Remotely controlled armed robots deployed in Iraq

While the Army is already taking good care of our wounded robots patrolling through Iraq, a recent deployment of three special weapons observation remote reconnaissance direct action systems (SWORDS) has placed rifle-equipped bots in the line of fire. The trio, which all handle M249s, are "are remotely controlled by a soldier through a terminal," and while their exact whereabouts and missions remain classified, the armed machines were reportedly designed to handle "high risk" combat scenarios if necessary. Currently, there's no record of a SWORD actually firing its weapon, but considering that each of these devices can potentially remove a human from harm, don't be surprised to see full blown platoons being unleashed when finances allow.

[Via Wired]

[Craig @ Aug 3rd 2007 6:10AM]

"The Army has authorized the purchase of 80 more robots -- which are being touted as a potentially life-saving technology"
How exactly is a gun life-saving? It's designed to do the opposite!

[Andir3.0 @ Aug 3rd 2007 6:49AM]

Unless your the hostage

[johnzilla @ Aug 3rd 2007 9:58AM]

Are you really that stupid? "Life saving" means sending a machine into battle instead of sending a human.

[I LOVE THE CAPS LOCK KEY @ Aug 3rd 2007 5:27PM]

Here is a video of it in action:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e26Gnc3E0yg

[Ihar `Philips` Filipau @ Aug 3rd 2007 6:13AM]

So. The war wasn't only about oil - it was about testing new military toys!!!

What a worthy use for taxpayers moneys and ... lives.

[Zeus the God @ Aug 3rd 2007 6:26AM]

Craig, its supposed to protect the lives of the side using them, so they don't have to risk theirs to protect their country. Also, the point of war isn't necessarily to kill, its supposed to reach a resolution through force... Now that the enemy sees (once finances allows) that what they are shooting at is merely a machine, and that they can't keep up with that due to their economy, they may just be persuaded to give up. I mean, its only a robot, and it can be replaced, a human life cannot, and because of that fact, there is no telling what the enemy will do.

[Eugene @ Aug 3rd 2007 6:28AM]

yeah, oil. psssh, who needs it? I mean, it's only useful for stuff like transportation, manufacturing, medicine, textiles, plastics, keeping people from freezing during the winter.... it's not like it's useful or necessary for modern living.

And I know all you anti-war types mailed in those comments on 100% hemp paper, made with ink you ground out yourselves from beetle shells and then walked it over to the engadget offices.

[Alan Partridge @ Aug 3rd 2007 7:05AM]

Did anyone say that oil was uselesss, or did they just imply that invading another country in order to steal it may be, at best, morally dubious?

[Eugene @ Aug 3rd 2007 7:09AM]

Are we stealing it? I must have missed that part, lets see.. over threw sadam as mandated by the UN security council, check. Established democratically elected Iraqi government, check. Handed over control of Iraqi oil to said government, check. Hmmm, try looking at the actual facts instead of propoganda.

And besides, if all we wanted was oil, we would have left saddam in power, since he was selling the oil below market rates.

[egåroht @ Aug 3rd 2007 8:46AM]

Well someone have surely read up on the propaganda, Eugene. You'll do well to read up on to what extent the Iraq government control anything important

[Eugene @ Aug 3rd 2007 8:52AM]

Did I say the iraqi government was doing a good job? or that iraq was secure? No, I didn't. I merely refuted the claim that we went to war over oil. I'm sorry if that's too difficult of a concept for you to grasp.

[egåroht @ Aug 3rd 2007 9:23AM]

And did I say that the problem was whether or not the Iraqi government is doing a good job? Will the Iraqis opinions matter if they go against the American governments wish (i.e. http://www.alternet.org/blogs/themix/43073/)

[Xavier Gill @ Aug 3rd 2007 9:29AM]

"Are we stealing it? I must have missed that part"

I'm afraid you did miss that part, unmetered amounst of oil have been taken since 2003 and $20billion of Iraqs future oil revenue will be taken to pay for reconstructing the damage caused by the invasion.

