無人武器的道德性與社會衝擊 【Comment】 There are debates in western semi sphere on the morality of using unmanned military combat weapons in war. Does how to kill matter? Obviously, it does. But why it matters? The point may rest; 1. The risk is unbalance. The party that uses unmanned weapons does not fear to be killed or harmed. Their counterpart is the only party to get hurt and die. It is unfair. And if it is unfair, the unmanned weapons should not be used and it is not war. 2. Those who fear nothing of hurt and death tend to kill more and with fun. Killing is no more than a motion picture. Large scale bombing of WWII, espec 賣房子ially the case of Enola Gay, has given us an example of what the remote killings may affect the ones who did it. It seems no Chinese society is interesting in or even aware of this. 為何會有此議題?同樣是殺人,怎樣殺有差別嗎?顯然是有的。 思考可能集中在: 1. 風險不對等:使用無人軍事武器這方,不怕死,而死的必然是被攻擊方。這是否為傳統「戰爭」的現代化呈現?或是另一這是騎士精神的影響。 2. 無感覺:因為殺人在千里萬里之外,所以生命的消逝與痛苦只是影像,甚至於只是電影片段,從而因易越過戰爭法的習慣界線而流於殘忍,甚至是樂趣。還有可能就是因為自己不會受傷,而輕率 結婚西裝開火? 這讓我們想到Enola Gay。 美國以無人飛機發動攻擊作法遭質疑●路透社(2010.10.23) (路透紐約聯合國總部22日電)聯合國調查人員今天呼籲這個世界組織,成立委員會研究無人軍事武器是否道德與合法,這顯然是指美國用來攻擊疑似伊斯蘭激進份子的無人飛機。 聯合國負責追查法外處決事件的特別調查員海因斯(Christ of Heyns),在提交聯合國大會人權委員會的報告中說,這類武器系統令人「嚴重關切,因為幾乎完全未經人權和人道人士檢視」。 他表示:「對於發展致命機器人技術在法律、政治、道德和倫理上的影響,國際社會急須正視。」 這是聯合國今年第二次提起這個問題。6月間,海因斯之前的調查員艾斯頓(Philip 酒店打工Alston)也曾呼籲,美國中央情報局(CIA)指揮無人飛機攻擊阿富汗與巴基斯坦境內蓋達組織(al Qaeda)和塔利班(Taliban)可疑份子的行動應該停止,因為這種由遠離戰場處下令進行的殺人行動,可能造成像打電玩的心態。中央社(翻譯) http://tw.news.yahoo.com/article/url/d/a/101023/16/2fj4t.html UNMANNED COMBAT AERIAL VEHICLES: EXAMINING THE POLITICAL, MORAL, AND SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS ABSTRACT There will likely be political, moral, and social implications of UCAV employment that strategists and military commanders will need to pay attention to as they craft strategies for future conflict. UCAVs are a very appealing op 澎湖民宿tion for the politician faced with use-of-force decisions due to reduced forward basing requirements and the possibility of zero friendly operator casualties. The flexibility of the weapon system offers the politician a seemingly high degree of control over the process of war. Together, these advantages may make a politician more inclined to use force first rather than last. In the moral realm, UCAVs are neither immoral nor illegal simply because risk to one of the combatants is removed. Additionally, notions of chivalry and fairness are not good standards by which to judge this technology. The social impact of widespr 節能燈具ead UCAV employment on the operator is an area of further concern. Remote-control war, however, does not change the underlying assumptions that have been the basis for the military ethos in the past. The final chapter highlights the dynamic between political, moral, and social issues as it addresses a range of possible unintended consequences resulting from extensive UCAV employment. Ultimately, the purpose of this thesis is to provide strategists greater clarity on the political, moral, and social issues surrounding UCAV employment. Doing so allows them to more effectively address, both objectively and subjectively, the implications of this new 西裝technology. http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA476987 The Future Of Unmanned Combat Aircrafts●RealMilitaryNetwork The age of manned aircraft may be nearing its end. With the rapid emergence and acceptance of droid pilots, as well as hundreds of fighter pilots being assigned to operating the Predator and Reaper UAVS, the prospect of human combat pilots is dwindling. The U.S. Air Force is having problems with morale in regards to pilots. With the decision of the transfer of one hundred newly-graduated pilots a year from flight school to UAV duty, the morale 當鋪of new combat pilots is sinking. To help with the issue, the Air Force is considering changing the term UAV (unmanned aerial vehicles) to RPV (remotely piloted vehicles) in order to stress that a pilot is still involved in the control of the aircraft. However, the entire human element of the UAVs may be taken out in entirety. UAVs are increasingly equipped with flight control software that operates by itself. Many current UAVs are already auto-controlled for takeoffs and landings. Many Air Force generals believe that the F-35 is probably the last combat aircraft to be manned by a live pilot. Many people additionally believe that the next generation fighter will not have a pilot on board, period 長灘島. But not all people are against the thought--Air Force generals around the world see the possibilities of the unpiloted jet fighter as a way to break the monopoly the U.S. Air Force has had on air supremacy for the last sixty years. American air superiority has largely been the result of superior pilots. But with new technology allowing fighter jets to be controlled by software rather than steady hands and fast thinking, the American Air Force is now forced to confront the possibilities of a new, leveled battleground in the skies against foes that may have equal or better unmanned fighter software. In simulations, fighters flown by software have been more maneuverable as well as more expendable than human 賣屋pilots, among other things. Many generals are convinced that the pilotless fighters will perform just as well in the real skies as in simulations. In addition, they are considering a sixth generation fighter that will not carry a human pilot. Otherwise, enemy pilotless fighters would have an edge over the U.S sixth generation aircraft. American control of the air will be maintained by a new generation of combat aircraft controlled by software, not someone in a cockpit. What are your opinions on the switch from man to machine? http://realmilitarynetwork.com/department/hotspots/future-unmanned-combat-aircrafts.html   .msgcontent .wsharing ul li { text-indent: 0; } 分享 Facebook Plurk YAHOO! 代償  .


yjggnhclpl 發表在 痞客邦 留言(0) 人氣()