2007-06-22 09:22:35 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
No. There may be battles fought largely be robots at some point in the future, but there will always be human victims. You can't grind down an enemy's will to fight by breaking thier toys.
2007-06-22 09:25:20 · answer #1 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If by robot you mean a device that humans are not physicly a part of, but will follow our orders remotely, then we are well on our way already.
Take the predator Its an unmanned surveilande aircraft (big remote controll aircraft) that is controlled via satellite from america. They patrol Afghanistan and Iraq quite extensively, and can carry a pair of hellfire missiles.
Wheelbarrow is a remote controlled robotic arm used by the british army to remotely make safe any bombs, and IED's that are found. Wheelbarrow has been used extensively in Ireland and Afghanistan/Iraq
And there is more on its way. Yes robots will play a more significant role in the future, but things will still require a human touch.
2007-06-22 16:37:46 · answer #2 · answered by ed c 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bunny -- you've seen far too many fighting animations.
The next step for humans is to become robots. We are very quickly approaching the beginning of the era that will allow us to get a glimpse of this new reality.
2007-06-22 16:35:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably, look at the bomb detection and disarming robots already being used. And the predator is somewhat robotic (even though it requires a human operator). Robotic soldier casualties would be more acceptable than human casualties, and the robots could be a more durable fighting force. They don't tire, and they don't need food or water.
2007-06-22 16:24:41 · answer #4 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No. War will always depend on boot's on the ground. If nothing else the current mess in Iraq should have underlined that. If your lucky, war is like Hobbes's philosophy, nasty, brutish, and short. With the emphasis on short.
2007-06-22 16:41:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope, there will always be a human factor, robots don't do judgment well, and that's whats required in a fluid battle situation.
2007-06-22 16:27:09 · answer #6 · answered by Army Retired Guy 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've thought about that... wouldn't that just be pointless? May the stronger, smarter robot win? Weird...
2007-06-22 16:46:45 · answer #7 · answered by THATgirl 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so. The whole point of war is to kill other people so you can take away whatever it is you went to war for (land, resources, etc.). I think at least on one side people will always be involved.
2007-06-22 16:27:22 · answer #8 · answered by Al Phanti 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Besides that it would take too much time and effort to create real "killing machines", the fact remains that people--well, most of us--are blood-thirsty.
2007-06-22 20:43:28 · answer #9 · answered by filia_san 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, probably not a good idea. My thoughts may change in the future, though ;). But I still say "no."
2007-06-22 16:35:02 · answer #10 · answered by Centrist 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