All language subtitles for Modern.Warfare.2.0.S01E02.Death.From.Above.1080p.AMZN.WEB-DL.DDP2.0.H.264-RAWR_track3_[eng]

Eliminate all thoughts
about your life...

and death.

Only then, you will disregard
your earthly life totally.

A loyal fighting man
is a pure-hearted son.

Be empowered to focus
your attention

on eradicating your enemy
with unwavering determination.

When you take this walk,
be aware of your surroundings.

This airstrip is the key
to the success or failure

of your mission.

You feel that you

are suddenly floating
in the air.

At that moment, you see
your mother's face.

She's not smiling or crying.

You must exert your full might

for the last time in your life.

The kamikaze were the first
directionable munition.

They inspired
the kamikaze drone.

The rise and use of drones has
created a fundamental shift

into how contemporary combat
is being fought today.

There's less risk of a son,
brother, or a father

not coming home to their family.

They fear what might come out
of the sky.

Getting the drop on the enemy
is crucial in warfare.

From reconnaissance
to inflicting damage,

the side that can see
the battlefield

controls the battlefield.

So, in the area
of modern warfare,

to dominate the ground,
you need to control the sky.

Horizons have always been
really important

for military leaders.

From Alexander the Great
onwards, what they needed was

a sense of perspective
over the battlefield.

They didn't know what was
in the dip in front of them,

over the hill to the side
or behind them.

And that's what air power
really started

to provide for them.

But in terms of remotely
piloted capability,

you're looking at Nikola Tesla

with his remote controlled boat.

Thereafter, we're talking
about aerial reconnaissance

undertaken by the British
during the First World War.

Today, that invaluable
battlefield perspective

is largely provided by drones.

The definition of a drone is
a system which doesn't carry

an operator in the cockpit.

There can be all kinds
of drones, naval drones,

underwater, ground drones,

most of the time
being called "robots."

The most commonly known
type of drone

is an unmanned aircraft.

In military terms,
it's always been

around the dull, dirty,
and dangerous work

that you don't want to risk
soldiers going into.

Aerial drones can be divided
into four basic groups.

Kamikaze, or loitering
munitions drones.

ISR, which stands
for intelligence, surveillance,

and reconnaissance drones.

Armed drones,

and combat drones.

The first type of modern
military drones were inspired

by the Japanese use of kamikaze.

Aerial bombardments were
notoriously inefficient.

Around 1935, the UK's
Royal Air Force started to use

the de Havilland Queen Bee,
a remote controlled drone

that was specifically used
for target practice.

The US Drone Program
started about a year later

after a visit by a US Admiral,
Standley Curtiss,

who went across to see
the Queen Bee in operation.

He started to develop
the Curtiss N2C-2

remote controlled drone.

We move on to a remotely
controlled drone

built by an actor,
Reginald Denny.

From there, drone technology
really plateaued

for a while until about 1973,
where we see the use of drones

extensively during
the Yom Kippur War

by the Israeli Defense Force.

But these initial ones
were very expensive to make.

This led to the development
of ISR drones,

which could return to base.

These vehicles
were largely used

for surveillance and scouting.

This is really what kickstarted

the Israeli Defense Forces
drone program,

Surveillance drones are drones
that carry surveillance

equipment, photo cameras,
video cameras, and the like,

and are used to locate targets
on the ground.

By 1985, the US had really
started to scale up its program,

and by 1996, the Predator
had arrived on the scene,

The Predator is part of the
so-called "MALE" drone group.

MALE stands for "Medium
Altitude, Long Endurance."

It could stay in the air for
a long time and can therefore

fly over a target for several
hours, if not longer.

During the insurgencies
in Iraq and Afghanistan,

we saw the increasing use
of drones as the West came

to rely more and more
on technology to deliver

an edge against a furtive
and deceptive adversary.

In the CIA, we started
using the drones

to gather intelligence
on high-value targets.

They were game changers.

Drones intelligence-gathering
shifted the focus of war

away from body count and toward
precise, targeted missions.

In Iraq, they changed
the face of warfare

because warfare suddenly
had a face.

During the global war
on terror, the strategy was

to attack and find and kill

individuals responsible
for attacks.

