Should robots be used in military?

Yesterday, I watched a documentary on Discovery Channel about the rise of robotics in the military. I thought it would make a perfect debate here and worthy for me to post it.

Basically, it started out 3 years ago when robots are used in wars. Now, there are 43 countries using robots in military. Military technology is becoming better from day to day and of course, there will be advantages and disadvantages to all of us.

This is a debate and I don't feel like typing the advantages and disadvantages of it because I'm pretty sure you'll come up with your own points.

So, the main thing here is should we or should we not use robots in military. Is it or is it not worth it for us to sit back and let the robots fight for us? Well, of course we control it but somehow, it sounds inhumane to me.

Let the debate begin!

For more information, you can click on provided links.
http://www.cbc.ca/documentaries/doczone/2011/remotecontrolwar/
http://blogs.reuters.com/bernddebusm...-control-wars/

Of course they should be, its either a little metal robot dies, or we loose a brave human, I'd much prefer to loose a robot as we could just make another...

I absolutely agree that we should have robot vs robot. But then we could have rogue robots who attack humanz. Think about that.

lol, we should control them from a far distance :P Maybe in a underground bunker?

What could possibly be a downside to using a robot to do the hard work?

Go for it.

A robot is only as smart as the person who made it therefore they should be used. However, should they be relied on is a different question

I'm just going to throw up some alternatives.

They're expensive. Unreliable. Can malfuncation. Can friendly fire.

I think I read somewhere that sort of like a sentry gun was placed outside an american base in Afghanistan (or somewhere), and when one of the troops ran like infront of it by accident, he was split into pieces by the machine.

Apart from the downsides, I think it would be worth nothing that many MEDCs will benefit as apposed to LEDCs who are fighting wars.

Thought I would prefer wars end completely (don't we all?)

Interesting idea. Obviously the benefits are that only a piece of metal ill be harmed, but I can see there being a change in the number of "pointless" wars. If less risk is taken on human soldiers, then Governments, warlords etc. would be more inclined to go attack other countries as the reduce in riskand resistance will make it easier.

why not robots????maybe IRON MAN will be born....but it might cost the government for R&D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zuth

lol, we should control them from a far distance :P Maybe in a underground bunker?

---

My answer is still no. We are already far away from the battlefield when we send a robot to kill people. So, why so protective and yet, do the thing again and again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marketing

What could possibly be a downside to using a robot to do the hard work?

Go for it.

---

I don't think killing humans/animals/any living organisms can be considered as hard work after all the years of civil wars and world wars etc. But, the question is mainly about humanity. How can you do something like that to kill anybody at the other side of the world? Sounds not right for me.

Good thing is robots can't sneeze to giveaway there position if they are going to spring a suprise attack, so i'll go for robots

yes I would say we should use them because it's not a human and that would mean less casualties, a lot of things can go wrong with robots rather easily so are they the safest and more reliable? mmm..

No robots have no morale and no sense of right or wrong (I'm assuming that these robots aren't man controlled and have independent thought)

Aye, Robots should be used, They don't feel pain, so the bullet wont hurt them

It's interesting seeing your reasons behind the use of robots, but no-one seems to of mentioned the principles behind using robots in the first place. Given that using a robot means less risks, surely Governments and armies would be more inclined to go to war over any miniscule detail, causing unwanted wars and terrorism? There would be less thought for people who maybe caught up in the attacks.