
Below, videos of two of the planes in question. The first is an MQ-9 Reaper, capable of carrying 14 hellfire missiles. The second, its predecessor, is the MQ-1 Predator, which can take only two missiles onboard.
Contributors
The Reaper
The Predator
A Predator MQ-1 striking a target. Location unknown. Posted on YouTube by "Kobusnl".
“The training course to operate these things in the US is only a couple of weeks”
Noel Sharkey is a professor of artificial intelligence and robotics at the University of Sheffield, UK.
The upside of using unmanned air vehicles
is that they can reach into difficult terrain and stay airborne for long
periods of time, and they do not risk the lives of the military deploying them.
In the US Army's case, the aircraft are directed by someone with a games console
in Creech Air Force Base, Nevada.
This means that US Air Force and CIA operatives can carry out missile attacks
in Northern Pakistan with unmanned aircraft
and then go home for dinner.
The training course to operate these things in the US is only a couple of weeks, and unlike in the UK where you have to be a pilot experienced in combat, in the US you don't even have to be a pilot at all. This represents an inevitable progression towards the deployment of robot weapons that will decide for themselves who to kill without discriminative capabilities or any idea of proportionality.
The robots are considered extremely militarily successful in the Afghanistan and Pakistan ‘decapitation raids', which refer to air-based raids which target top al Qaeda leaders. But while 14 of the aforementioned have been killed since 2006, so have more than 600 civilians, according to the Pakistani press. It's not good PR for the West. There's something very uncomfortable about these weapons not being manned. There is already an argument for putting nuclear weapons on these planes and I do think that it could happen.
Around 40 countries are already developing unmanned war vehicles, including Pakistan, India, Turkey, China and Russia. It's all going to change quite dramatically when everybody has them. What gave me hope was Obama coming into power, but while he's cut back on conventional weaponry, he's increased spending on unmanned weapons to almost $5.5 billion for 2010."
The console for the Predator
Posted on Flickr by "hudson".
“Able to actually do something on the war on terror…”
Parody of a Mastercard ad, featuring one of the first self-flying UAVs and the more modern Predator. Posted on YouTube by "Lineback".
»
Sign up via 
Observers' Tips
The Observers TV show
What we’re working on now...
Comments
Fantasy Land
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Fri, 19/06/2009 - 13:39.Guess what? War, robotic or not, is insane.
Unregistered user
That is certainly a very
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Fri, 19/06/2009 - 15:35.That is certainly a very sane thing to say.
Unregistered user
Obama boosts joystick funding for war on terror
Submitted by McGarry (not verified) on Fri, 19/06/2009 - 09:38.Modern Fighter Planes over Afghanistan or any other terrorist controlled area do not flyover for an inspection,surprise attack is the nature of the war. Manned or Unmanned the planes deliver their payload from a distance,one would hope that eyes on the ground would be giving the final go-ahead for each mission.War is never fought by gentlemen although some gentlemen may be involved, it is started by politicians driven by business moguls whose wealth is at risk and fueled by the media, also controlled by business moguls. It has always amazed me how the media start by reporting on the human rights abuses being inflicted by the ruling regime and end up trying to discredit the liberating forces, whatever draws the viewership is the order of the day. Lets look forward to the day when Countries settle their disputes by Robot wars on uninhabited islands.
Unregistered user
robotic 'war on terror'
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Thu, 18/06/2009 - 20:14.I find the idea of someone sitting safely and comfortably in one country, potentially getting a kick out of playing war games on a consul with the lives of people in another country while they are so far removed both literally and emotionally, quite terrifying. At least when soldiers are conditioned to believe the dominant ideology of their country and they have to physically travel to another to engage in war, there is some hope of enlightenment developing, some hope of identifying with the humanity of the other, with cultivating an appreciation of the cultural mores and aspirations of the people of the country with which they are at war? Some hope of making compassionate decisions in the moment. What hope of that is inherent in logic based, potentially all powerful, exciting, robotic war games?
Unregistered user
You live in a fantasy land
Submitted by Unregistered user (not verified) on Fri, 19/06/2009 - 06:31.You live in a fantasy land
Unregistered user