A special forces team
in a helicopter,

coming from the other horizon,
could be heard and found.

A drone could loiter almost
silent above the battle space,

spending hours, perhaps days,
airborne, seeking out

the individual and eventually
targeting them with a precision

and a lack of risk
that the West had previously

been unable to achieve.

In 2001, in Tora Bora,
we were hunting Bin Laden

and his close associates.

Late one night, we saw lights
in the bottom of the valley,

about 1,000 meters below us,
moving around.

And we were in a very
vulnerable position,

and were afraid that they were
maneuvering to outflank

and overrun us.

We called for aerial support,
but nothing was available

except an unarmed
Predator drone.

We had them fly that drone down
low so that the people

in the valley would hear it.

They did, and it worked.

The lights went out,
and nobody messed with us

that night.

I knew at that time that drones
were gonna make

a huge difference
on the battlefield.

But sometimes it's not enough
if you don't have

the capability to then
strike a target you have
identified.

In fact, there was
an incident before 9/11

where drone operators
thought they had identified

Osama Bin Laden on the ground,

but the strike that was ordered
basically arrived too late.

It was the unique challenges
presented by the war on terror

and people hiding in villages
and in remote,

inaccessible places that really
put the pressure on us

to develop drones capable
of carrying munitions.

From this requirement,
we saw the arrival

of the Reaper drone.

The MQ-9 Reaper.

MQ-9 Reaper.

And flying the new MQ-9 Reaper.

Its payload capacity makes it
more of a hunter-killer.

Aircraft can become
a vital weapon.

It's changing the way we see
the combat arena.

We're setting the bar,

and I think we're setting it
pretty high.

The Predator was soon modified
from a surveillance drone

to an armed drone.

They put two Hellfire missiles
under its wings.

The first time they carried out
the tests, they were actually

worried that the missile would
be too powerful for the fragile

airframe of the Predator
and rip off its wings.

That didn't happen.

This then led
to the development

of the MQ-9 Reaper drone.

It was in 2006
when the US Air Force

really began an effort
to absolutely control the skies.

And once you control the skies,
then you dictate

the tenor of battle
on the ground.

When people think of drones,
we picture the Reaper,

which became known to everyone
during the wars

in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Through its success
in both war zones,

the drone became commonplace
on the battlefield.

The catalyst for the Reaper
drone was the sheer number

of targets that
the global war on terror

delivered for the military.

How to service these was
a perfect storm requiring

range, weapons,
surveillance,

all in one platform.

It can carry more armament,
more missiles.

It can also stay in the air
for longer,

so 27 or more hours
in the air.

It flies higher, which means
it can evade anti-aerial systems

more easily.

And it has a top speed of
up to 550 kilometers per hour.

The MQ-9 Reaper drone
has changed the face

of how warfare is waged.

Remotely piloted
via satellite links

from Creech Air Force Base
in Nevada,

teams of people
watch 24 hours a day,

365 days a year,
ready to take out threats.

During the war on terror,
Gary Harrington saw firsthand

the effectiveness of
the Reaper drone.

Our role at that time

was to locate
the top tier of Taliban

and Al-Qaeda that were
on the most wanted list.

But these high value targets
weren't out in the open,

So the time window
was real small

in which you could
strike them.

The Reaper drone gave us
the capability to, one,

make sure that it was
the intended target,

and two, that it was the right
time to strike.

We started changing the warhead
that came on them.

We could dial that warhead up
to take out a bunker,

or reduce it to hit
a building or a vehicle.

It was like being able to put
a sniper on the ground

in places you couldn't get
a person and be able

to leave them there
for long periods of time.

It's the perfect weapon
for an age of perpetual warfare.

The CIA says seven
of its employees were killed

and six others wounded
in a suicide bombing.

The bombing took place in
the city of Khost in a province

that borders Pakistan
and is a Taliban stronghold.

The Taliban claimed
responsibility for the bombing.

This is the Shahidi attack will
be the first of the revenge

operations against
the Americans

and their drone team.

The CIA released a letter
from President Barack Obama

in which he says
the victims come

from a long line
of patriots.

That attack was devastating,
and the US

immediately wanted Al-Qaeda
to know that we were

coming for them.

