Predatory Assumptions


This article in the Guardian (and a story on 60 Minutes from two weeks ago) remind me of a Star Trek episode. In it Captain Kirk is aghast that citizens of a planet go willingly to death chambers when each country is virtually attacked by the other. (I think Kirk was kind of in love with a woman on the planet, but then again, when was he not?) While it's not a really 'tight' analogy, the point was and is that violence and warfare had lost their meaning. It was a cautionary tale, one that science fiction does better than any 'realistic fiction' could.

Apparently violence has lost it's meaning to Americans, so long as it is perpetrated against other people. It's just absolutely surreal to think that we're training more video jockeys these days than actual pilots. The surreal nature of it comes when I watched the 60 Minutes story in question. In it the Air Force officer was talking about how great his job was, that he could kill and maim people--couched in the rhetoric of self-defense, of course-- while sitting at his desk all day long, in essence playing a video game with real world consequences and then be home in time for dinner. He even said, "I hope I never have to fly again. It's too dangerous," or something to that effect. It was horrifying to me to hear this kind of talk from an officer in our armed forces. Are we that lost? Are we so enamored of our supposed technological superiority now that the real world consequences of death and destruction are nothing but an afterthought, a pang of guilt best washed down by a Budweiser, while at home eating a meal with the wife and kids?

Here's what's even more scary: this kind of training--and warfare--assumes--dangerously if you ask me--that we will continue to have air superiority for the foreseeable future. It's absurd and complacent thinking. One our children will quite possibly rue. We may be at the top of the heap now, but the day will come when a coalition of powers grows weary of our unilateralism and defeats us--or worse, some minor power gives us another bloody nose like 9/11 that sets off another round of vengeance-seeking wars with no point and no end that rips apart a regional equilibrium and creates even more violence. I really don't know which one would be worse.

That smaller powers coalesce in order to defeat or contain a larger power is an immutable fact of geopolitics and the schoolyard. I don't know when it will happen, but I know it will. It's only a matter of time.


Sean Paul Kelley August 25, 2009 - 11:40am
( categories: USA: Armed Forces )

long after the last one's left the battlefield to pilot drones from a console ten thousand miles away?

The warrior ethos in most cultures - chivalry in the West, Bushido in Japan etc - hinges on honor, which in turn hinges upon some degree of risk.

Remove that link and there's no "warriors" - nor even hunters. Just exterminators.


"The best-informed man is not necessarily the wisest. Indeed there is a danger that precisely in the multiplicity of his knowledge he will lose sight of what is essential."

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Escher Sketch August 25, 2009 - 12:22pm

I doubt the individual will consider themselves a warrior-
The military I would think will class them as an operator persay- not a warrior as we have had thru our history- but
one cant say what the writers- historians-- military researchists- many with no own personal military experience- we cant say what will be their take-
heck my take is the AF is in a world of their own anyways- they fly - do the mission - usually without close contact - go back- shower - eat- have a drink - sleep then go do it again--
heck even have heard of soldiers- damn army guys refuse dentrance to a AF dining hall - told they could eat when they got back to their unit- also heard that same facility was liberated of sodas- snacks- many other nice items not seen on the front lines-
Like I said I just heard that ( could one be prosecuted for taking from their own supply line??) in a AF court I bet so lol

Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 12:40pm

I went to a Military University, and Army university, not West Point. Not one of the young officers who were my friends ever referred to themselves or their troops as "warriors". They were professional soldiers, and proud of their professionalism. They would be been offended to be called warriors.

The term "Warrior" makes me somehow queasy. To me, it implies an individual fighting individually, undisciplined, picking their own fights, and glorying in the battle and death. Bit like Valhalla. Or Zulu warriors.

Soldiers, on the other hand fight and die in groups (platoons, squads, companies, battalions, and armies). There is no glory in being a soldier, one is doing their duty, disciplined and following orders.

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 2:22pm

webster says differant
"Etymology: Middle English werreour, from Anglo-French *werreier, guerreier, from warreier, guerreier to wage war, from werre war — more at war
Date: 14th century
: a man engaged or experienced in warfare;

and obviously the military doesnt share the same concept you do on the use of warrior- there are warrior units- warrior programs and the elite once a year best warrior competition-

No glory in being a soldier? debateable- Im sure its a glorious feeling to be able to defend and protect the country you love - with honor

Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 2:44pm

if you blindly follow orders and waste a bunch of civilians. Maybe it's even more glorious from behind the console of a drone...

