Transcript Lecture 14--Computers and the Military

Computers and the
Military
CIS 350—Computers and Society
Morgan C. Benton, Instructor
The Human Defensive Instinct

Throughout human history few forces
have inspired and motivated as much
creativity and technological
advancement as the human urge to
keep other humans from blowing us to
smithereens
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
Inventions Inspired by
Defense
Clothing
 Buildings
 Calculus
 Interstate Highways
 AK-47s
 B2 Stealth Bombers

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
The Impact of Defense on
Computers
The first computers were created by
the US Defense Department during
WWII
 The Internet evolved from ARPANET
which was a US military project
 Basically, if there’s a high tech gadget,
the military either uses it, invented it,
or forked over the cash to get it
invented

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
The US Military Budget




Total: $379 billion proposed for 2003
 Larger than the next 15 largest budgets COMBINED!
 $1,353.71 per person (estimated 280 million people)
 2001 budget >2x all other NATO nations combined
Increase over 2002: $48 billion (14.5%)
 This is more than Russia’s entire defense budget
36.2% of Global spending—5% of population
30x budget for aid to developing nations
Source: http://www.theglobalist.com/nor/factsheets/2002/02-25-02.shtml
(this link no longer works, but this information can be found online
by typing ‘us defense budget’ into any search engine)
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
What does that $$$ buy us?
Lots of weapons
 Lots of soldiers
AND
 Lots of computers
…which means…

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
You May Be Working for the DoD
In some way or another a great deal
of the money that gets spent in the US
each year on R&D, writing software,
and implementing various information
systems comes from the DoD, which
means that it is very likely that some
of you will be doing this work
 What are the ethical implications of
this?

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
The Ethics of Defense

Killing violates the Categorical Imperative,
even when it means saving many other
lives, but…


“Deontologists do often recognize selfdefense and other special circumstances as
excusing killing, but these are cases when, it
is argued, the killing is not exactly
intentional. (The person attacks me. I would
not, otherwise, aim at harm to the person,
but I have no choice other than to defend
myself.)” (Johnson 2000, p44)
Deontology vs. Utilitarianism
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
What might you be asked to
build?

Before considering the ethical
considerations further, it would help to
get an idea of the kind of systems that
are being built
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
"Smart Weapons”: Tomahawk Missile

Tomahawk cruise missile is a winged,
high subsonic speed surface-tosurface missile launched from ships or
submarines against targets up to 900
miles away.
Picture source http://www.cna.org/tlam.htm
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
"Smart Weapons”: Tomahawk
Missile (2)

After launch, Tomahawk follows preprogrammed missions.
 The Block II version navigates by
comparing what it "sees" on the ground
to what is stored in its memory.
 Block III Tomahawks, first delivered in
1993, added improvements including
satellite based global positioning system
(GPS) navigation, extended range,
improved accuracy and time of arrival
control.
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
"Smart Weapons”: Tomahawk
Missile (3)



Following an indirect and non-straight route
to avoid enemy radar and defenses it
"strikes its target with pinpoint accuracy"
(within 10 sq ft. area) even after traveling
great distances; program tells it
characteristics of target in order to "see
through" camouflages
Costs $1.4 million per missile
About 90 Tomahawks used in 1st 25 days of
Operation Enduring Freedom
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
SDI - Strategic Defense
Initiative (1985)

Better known as Star Wars, it was popularly
conceived as a project that would use laser
beams to destroy enemy ballistic missiles
while still in space.

In reality, the project was much wider than
that, and was motivated by a paradigm shift
as described earlier: MAD cannot by itself
be an adequate deterrent.
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
GPALS - Global Protection against
Limited Strikes (1990 ?)

