… any day now. I’m not holding my breath.
Only a few troops, perhaps 1 percent, will actually direct aimed fire at the enemy with the intent to kill. These troops are treasured, and set apart, and called snipers.
Armed robots will all be snipers. Stone-cold killers, every one of them. They will aim with inhuman precision and fire without human hesitation. They will not need bonuses to enlist or housing for their families or expensive training ranges or retirement payments. Commanders will order them onto battlefields that would mean certain death for humans, knowing that the worst to come is a trip to the shop for repairs. The writing of condolence letters would become a lost art.
No human army could withstand such an onslaught. Such an adversary would present the enemy with the simple choice of martyrdom or flight. So equipped, America’s military would be irresistible in battle.
I found the above link at the Unreligious Right (a great blog, by the way) and this sums up my sentiments.
From the second link:
There are many problems with Pike’s theories that just leap out at the reader. Pilotless drones and other unmanned vehicles are not the same thing as self-directing robots capable of replacing humans. Unless Pike has classified information on these robots not available to the general public, the technology for the type of robot army he describes simply does not exist, and is unlikely to appear in the next few years. His entire article appears to be based on the military equivalent of vaporware. But even if such technology did exist, his other assertions are also way off-base. Pike argues that “no human army” could stand against a robot “onslaught,” and that anyone facing such a force would have a “simple choice of martyrdom or flight.” I find it difficult to believe that someone like John Pike, with his knowledge of military affairs, would make such a ridiculous unfounded assertion. Any weapon system has weaknesses and can be defeated by human ingenuity, or other factors unforseen by the creator of the wonder weapon. And the idea that the U.S. could suddenly deploy a completely irresistable robot army, of the type Pike envisions, doesnot even qualify as good science fiction, let alone a reasonable real-world military prediction.
The HOT5 is a new feature at the excellent blog, the Unreligious Right, and today this (linked here) post of mine was selected as one of the “hot 5”
Another on the list was this post from Unreasonable Faith. I loved it and had to link it.
From the last link:
The other day I was thinking about the similarities between belief in Santa and belief in God. So I thought I’d make it into a graphic. Enjoy!
I’ve been enjoying the new blog, The Unreligious Right, quite a bit since it started last month. All this diversity in thought on the right is cool to see after what seemed like years of top-down hegemony by dictat. And anything that serves to marginalize the theocratic wing of the GOP warms my heart.
This post today really caught my eye.
Here’s the set up:
The New York Times reports
that three NYC police officers have been charged in conjunction with a case in which one officer:
took his retractable baton and “shoved it” up Mr. Mineo’s anus, Mr. Hynes said, and that “resulted in an anal rectal tear.”
And here’s the kicker:
The officer who actually carried out the assault faces up to twenty-five years in jail. If convicted he should get the maximum. The police are given greater power & responsibility than other citizens; if they abuse it they should also receive greater punishment.
I couldn’t agree more, and couldn’t put it any better either. Police are given a great trust to accompany that power and when that trust is breached the consequences ought to be dire.
This comes from a great supporter of our law enforcement. I have a close relative who died on duty several years ago and a great uncle who served as chief-of-police for a west Texas town many years ago. I appreciate the sacrifices made by our law enforcement, but at the same time I hope everyone (both civilian and cop) remembers the concept of protecting and serving, rather than seeing a cold line between pigs and scrots
Until the freaky fringe of the GOP who’ve convinced themselves they are the party understand all the RINO (Republican In Name Only) rhetoric is doing nothing but bouncing around a tired little echo-chamber bar room at last call — except when the message does get loose and serves to scare off potential GOP voters — sober up and face reality, there is no coalition.
I think this group can be blamed for shattering the three-legged stool. RINO this, RINO that. I get the feeling these folks wouldn’t recognize a Reagan Republican if they were bit on the ass. As a matter of fact Reagan’s policies and politics would render “the icon” a RINO in the minds of these incurious parrots.
Here’s a nice takedown from a cool site, The Unreligious Right:
John Hawkins, who blogs at Right Wing News, has a new column up at Townhall entitled “Five Hard Truths for RINOS.” As a pro-choice Republican who supports some sort of amnesty for illegal immigrants, gay marriage, and has other heretical positions, I qualify as a RINO when viewed by hardcore conservatives. Here’s my RINO response to Hawkins’ five points.
Be sure to hit the link for the whole bit. It’s worth it.