[Bryce Dechert @ Aug 3rd 2007 6:39AM]

The REAL debate is, of course, whether our friendly little killer robot will be controlled by a PS3 controller, or a Xbox 360.

I vote PS3, if they bring the rumble function back.

[Alan Partridge @ Aug 3rd 2007 6:58AM]

So when another massacre happens like the one in Fallujah they can just blame it on a computer error?

Anyone know how much one of these cost?

[Jonathan Davis @ Aug 3rd 2007 7:11AM]

If Ender Wiggin is driving, we're all saved! Ho! Ender!.

[JC @ Aug 3rd 2007 8:38AM]

Massacre HA? Were you there?? Where are you basing these accusations from?? Your own experiances, or from the likes of Michael moore??? Know what the hell you are talking about before you make extrodinary claims of "massacres", and stick to relavent posts that pertain to the article! There are other hippie sites for you to talk bad about people who had the balls and courage to fight and risk there life for there country that you did not.

[Matt @ Aug 3rd 2007 8:36AM]

I for one welcome our rifle bearing robot overloads

thats getting a bit tired now isn't it?

practically, can it communicate? can it issue phrases like "put your guns down" or stop fighting etc, can it hear and relay it to the controller? Soldiers aren't just for shooting but for diffusing situations, can it call in locations for airstrikes etc? this for pure combat may be fine though.

although i think a well thrown grenade could quite easily finish it...

[Xenoterranos @ Aug 3rd 2007 10:05AM]

The same could be said for a truck full of soldiers, no?

[EDomain @ Aug 3rd 2007 10:35AM]

No offense, but I was in the Army, and a grenade is not going to hurt that thing. Do you see those treads?

Now, I have no idea about IEDs... i imagine if an IED can blow up and armored humvee, it might hurt these things, don't really know though.

[eugene @ Aug 3rd 2007 9:41AM]

yeah yeah, keep on with your hypotheticals. Back in the present day and in the real world, Iraqi Interim Oil Minister Thamir al-Ghadhban is calling the shots.

[eugene @ Aug 3rd 2007 9:37AM]

not taken, spent in iraq, for iraq. Not very well, and not very
wisely, but it was hardly stolen. And it was hardly 20 billion, it
was a little less than 9 billion according to audit reports.

[chris crouse @ Aug 3rd 2007 9:40AM]

I thought the last of these was destroyed when we blew up the stargate on P-53791.

[km @ Aug 3rd 2007 10:15AM]

Was that battling the Ori or the Wraith?

[eugene @ Aug 3rd 2007 9:44AM]

sorry, my bad, current oil minister:
Husayn al-SHAHRISTANI

[johnzilla @ Aug 3rd 2007 10:06AM]

If you want oil, buy it on the open market with everyone else.

There's no justification whatsoever for the invasion of Iraq. None whatsoever, that is, unless you count "ego" and "government contract boondoggles for friends" on the part of the president and the hawks in his administration.

The US has no business telling other countries what to do when our own country is so screwed up.

And please, Eugene, don't use the "we got rid of Saddam" argument...that just shows your ignorance as well as the absolute futility of current American foreign policy. It wasn't that long before we were claiming Saddam was the devil incarnate that we were claiming he was our best friend. Was Saddam a bad guy? Sure. Should he have been in power? No. But it is not up to us to push him out of power or prop him up in power. That's up to the citizens of Iraq. Living under tyrrany is a choice. Remember? If you don't, you might want to take a longer, deeper look at American history in the late 1700s.

[Chris @ Aug 3rd 2007 2:43PM]

Man, iraq was a real threat prior to the invasion. I'm sure glad that we can rest now that developments in military technology can save american lives yet still go on generating new unhappy people in countries with GDPs smaller than some of our cities.

really though, this is good, in the right hands, but presently I kind of think that the illusion of Iraqi autonomy should be replaced with a bit of actual self determination.Perhaps that would be something to pour energy and resources into. Or, we could just continue handing out no bid contracts to .....

