 |
| (Picture I) |
Kimmo Huosionmaa
This is a writing about the paradoxes of war and militarism. The militarism and war are things, what is strictly out from normal people head, and there are many things, why is not very tolerated to speak about the military systems. One of them is that the national security is limiting the comments about those things. And when we are looking very sharply to the militarism and army, we are seeing that our religion has been against violence in 2000 years, and we still fight together by using weapons.
And even if we are against violence, many people are getting their salary from military forces their equipment, and the weapons industry around them. War is good business for the weapon dealers, who offers more and more lethal and advanced weapons, what suits for many missions. Also, support equipment like GPS systems is a very good article, because the owner of those satellites can cut the location signals of those weapons, and that's why they cannot use against the deliverer of GPS-system, and that ties the clients more effectively to the influence of another actor in the field of international politics and strategies. Strategies have always depended on the politics, and that's why the political support for weapon trade is extremely important.
We must say that using killer-drones would create the military, where doesn't serve a single man. But here we must know, that if there would be autonomous killer robots, what replaces the places of the military personnel, we would come to the situation, that there would be no work for the men, who serve in those military forces. And one of the first group. what would be lost their jobs, are the fighter pilots, who serve in the war against terrorism. Those missions can be done by using drones, what just fly to the target, and then drop their weapons.
The human's advantage in comparing with robots is that human would make surprising movements for those aircraft. And that's why human pilots still win the drones, and this is the thing, what keeps those pilots in the cockpits. When we are thinking that the use of missiles and drones is somehow cowardly action, we must say, that the leaders of the terrorist organizations and military forces would not be in any danger in those operations. If some Tornado or Sukhoi-pilot would drop the bombs from the high altitude like 10 000 meters, there would not have the single missile, what could harm that aircraft, if the opponent is some kind of Isis-terrorist.
The smart bombs, what have satellite guidance are extremely sharp, and in those operations, they could destroy targets very effectively. The civilians are not suitable to comment those things, because that would be harmful to the reputation of military forces. If those pilots would be replaced with the artificial intelligence, there would not be heroes in another side, what is, of course, our side. But when we are going to speak about the fighters, we could act like some children at the sandbox, who are asking each other, whose car is the best?
In this case, when we are talking about multipurpose-fighter contracts, we can ask the question, what is the best, 4th,5th or 6th. generation fighter or multirole aircraft? And in this case, people have the right to talk, which one is the best, Super-Hornet, Gripen or SU-27? And if the writings have no influence or expertise, why those people would not have right to write about those things? Of course, somebody says, that I'm writing this for revenge because I didn't have promotion in the 100th. anniversary of the Finnish defense forces, and that's why I' writing about this thing. But people have right to their opinions.
Sources:
https://www.mtv.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/artikkeli/siviilin-ei-kannata-tehda-paatelmia-havittajakaupan-huutelijat-harmittavat-puolustusministeri-niinistoa/6936626#gs.wCcrRNM
Picture I
http://nationalinterest.org/files/styles/main_image_on_posts/public/main_images/testflyging_av_forste_norske_f-35_-_22492943335_14_0.jpg?itok=1NsSjsUW
Comments
Post a Comment