______________________________________________________
Distrust anyone who wants to teach you something.

OldLakeRat August 25, 2009 - 5:03pm

ok so gues sim wrong- being a soldier must suck - poor bastards

Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 26, 2009 - 10:53am

Warrior: A man. One man. One on his own.

Not a team.

Being a soldier is being part of a team.

There is no glory in war. There is pride in doing one's duty. A glorious feeling is not glory.

From Websters: Glory
"very great praise, honor, or distinction bestowed by common consent; renown: to win glory on the field of battle"

Notice "bestowed". Glory is earned. Not felt.

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 5:05pm

not disagreeing but every soldier is a warrior- and all together are an army- preach all u like but convince me u shall not ---all your yrs of military are appreciated
Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 5:11pm

There are shades of meanings in words. We agree to disagree on shades of meanings.

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 5:33pm

so why in so many programs does the army - nat guard etc- use the term warrior with pride? they misusing it? they have for years and will continue to us eit when so deserved
- Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 5:40pm

The content of this thread entered my mind and ground against what had gone in yesterday...

It was, however, a known fact that many of the senior officers on board the Vincennes knew very little about computerized warfare. The tactical officer for surface warfare, Lt Cmdr Guillory, knew so little that he routinely used his computer screens as a surface for sticky notes instead......snip... Lt Clay Zocher was the boss of Air Alley, which was responsible for air warfare, but he had only stood watch at that post twice before and had never fully learned and mastered the console routines. In fact, when he was finally given the green light to fire upon the incoming aircraft, he pressed the wrong keys 23 times, until a veteran petty officer leaned over and hit the right ones. Nerves were shattered, and the training seemed nonexistent.

So who says the US military never learns from it's mistakes. :-)

There is only ever one enemy, and that is the military. It doesn't matter which side they purport to be on.

John Carter August 25, 2009 - 6:27pm

of the Sci-Fi book "Ender's Game".

craz3z August 25, 2009 - 12:25pm

They had the weaponry to take it.... but not the men to keep it.

So after buggering around for a month or two... they went home.

There is only ever one enemy, and that is the military. It doesn't matter which side they purport to be on.

John Carter August 25, 2009 - 6:31pm

Is to reduce costs, reduce, reduce, reduce, to increase sales. Computers, cell phones, Flat Panel TVs, digital cameras, and so on.

Today a $1 Billion bomber can be had for $100,000.
In five years it will be $5,000, and so on.

Are personal bombers protected by the second amendment? Does eveyone get to own one?

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 2:01pm

find those prices on craigs list ?? might be a scam my friend
think its crazy assumptions (views ) like that that start so many internet rumors and keeps snopes etc busy lol

Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 2:10pm

for the comparison is sound. In '87 the first cell phone I had cost $2K installed, plus a 2 yr. service contract. The technology was shit compared to what can be had now, and of course, waaaayy more expensive. Consumer electronics in general have followed the same trend. Why would it be a "crazy assumption" to think that electronic components the DOD use have not?

______________________________________________________
Distrust anyone who wants to teach you something.

OldLakeRat August 25, 2009 - 4:57pm

sound for the general consumer products I agree- but weapons of warfare arent gettin cheaper cause they keep improving-- if he can find me a billion dollar bomber that he can buy for 100k- I'll be a believer - scarp price would be more than that

Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 5:04pm

A B1 cost about a billion (That's not accurate, I personally have never bought one).

Todays Predator drone cost in the hundreds of thousands, and drops bombs.

Why would anyone want a used B1, when they can get a nice shiny new Predator? Why do you think that the air force want Predators? more bang (literally) for the buck, and fewer personnel killed in action.

Now can we discuss price curves of "ordnance delivery systems" technology?

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 5:15pm

hey I was just commenting on what you had provided- and we can discuss what ever u like - I 'll do my best lolTexas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 5:26pm

would not be my first guess as to the escalating price tags. That argument doesn't hold water. Electronic technology in general has been improving as have the associated manufacturing techniques. Better for cheaper. Whoever has the contract for "weapons of warfare" is going to make an obscene amount of money, and at taxpayer expense.