[deedeedee @ Aug 3rd 2007 10:23AM]

wtf, where are they gonna use this?? i would think sending it into a house or on the street? Then I hope the soldiers will be watching it closly when controlling it, cuz look at this thing, how easy would it be to have someone comes up from behind and just sit on it and take their sweet time to mess it up and draw a smily face on top.

[jeff @ Aug 3rd 2007 11:11AM]

1. Real question is what happens the gun jams.
2. To the tree-huggin, earth-muffin, no-vinyl-using, no-driving, no-plastic-using, non-reality-using folks... we use oil. Where would you like us to get it from till you finish cold fusion?
3. Don't talk about "costing lives" until you talk to a Soldier. You might actually learn something about the world and not your cubicle...
4. Put up: State Department needs people in Iraq right now.

[Andrew @ Aug 3rd 2007 11:41AM]

Jeff:

1. It stops firing.
2. You're part of the problem, not part of the solution. Get out of the way.
3. I'm not American, but I hate the fact that American soldiers are losing their lives for some penny-loafer-wearing oil-baron's idiocy. If you don't know about the world outside of YOUR cubicle, most of it despises the fact that your country is in Iraq, including your allies.
4. The State department needs smarter people making the decisions right now so that it can stop the Iraqi occupation without sending their country into civil war when they leave.

[Majd Al-Shihabi @ Aug 3rd 2007 12:35PM]

I'm an Iraqi and I know what's happening there now. I've seen how much better Saddam was than the current government. He built a country, he educated, Iraq was one of the richest countries in the world. We had no problems until the some f***ing countries put sanctions on us and destroyed or economy. Why? because we wanted to improve our living conditions. We're not allowed to do that if that will affect the Americans in any way or shape of form. We have to stay a 100 years behind you in everything.
Weapons of mass destruction? ha! and then to get rid of the "dictator"? Most of you Americans are brain washed.
How much would it coast to to fix the sewer system in New Orleans? LESS THAN THE COAST OF ONE DAY OF WAR IN IRAQ !!!! But that's too expensive.
do you want to debate this with me? I'll floor you with my arguments. Add me at
majd . al [at] gmail . com

[Syndication @ Aug 3rd 2007 1:08PM]

I'm sure the Kurds were a lot better off being gassed to death under Saddam's government and the Iraqi soccer team was much better treated.


Go back to your hole Saddam loyalist.

[Loonie @ Aug 3rd 2007 1:12PM]

Oh well, of course that makes it all okay then, Syndication.

[Majd Al-Shihabi @ Aug 3rd 2007 1:13PM]

You think I'm a Saddam loyalist?
I forgive you for saying that - you don't even know me!- but I'll tell you one thing. I said I'm a Iraqi, how? My mom is an Iraqi Kurd!
She knows that the Kurds are much worse now than before the invasion.

Plus, I don't like Saddam, in fact, I hate him. But if you had to choose from 2 shitty situations, Saddam (taking away our freeedom of speach) or the Americans (stealing our money) we would choose Saddam :)

Go do some reading from somewhere other than your CNN :) they're bullshit :D

[Majd Al-Shihabi @ Aug 3rd 2007 1:17PM]

try AlJazeera maybe?
http://english.aljazeera.net/English

[poulan @ Aug 5th 2007 7:11AM]

You won't be flooring me with your arguments. Richest countries of the world you say? How much of that wealth did your family actually see or was it just a few oil barons that enjoy the oil revenue? I think we know the answer - regular Iraqis see shit of that wealth. Oh, and 'We have to stay a 100 years behind you in everything' - you did that yourselves by 'enjoying' a dictatorship. Which 'serious' country even in the 20th century which cares about human rights, freedom of opinion and has a successful economy did that? Sure, I agree that 'WoMD' was pure rubbish however remember that right now it is war and things get worse before they get better in your country and you cannot compare peace time dictatorship rule with wartime. Sure you don't like a big powerful alliance crushing your country and it was about oil but your children will have better lives for it.

