Ethics of robots/drones/unmanned machines use in war

**Mazmaz** · 2012-10-03 02:46

So, since this is kind of a field of my studies/interest, I'd love to get some discussion going about this sort of thing.

What are your thoughts about the ethics of using more and more robotics for the purpose of war? Right now, the international laws regarding them is undetermined, and the US military has made quite an extensive use of these. We've seen things like the change of definition of "combatant" to include most civilians, in order to cover up the number of civilian deaths due to drone strikes. The drone strike program has expanded and is in use in multiple countries, and has been used to assassinate US citizens before.

Do you support the use of robotics in military? Do you think that they will lower the political cost of war so much that there'll be no deterrent to war? Should robots eventually be able to make autonomous decisions when it comes to life and death of humans on the battlefield? Who should be accountable when mistakes happen?

For reference, an excellent report by Aljazeera:

**Rhyis.** · 2012-10-03 03:04

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lth_poster.jpg

**hey** · 2012-10-03 04:14

Do you support the use of robotics in military?

Do i support not putting people in danger if they don't need to be? Sure.

Should robots eventually be able to make autonomous decisions when it comes to life and death of humans on the battlefield?

No.

Who should be accountable when mistakes happen?

The person controlling it.

We've seen things like the change of definition of "combatant" to include most civilians, in order to cover up the number of civilian deaths due to drone strikes. The drone strike program has expanded and is in use in multiple countries, and has been used to assassinate US citizens before.

I'm not sure i understand how any of this is related to the use of drones. It seems insane to me to think none of this would have happened anyway in the absence of drones.

**Kuya** · 2012-10-03 04:38

I think an interesting development is how the use of drones permits military leaders to avoid calling something a war simply because there are no human soldiers involved (from the attacking side, anyway).

**hey** · 2012-10-03 04:43

Originally Posted by Kuya

I think an interesting development is how the use of drones permits military leaders to avoid calling something a war simply because there are no human soldiers involved (from the attacking side, anyway).

Again, i think the drones are just an excuse here, for something that would be done either way.

**Kuya** · 2012-10-03 04:49

What are you talking about? I am saying that drones let you avoid calling something a war by technicality, because the combatants aren't human.

**hey** · 2012-10-03 04:55

Not by any definition of war i'd ever consider to be anything but retarded.

That's the great thing about politics: it doesn't matter if something is true or not, as long as you can convince people.

**Kuya** · 2012-10-03 05:33

It's a legalistic issue. International law and some national laws did not conceive at the time, the idea of machines fighting wars without any humans in them. The Obama administration argued that the US was not involved in a war in Libya because there were no US troops on the ground, and therefore the War Powers Act did not apply.

**hey** · 2012-10-03 05:46

I'm sure they could ahve found another argument if they really wanted.

**Kuya** · 2012-10-03 06:16

Why haven't you stated your position? Do you think drones have no significance? The only thing you've been saying thus far is that x, y or z could have been done with something else. Which is a bad argument because you can't prove 'what ifs', and to add to that, i'm mistified as to who you're arguing against given that no one has claimed that drones lead to anything exclusively.

**hey** · 2012-10-03 06:19

I answered every question from the OP in my first post.

Drones make sense, if you need to fight a war. Why you'd ever need to do that...i don't know.

My point is, we need to stop blaming drones for the shit real people are doing with them. Drones are great, the people controlling them are terrible. Does anyone seriously support needlessly endangering peoples' lives?

**Kuya** · 2012-10-03 06:33

You're arguing against a strawman. The OP is asking you about the ethics of drone use, not whether drones should be used or not (although you could based on ethics, decide that drones cannot be used, but no one has argued that).

The correct way to approach the subject is to answer on whether you agree with the way drones are currently used. If not, how should drones be used, based on your understanding on what is ethical.

**hey** · 2012-10-03 06:39

I'm not arguing with anyone, i am stating my positions on drones.

I do not agree with ANY current military action. What the fuck does that have to do with the ethics of drones?

**Kuya** · 2012-10-03 07:05

Anyway, moving away from the legal issue i mentioned and more towards ethics: i'm concerned about people's capacity to judge an act as ethical, the farther away and more removed they are from the act itself. Deontologically, there is no issue since the intent behind the act matters regardless of the means, but i think if you consider it from a utalitarian perspective, then there's a problem. Some utalitarians might say that as long as a drone attack leads to the most good possible, it's ethical (ex: leading to the least amount of death, out of all possible military alternatives), but i think the ability to judge the ethicality of a consequence is perverted when you start to get more detached from the act itself.

For a deontologist though, this is a no brainer. Military drone use is antiethical, because given how unprecise they are in their killings, they often kill innocent people. Killing innocent people as collateral is akin to trearing people themselves as means to an end, and therefore military drone use is not ethical. But you could use this argument to say that since, very often, military action kills or harms innocent people, then warfare is always unethical. So it wouldn't be limited to drones

**hey** · 2012-10-03 07:09

For a deontologist though, this is a no brainer. Military drone use is antiethical, because given how unprecise they are in their killings, they often kill innocent people.

The issue then is not whether drones are ethical, but whether current drones are ethical.

**Churchill** · 2012-10-03 07:36

what in the fuckity fuck

**Rhinox** · 2012-10-03 07:44

I argued against drones before it was cool to argue against drones. There was a thread I made years ago.

**Ragnus** · 2012-10-03 07:47

While I laud the lives that the drones are saving, the amount of psychological terror they instill by whirring around at all hours of every day on top of unintended collateral damage is substantial.

**Churchill** · 2012-10-03 07:58

Originally Posted by Ragnus

While I laud the lives that the drones are saving, the amount of psychological terror they instill by whirring around at all hours of every day on top of unintended collateral damage is substantial.

Yes, these are all positives. I am alive many times today because of them and many never met danger for their (drones) use.

**Waraji** · 2012-10-03 08:01

It's all fun and games, until they are whirling around US territory "protecting" US Citizens.

Thread: Ethics of robots/drones/unmanned machines use in war

Thread Tools

Ethics of robots/drones/unmanned machines use in war

Ethics of robots/drones/unmanned machines use in war

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads