[manigandham]

It isn't. The military should be equipped with the best talent and tech we have to offer, for the best defense of the nation. We don't live in a vacuum and there are now lifetime dictators like Putin and Jinping with major military power and constant cold-war and cyberware tactics being deployed.

It's easy to throw around ethics but many people don't think that far ahead and saying "we shouldn't make weapons" is naive and dangerous when the rest of the world already has them pointed at us.

[webninja]

What value is AI assisted drone strikes going to provide? If another country, China, Russia, etc sent drones for targeted drone strikes, we could send ours over with untargeted drone strikes that also cause collateral damage. This is also considered offensive technology, not defensive technology.

I think the potential negatives with this technology outweigh the positives.

[manigandham]

You're arguing that collateral damage is a good thing in a comment seemingly about why advanced weapons tech is a bad thing? How is this ethical or cogent?

AI isn't only used for drone strikes, and more accuracy in means a better outcome in actually hitting the target while preserving the lives of innocents (and thereby ending the conflict quickly and reducing the chance of eventual retaliation by other groups). We can always launch more attacks if we have more targets to destroy, not just hope the drone randomly blows things up during its mission.

There is also no offense or defense, they are the same thing when talking about weapons. Having the best weapons and never using them is far better than being unprepared when someone else comes along with more capabilities.