_____________________________________________________
Distrust anyone who wants to teach you something.

OldLakeRat August 25, 2009 - 5:20pm

so after the M1 then the M1A1 and A2 should of been cheaper - hmmmm dont see it Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 5:29pm

We are discussing the price of planes. In a plane 50% or greater of the cost is avionics (electronics), and there is a significant difference between predators ad b52/b1s/b2s because of the remove of people from the aircraft.

A different technology. Just like TVs, CRTs to Plasma, to LCDs to LEDs.

M1, M1A, A2, AK47, Browning 303, don't see much new tchnology.

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 5:51pm

thought sure you'd know that the m1 was 1st abrams tank- the m1a1 next tthen the m1a2- wouldnt say they are just mechanical at all- - Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 6:04pm

M14(civilian model M1A), M16A1,M16A2, and AK47 and finally AK74. Oh, and that would be an Enfield 303 (British) ;)

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 26, 2009 - 10:26pm

he was answering my post about an m1 and not the garrand- pay attention I disagree with Kay Jewelers. I would bet on any given Friday or Saturday night more kisses begin with Miller Lites than Kay.

Justin Time August 27, 2009 - 1:36am

...armoured vehicles. A huge component of the cost (I'm virtually certain the largest component unless Chobham is a lot more expensive than I think it is) is the electronics (C3I, sensors, etc.).

I tend to think that the largest part of the cost differential between a Predator/Reaper and a B1 (once one accounts for carrying the meat bags) is that the airframes are so vastly different. One's a jet that drops ordnance of all sizes until the cows come home - the other's [Reaper] a greatly glorified Cessna that can drop the grand total of 2 Mk82 series weapons. Take all the avionics from a Reaper, including ground control stations, and I'll bet the bill gets a lot more comparable to a teen series fighter than one might initially believe.

“The absence of any US-Iran bilateral channel...may have the perverse effect of reinforcing Iranian interest in progressing in the nuclear realm so that the US will be forced to take it seriously and engage it directly." ~ Richard Haass

JustPlainDave August 25, 2009 - 6:05pm

Even with a stick from 10,000 miles a away. The time of machines killing people is about to begin.

Can you program the Laws of War and the Rules of Engagement into a robot? Can you imbue a robot with his country's culture? If something goes wrong, resulting in the death of civilians, who will be held responsible?

Support your robot warriors!

Where can I buy the little sticker for the back of my car?

We need a NATION WIDE STRIKE for Real healthcare reform

Joaquin August 25, 2009 - 3:28pm

...operating the machine and yet another human telling the operator to pull the trigger. Are those people not responsible for the deaths resulting from their actions? I feel sorry for the poor schlumps flying drones from Nevada killing women and children. In many ways they're more morally repugnant than the guy on the ground, face to face, pulling the trigger.
"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." (1984)

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 25, 2009 - 9:15pm

However, the military has robots that are autonomous; i.e., no operator, the next step is to kill autonomously; its only a matter of time.

We need a NATION WIDE STRIKE for Real healthcare reform

Joaquin August 26, 2009 - 12:19am

...it follows, it will only be a matter of time before the machine malfunctions and goes against the operator...there's always an operator; by definition there is always an operator.

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 26, 2009 - 1:09am

Automatic Mode

We need a NATION WIDE STRIKE for Real healthcare reform

Joaquin August 26, 2009 - 2:25am

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 26, 2009 - 6:15am

...I thought a strike would be good as well and said so on another site; went over like the proverbial lead balloon...

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 26, 2009 - 6:18am

It was your suggestion here that got me thinking about it. We need it, its the only way anything will happen.

We need a NATION WIDE STRIKE for Real healthcare reform

Joaquin August 26, 2009 - 9:17am

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 26, 2009 - 10:26am

...that I suggested a national strike. But truly, it's the only thing that will work. "They" will ignore everything else. Realize; it will be dangerous, "they" have no sense of compassion, only a sense of duty. They'll likely bust heads to stop it.

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 26, 2009 - 11:02am

gettin ya head busted when health care is at risk - that a good idea??

Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 26, 2009 - 11:07am

...no pain, no gain. My guess is, you're young. I would further venture that if there is no progress on healthcare (and it's at the tipping point) you'd regret not striking. This really should be on another thread.

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 26, 2009 - 10:20pm

I will post it here without a date to get feedback then I have a plan to get it to go viral.

