The Gamesmanship of Modern War
Pete Schaff
Issue date: 3/24/09 Section: Impact Staff Blogs
MARCH 19 - War.
It is brutal, violent, and oftentimes senseless. We have seen that most recently with the present war on Terrorism/Iraq.
To limit the cruelty and brutality associated with war, often in the past man has created certain ways to protect his soldiers, from armor to projectile weapons. The most recent of these inventions in order to protect the soldiers is the UAV, or Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
While most UAV's are fitted for reconnaissance work (the BQM-147A Exdrone for instance) there are still others which are made primarily for combat, some able to deliver 3,000 lbs. of payload (the MQ-9 Reaper), to any area within 32 hours of the launching pad. Even the reconnaissance drones carry minor weaponry (25 lbs. of payload on the spy drone).
Yes, this does save our troops' lives. Especially when they are scouting enemy terrain, and I would have no problem with UAV's if they were kept solely to investigation/scouting work. But once it becomes weaponized, I begin to have serious issues.
The point of war is combat, to overtake your enemy and destroy them, subjugate them for any variety of reasons. Money, trade goods, even peace. And the deciding factor in war is always human lives. How many lives are we willing to lose to gain what we want? How many lives are they willing to lose to get what they want? Each side asks itself this question and each side has to come to a decision as to whether the cost, in lives, will be too much, or will be just enough, to validate their reason for going to war in the first place.
The "strategic withdrawal" in Vietnam happened because the government could no longer validate its reason for the war in relation to the number of lives lost.
How does this all relate to UAV's? Well once robots are flying our bombs out to the targets and the robots are tactically sniping off key enemy figures and robots are shooting down the soldiers of the enemy, we will always win.
How is this bad? You may ask. Well, at that point war has become a game. The other side takes all the risks and we get to sit comfy and cozy back at home behind a joystick directing our robot army to kill off their human army. And we watch it all on a computer screen; war becomes a giant video game.
Many people won't see the danger of this; they may even think that it would be "cool" or "awesome" to control tanks and planes by remote and actually kill enemy combatants. But there is nothing more dangerous than a country that perceives war as a game. Without the human element, the deciding factor of human lives on both sides, at stake in war, the side with nothing to lose and everything to gain will always win; so why should that side stop fighting? Well here's a thought, that side won't stop, at least until the world belongs to them.
Now others will argue that this will not happen, not in America, and not in any other democratic nation. I disagree. The potential rewards from this style of combat far exceed any moral opinions that might be raised. Think about it, no risk.
No one's sons have to die, no one's brothers or sisters, no one's father will be lost in combat, at least on our side.
It is brutal, violent, and oftentimes senseless. We have seen that most recently with the present war on Terrorism/Iraq.
To limit the cruelty and brutality associated with war, often in the past man has created certain ways to protect his soldiers, from armor to projectile weapons. The most recent of these inventions in order to protect the soldiers is the UAV, or Unmanned Aerial Vehicle.
While most UAV's are fitted for reconnaissance work (the BQM-147A Exdrone for instance) there are still others which are made primarily for combat, some able to deliver 3,000 lbs. of payload (the MQ-9 Reaper), to any area within 32 hours of the launching pad. Even the reconnaissance drones carry minor weaponry (25 lbs. of payload on the spy drone).
Yes, this does save our troops' lives. Especially when they are scouting enemy terrain, and I would have no problem with UAV's if they were kept solely to investigation/scouting work. But once it becomes weaponized, I begin to have serious issues.
The point of war is combat, to overtake your enemy and destroy them, subjugate them for any variety of reasons. Money, trade goods, even peace. And the deciding factor in war is always human lives. How many lives are we willing to lose to gain what we want? How many lives are they willing to lose to get what they want? Each side asks itself this question and each side has to come to a decision as to whether the cost, in lives, will be too much, or will be just enough, to validate their reason for going to war in the first place.
The "strategic withdrawal" in Vietnam happened because the government could no longer validate its reason for the war in relation to the number of lives lost.
How does this all relate to UAV's? Well once robots are flying our bombs out to the targets and the robots are tactically sniping off key enemy figures and robots are shooting down the soldiers of the enemy, we will always win.
How is this bad? You may ask. Well, at that point war has become a game. The other side takes all the risks and we get to sit comfy and cozy back at home behind a joystick directing our robot army to kill off their human army. And we watch it all on a computer screen; war becomes a giant video game.
Many people won't see the danger of this; they may even think that it would be "cool" or "awesome" to control tanks and planes by remote and actually kill enemy combatants. But there is nothing more dangerous than a country that perceives war as a game. Without the human element, the deciding factor of human lives on both sides, at stake in war, the side with nothing to lose and everything to gain will always win; so why should that side stop fighting? Well here's a thought, that side won't stop, at least until the world belongs to them.
Now others will argue that this will not happen, not in America, and not in any other democratic nation. I disagree. The potential rewards from this style of combat far exceed any moral opinions that might be raised. Think about it, no risk.
No one's sons have to die, no one's brothers or sisters, no one's father will be lost in combat, at least on our side.
Be the first to comment on this story