Scaled down SDI

“Intended to rely on ground-based
interceptors (upscale Patriots among
others) on U.S. territory in conjunction
with the… "brilliant eyes/pebbles"
projects.”
Peter Clausen, Nonproliferation and the National Interest :
America's Response to the Spread of Nuclear Weapons,
Harpercollins College Div. 1993
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
National Missile Defense(NMD)
– 2001




Revived by Clinton administration in 1998 nearly
coinciding with test of 3-stage ballistic missile by North
Korea
Strongly advocated by President George W. Bush
during his campaign and since election
Controversial because proceeding with the plan
involves revoking or ignoring the 1972 ABM (AntiBallistic Missile) treaty we signed with Russia
Widespread displeasure among other nations at the
Bush administration’s determination to push ahead
despite previous agreements
--Source http://www.howstuffworks.com/
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
MAD



MAD is an acronym that stands for Mutually
Assured Destruction and which means that
in the event of a nuclear war both sides
could be relatively confident that they would
be destroyed
MAD was the primary philosophy which
kept us from blowing each other up during
the cold war
SDI or NDM would give an advantage to
one side, upsetting MAD and changing the
balance of power, which is why it was
banned by ABM
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
NMD Since September 11

Union of Concerned Scientists
(http://www.ucsusa.org/security/0missile.html)




For a terrorist group or a developing country,
a long-range ballistic missile is the least
attractive option to attack the United States
Missile defense is not the answer.
It’s the warhead, not the missile.
True security requires international
cooperation.
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
NMD Since September 11

Sept. 11 Verdict: Yes to Missile Defense
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-000082732oct17.story



There is no better example of the new threats we face than
the Sept. 11 attacks and that "the case is more strong today
than it was on Sept. 10 that the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty
is outmoded.”
Sept. 11 attacks remind us that seemingly remote or
abstract dangers can become tragically real very quickly.
Being able to threaten the United States with a biological or
nuclear weapon on a ballistic missile could allow an
adversary state to act aggressively against its neighbors in
the hopes that, with Americans at risk, Washington would
not retaliate. A hostile state armed with ballistic missiles
could also harbor terrorists such as Osama bin Laden, with
the knowledge that a U.S. with no missile defense would be
highly reluctant to threaten enough force to capture him or
overthrow the country's ruling regime.
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
What’s the point?
The point is not to debate whether or
not SDI is a good idea
 The point is that if we as a society
decide to build these things then we
have to do it with utmost care
 The designers and builders must at
some level take responsibility for the
impacts of their creations on the world

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
The Shadow of Nuclear Weapons
At least some of the scientists
involved in the creation of the first
atomic bomb were pacifists.
 They only got involved because they
wanted to prove that the bomb
couldn’t be built.
 Nuclear weapons have profoundly
affected the psyche of our society
during the past century

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
Problems with MAD

Any number of failures or errors could
set off a nuclear war including:
Mechanical failures
 Design flaws (systems are VERY
complex)
 Human errors
 Freak accidents
 Deliberate sabotage (hacking)

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
Automatic Release Of
Weapons
Launch-on-Warning
 Computerized Battle Management
Systems will automate decisions to
launch missiles, including nuclear
missiles.
 Necessary for Star Wars because the
boost phase lasts only a few minutestoo short a time to convene human
judges such as joint chiefs of staff

©2003 Morgan C. Benton
Arguments for weapons
development




If we don’t do it, someone else will…
Guns don’t kill people, people do—i.e. the
technology is inherently value-neutral (see
Johnson page 204-5)
Weapons ultimately save lives and make
people feel more secure (utilitarian)
More precise weapons are more ethical
because they reduce “collateral damage”
(also utilitarian)
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
Arguments against
development




No guarantee that someone else will develop the
weapons—in which case we’ve done it for them
Weapons are value-laden and hence not neutral
Weapons can fall into the wrong hands and the more
complex and powerful the weapons the greater the
danger
Killing is immoral because it violates the categorical
imperative, and hence the notion that people should be
free to choose their own destinies, and ultimately
democracy—weapons main purpose is to kill or
destroy
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
Weapons Updates Online
 Defense
Daily:
http://www.defensedaily.com/progprof/
army/
 Army
Projects.com
http://www.armytechnology.com/projects/index.html
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
Thank you.
Discussion


Critique this argument:
Computer technology increases the range
and power of the defense systems that we
CAN build, and hence the range and power
of the systems we MUST build to stay
ahead of the “competition”—real or
imagined—and therefore we have no choice
but to build such systems
Are there truly no alternatives?
©2003 Morgan C. Benton
For Next Time

Study for the midterm
©2003 Morgan C. Benton