We need a NATION WIDE STRIKE for Real healthcare reform

Joaquin August 27, 2009 - 12:07am

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 27, 2009 - 5:01am

We need a NATION WIDE STRIKE for Real healthcare reform

Joaquin August 27, 2009 - 10:27am

actually as a vietnam era vet- and later (retired actually I have health care so good luck lol

I disagree with Kay Jewelers. I would bet on any given Friday or Saturday night more kisses begin with Miller Lites than Kay.

Justin Time August 27, 2009 - 1:38am

...now who the hell is Kay Jewelers?

www.iauthorbooks.com
http://iauthorbooks.blogspot.com/

Celsius 233 August 27, 2009 - 5:04am

jewelry store...when you start quoting ads, that means you watch too much of that TV thing.

_____________________________________________________
Distrust anyone who wants to teach you something.

OldLakeRat August 27, 2009 - 10:40am

actually saw the saying poste delsewhere n liked it- doubt id fall in the couch potatoe category at all
I disagree with Kay Jewelers. I would bet on any given Friday or Saturday night more kisses begin with Miller Lites than Kay.

Justin Time August 27, 2009 - 11:03am

Can you program the Laws of War and the Rules of Engagement into a robot? Can you imbue a robot with his country's culture? If something goes wrong, resulting in the death of civilians, who will be held responsible

thought the enola gay mission sorta did away with accountability in those situations

Texas is fixin to buy China

Justin Time August 25, 2009 - 3:42pm

...pilots than "meatspace" pilots doesn't necessarily mean that drones are proportionally "more important" than manned aircraft. A number of the more important drones tend to have a lot longer loiter time on station than manned aircraft, meaning that each individual airframe requires more manpower to operate. My understanding is that it's not unusual to change crews, sometimes more than once, during the course of many missions. This in turn underscores the fact that these platforms are much more about reconnaissance and pervasive observation than they are about direct kinetics - that will likely change over time, but that's the present reality.

The rise of these unmanned platforms, particularly if combined with unmanned land combat systems (and possibly autonomous or semi-autonomous systems) suggests to me that ultimately what we're going to see is a scenario where unconventional and irregular warfare is increasingly the norm for powers that seek to challenge the industrial powers. With swarms of unmanned platforms out there one will naturally be driven to low signature alternatives (enemy tanks will stand out like sore thumbs on a sensor saturated battlefield - enemy light infantry might survive a lot better).

It interests me, in an ironic sort of way, that folks are so creeped out by the notion that drone warfare somehow doesn't touch them or the combattants very directly. The reality of warfare in modern western powers is that it is increasingly prosecuted by a volunteer military caste which is disproportionately hereditary and increasingly coming to stand apart from the societal mainstream (more due to the societal mainstream than to the military, my personal view). If there's anything that should creep folks out, that's it more so than drone warfare, at least in its current incarnation.

“The absence of any US-Iran bilateral channel...may have the perverse effect of reinforcing Iranian interest in progressing in the nuclear realm so that the US will be forced to take it seriously and engage it directly." ~ Richard Haass

JustPlainDave August 25, 2009 - 4:21pm

fixed: professional volunteer military caste

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 5:20pm

The dominant story of the last couple decades for most western militaries has been the transition to the all-volunteer force.

“The absence of any US-Iran bilateral channel...may have the perverse effect of reinforcing Iranian interest in progressing in the nuclear realm so that the US will be forced to take it seriously and engage it directly." ~ Richard Haass

JustPlainDave August 25, 2009 - 5:56pm

as people volunteer for any job.
Not volunteer as in unpaid.

We volunteered to pick up trash. We worked for free.
We volunteered to help the church. We worked for free.

We volunteered to join the Army (we were not conscripted). We applied for a job.

No equivalence here for "volunteered".

Synoia August 25, 2009 - 7:57pm

The aspect of voluntary labour having to do with free will is a lot less controversial than the aspect having to do with compensation (i.e., compensation is a slipperier slope). There are an awful lot of jobs that're easier to get, and that counts for something.

I work in the voluntary sector - for me the notion that volunteer == professional isn't a contradiction.

“The absence of any US-Iran bilateral channel...may have the perverse effect of reinforcing Iranian interest in progressing in the nuclear realm so that the US will be forced to take it seriously and engage it directly." ~ Richard Haass

JustPlainDave August 25, 2009 - 9:03pm

if all the imperial goons were unpaid?

chalo August 26, 2009 - 12:03am

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.