[Big Ed @ Aug 3rd 2007 11:06AM]

All of you must see this conflict from a practical point of view. A "democracy" has been established in Iraq some time ago a Iraqi army has been trained. Why are we still there? U.S. presence in Iraq and the middle east has generated even more hate for the U.S. than ever before. Oh, did I forget to mention the billions of dollars going into this conflict and the thousands of soldiers that paid the price for one man's ignorance.

[mastershake3 @ Aug 3rd 2007 11:29AM]

so many idiotic comments! Some of you liberals really do frighten me with what you buy into!

But here's something to consider, If you suicede bomb a bunch of robots, YOU ARE NOT A MARTYR!
So if you are a teenager, and considering military service....get good at squad based comabat games.

[Andrew @ Aug 3rd 2007 11:50AM]

Believe me - we don't frighten you half as much as you frighten us.

If you think the military is like a video game, fine. Join the army. Go to war. The only thing is: you don't get bio breaks and your mom doesn't tell you when it's time to go to bed in the real world. No, instead you get to see the absolute worst side of humanity, you get to bleed and feel pain, see good people die in front of you and have years of nightmares afterwards, sometimes so much that you end up a psychological wreck, can't keep a family together, and end up an alcoholic on the street. Sounds like fun, eh?

But hey, don't let me stop you from falling hook, line and sinker for that 'America's Army' propaganda.

My advice, if you're a teenager and considering military service? Find out how to use your position to stop war, rather than prolong it.

[mastershake3 @ Aug 3rd 2007 12:05PM]

yes, I did. And I have, Your welcome.
Now READ the book "On Killing" by Lt.Col. Dave Grossman, before you make another ignorant comment. I don't mean ask someone what its about, I mean you read it.
By the way, those psychological effects your speaking of, that's what the book is about, and why I don't have any problems. I think when you understand more, you'll phrase your comment differently.
By the way when I was in, I saw the best side of humanity. I saw selfless sacrafice, heroism, sympathy, humility, honesty, brotherhood, and acceptance. All the lefties washed out long before they made it to Ft. Bragg, thank God. The military is not a video game, and it's not for everyone.
Many people when presented with something they can not handle choose to believe other realities, such as conspiracy theories and delve into psychological illness. And good people can be damaged by these lunatics. Anyway, open your mind, and read the book.

[Magallanes @ Aug 3rd 2007 12:03PM]

A suicide robot bring some logistic trouble :COST. Latins and rednecks are quite cheap for this matter, sadly but it's true even when i think that any life is priceless.

Anyways,how this works?. this robots must contain some confidential parts, so if a "enemy" troops bring down they can loot it. And AFAIK, those robots each cost more that a ps3 and they are not invulnerable (neither a tank is invulnerable).

[buzweaver @ Aug 3rd 2007 12:12PM]

Technology can and does play a key role in the Military, there will be limitations of course, however any advantage that keeps our troops out of harms way is helpful.

[mastershake3 @ Aug 3rd 2007 12:12PM]

@Magallanes you misunderstood me, I'm saying that using robots instead of troops counters some of Muslim Fanatisism. They believe if you die, but take the enemy with you, you are a religious marytr. However, Allah would not see a robot as the enemy as far as I understand it. i.e. sucide bombers vs. robots don't go to heaven.

[michas_pi @ Aug 3rd 2007 4:30PM]

I hope Iraqi homebrew terrorists don't hack this thing to attack US troops, have human emotions, etc.

P.S. Kind of like Red Planet

[poulan @ Aug 5th 2007 6:57AM]

I don't think this think is going to win the hearts and minds of local populations. Most soldiers spend far more time doing humanitarian work than pointing guns at people anyway. One stick of chewing gun on the camera or bullet through a wire and this thing is a paper weight, seeing as it's not the most stealthy design imaginable that will probably happen fast. It's likely application would be in sending it into an enemy stronghold where there are no civilans and let it blast the crap out of everything that moves.

[Skasiah @ Aug 5th 2007 2:49PM]

All is well and good until SKYNET gets breached.