For years now a debate has raged within the US government concerning the use of military drones: unmanned, remote-controlled aerial vehicles with long-range missile capabilities.
Opposing arguments vary, from those based on moral grounds to pragmatic criticisms, with experts saying that “surgical killings” are good for taking out key personalities but have little effect on the long-term viability of terrorist organizations.
From a diplomatic perspective the drones are highly detrimental to Pakistani/US relations. As tribesmen value bravery above all else and see the drones as a symbol of American cowardice.
But at this point, protesting the drones on the basis of their relevance and immorality has become moot: In early August a drone got a confirmed kill on one Baitullah Mehsud, leader of the Pakistani Taliban. Mehsud had a $5 million bounty on his head before being sniped by joystick with a Hellfire missile.
In the West we are gradually becoming pro-drone and anti-flesh. Just like our nonalcoholic beer and “I can’t believe its not butter,” we want our war sans casualties – conflicts fought through computers so as to not get a drop of blood on our soft, Palmolive hands. The rationale is somewhat altruistic, albeit selfish: fewer troops will die, fewer mothers will cry, and the horrors of war will become a thing of the past.
The US military predicts that in less than 40 years they’ll have autonomous drone units that can make all their own decisions, completely eliminating the need for human guidance and observance.
Throughout the first decade of the 21st century, citizens and politicians were constantly embroiled in a battle over what was moral, what was acceptable and what was necessary. Guantanamo Bay, rendition flights and torture all served as benchmarks for Westerners to gauge their moral pulse against. Each new assault on what we considered to be our humanity deserved to be challenged and inspired fierce debate.
But when we remove the humans from the equation – when war becomes literally inhuman – what’s left to debate? War crimes will become guiltless: a mere twisting of knobs. Slowly, with each OS update, innocent casualties will be curbed to an acceptable level. The Marine will be replaced by the computer programmer – a meek nerd so far from the action as to be absolved completely of its consequences.
With robots off fighting our wars for us, we’ll have nothing left to do but quietly sip our lattes and listen to our iPods. While somewhere, far off in the distance, a drone may or may not be dropping 50kg units of hellfire on some yet-to-be-named combatants. It’s not even post moral … it’s a Zen algorithm that melts steel.
This is a strange indicator of our retreat into the virtual when you consider that our so-called enemies are willing to sacrifice everything, their own bodies and very existence for a chance to kill one or two of our soldiers. We see their tactics as irrational, and they see us perhaps as we already are: machines.
– Douglas Haddow










































07, 2009
08:48 pm
Link
"The US military predicts that in less than 40 years they’ll have autonomous drone units that can make all their own decisions, completely eliminating the need for human guidance and observance."
Has no one learned from Terminator or The Matrix? By completely removing humans from a military chain of command, it would not be long before the computers realize that in order to end all conflict, getting rid of humans would be a simple solution. Next thing you know, the war on machines begins.
— Anonymous Canadian29, 2009
02:42 pm
Link
tribesmen? bravery?
— AnonymousThat doesn't go together. They are terrorists.
It is not a conventional war. The enemy in Afghanistan are just a bunch of illiterate, unorganized muslim terrorists. You can't hope to kill them all with the help of conventional warfare
19, 2009
12:29 am
Link
A rather silly argument considering that we (in the West) seem to have no problem with getting up close and personal with torture. Now, if someone said that we would someday produce a machine that would force the truth from a person, without the operator having to see, touch, listen to or smell the process, I'd probably think that was going too far. But a pilotless vehicle to root out the bad guys? Stick a flamethrower on that baby and hand me the joystick.
— AnonymousCanadianThere will always be people who have no problem getting their hands dirty when it comes to killing or torture. The question, and what it all comes down to, is what side can be more effective and can get the job done more effectively? Is bravery more important than righteousness? Is ruthless efficiency better than imagination? Whose cause is just? Judging by the violent nature of 3 year olds, I doubt we will ever see the end of war for another few thousand years of evolution or our extinction, whichever comes first. I would like to live, and I'm guessing that's why other people fight back. Unless everyone can be like Ghandi we may as well learn to live with death, sad I know. Not a popular opinion but I think we will live longer if we are more realistic about human nature.
01, 2009
10:29 pm
Link
What is the cost of these drones? How dispensable are they?
— Anonymous27, 2009
05:09 pm
Link
take the war out of the equation first
— perceptiventityas if it was only enevitable for usanians
either in digitised or cannon fodder format
23, 2009
08:02 am
Link
Ray Kurzwell's The Age of Spiritual Machines is a good read on this topic as well.
— Anonymous22, 2009
02:40 pm
Link
I agree with the author that killing from miles away is disturbing. This being said, I can't help but think that the article misses the point. Is killing from a distance really a "retreat into the virtual" or just pragmatic? Did the first guy that used a bow and arrow "retreat into the virtual" because he didn't have to stab or strangle his victim? How about if you used a gun or a howitzer? An IED?
Also, I would be interested to hear what US military official said that in 40 years there will be autonomous drone units that will be making the decision to kill or not to kill. If this is true I would be shocked to say the least. Does someone have a source for this?
Finally, killing is a crime....but isn't a media that isn't interested in exposing the killing a large part of the problem? If people here were exposed to the virtual killing maybe we wouldn't be "sipping our lattes and listening to our iPods to blissfully. (By the way, why is adbusters always attacking these type of yuppie activities? Is drinking a latte or listening to an iPod really that reprehensible?)
— Lloyd Pitcher22, 2009
03:16 pm
Link
"Is drinking a latte or listening to an iPod really that reprehensible?"
Yes.
— Anonymous28, 2009
08:00 pm
Link
yes, kill yourself, ipodian latte pig.
— Anonymous02, 2009
11:00 pm
Link
some coffee is brewed fair trade organic and served in a cup that can be reused; coffee nazi!
— just saying21, 2009
08:59 pm
Link
The military talks about war with other countries BUT what the military does not talk about is that the same drones can be and will be used against US citizens when there is a riot or when people want to protest. The police will be the next to disappear and be replaced by drone cops.
— Anonymous21, 2009
05:23 pm
Link
Please fix the typographical error in the title(Flash).
— Anonymous21, 2009
05:26 pm
Link
Done. Thanks for the heads up!
— editor21, 2009
08:55 pm
Link
You respond to this request in 3 minutes (!), but when a contributor writes an entire article based on a proven lie (The Israeli Brand) you don't even comment or apologize? Great "journalism."
— McAnonymous22, 2009
08:50 am
Link
Agreed.
— Lloyd Pitcher21, 2009
05:08 pm
Link
read the book, Amusing ourselves to Death.. its nearly relative to this if your interested in technology taking over
— Anonymous