"The laws of war are an act not of charity but of self-interest," the editorial continues. "The U.S. would be weakened, not strengthened, if chemical and biological weapons were widespread, and the same is true of robots. They are a cheap way to offset conventional military, and other nations and groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon are already deploying them. "We can never put the genie back into the bottle, but putting a hold on further development of this technology could limit the damage."
While this is perfectly true, the sentiment of the Editors is unlikely garner much support inside the Pentagon, which now dominates the planet militarily from 1,000 bases in the U.S. and 800 more overseas and has the financial wherewithal to manufacture countless robots, which Hezbollah does not.
The prospect of waging wars on battlefields ll,000 kilometers distant by remote control from computer terminals near Las Vegas, Nev., without exposing its own personnel to harm may seem like a dream come true to the Pentagon---but because of its persistent aggressiveness much of the rest of humanity may see it as a nightmare. As the Scientific American article points out, as a result of the deadly Predator strikes, a leading Pakistan newspaper has already branded the U.S. a "principal hate figure." That is, of course, precisely how the "Empire," with its Imperial Walkers and robot soldiers, was perceived by the "human" rebels in the 1977 movie "Star Wars." Need I say more?
#
(Sherwood Ross is an American public relations consultant "for good causes." He has contributed to many national magazines and formerly worked for major dailies and wire services. Reach him at sherwoodross10@gmail.com)
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