Quickly, the US policy
towards terrorists became that

of cutting the head
off the snake.

And in late 2009, when Al-Qaeda
conducted a successful suicide

attack against the CIA base
in Khost, killing seven

CIA officers, it was believed
that al-Yemeni was the head

of that particular snake.

In late 2009, when Al-Qaeda
conducted a successful suicide

attack against the CIA base
in Khost, killing seven

CIA officers, it was believed
that al-Yemeni was the head.

The CIA leadership desperately
wanted to find the perpetrators

and planners of this act.

They notified the ops center
that this superseded all other

ongoing targeting operations
and it was all hands on deck.

They wanted eyes on al-Yemeni
and his accomplices, ASAP.

The NSA intercepted
communications from Al-Qaeda

congratulating al-Yemini
on the success of his operation.

That call came from the area
near a compound

in Miran Shah, Pakistan.

They wanted someone with
experience running operations

in that area.

I was actually asleep one night,

and got a message
from the embassy

because it had received
a NIACT message.

NIACT stands
for "night action required."

That indicates that
this message requires immediate

attention or action regardless
of the time of day or night.

Based on my years of experience
looking for Taliban

and Al-Qaeda in the Pakistani
tribal areas,

I was directed to report
to the Ops Center.

As I walked into the control
center, a boss shook my hand

and said, "We have a suspected
safe house location,

"but it's connected
to what appears to be

"an apartment block.

"And we're not sure
if al-Yemeni is actually in it.

Can you take a look?"

The suspected location was
in the middle of the town.

There were a lot of innocent
people in close vicinity,

and you couldn't either
drop a bomb

or land something
like SEAL Team Six.

So the decision was made
to use a Reaper drone.

It took a long time to confirm
that it was al-Yemeni

beyond the shadow of doubt.

But with the Reaper,
we were able to observe people

coming in and out
of the safe house.

And importantly, we could also
verify that women and children

were coming in and out
of the adjacent building,

while only men were going
in and out of the safe house.

We also regularly saw armed men
on the rooftop

of the suspected location.

The problem was, how could
we find if al-Yemeni himself

was inside the compound?

This is where the Reaper's
increased sensors

came into play.

It was cold weather,
and we could see individuals

as bright, glowing dots.

It was a two-story building
with multiple rooms,

but one of the upstairs rooms
had a heater in it,

that we could see on infrared.

One of the glowing dots
did not go out much,

was alone more often,
and slept alone.

By watching the dots for a long
period of time, we could tell

that there was deference
to one that the others seemed

to come to and leave from.

We determined that
that must be the leader.

When we felt comfortable
that we had identified al-Yemeni

in this compound, we then
watched and waited until we got

a group gathered because we knew
we were only gonna get one shot.

And if he and the other
planners were not taken out,

they would go into hiding,
and we may never find them.

The command kill chain
was notified.

They quickly stood up
and asked, "How can we take

"this shot without injuring
the civilians that are

on the other side of the wall?"

The decision was made to try
to attack with the drones

through the roof
instead of a wall.

This prevented more lateral
penetration of the shrapnel.

Due to the Reaper's
capabilities, we could

with confidence say, "Yes,
it's time to take the shot."

Several missiles were fired,
and all the people that were

in the room with al-Yemeni
at the time were killed...

...but no innocent civilians
were harmed.

We have taken
away their infrastructure.

So we are chipping away
at Al-Qaeda.

We're making progress
in our major goal,

our central goal
in Pakistan and Afghanistan,

and that is disrupting
and dismantling,

and we are gonna ultimately
defeat Al-Qaeda.

The strike on al-Yemeni was
an important moment

in the history of drone warfare.

It was in the late 2000s
that everybody started talking

about targeted killings.

Basically strikes outside
official battle spaces

and in countries such as
Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia.

In December 2009,

drones were used to take out
Saleh al-Somali,

who was Al-Qaeda's
external operations chief.

Drones were used to take out
Al-Qaeda's number three

and number eight.

The Reaper was a great tool
on the battlefield.

It also helped in the political
realm because you did not have

to send people in harm's way
or in hostile territory

to take out a target.

People in the region knew that
drones were flying overhead,

but they were flying so high
that most of the time

they couldn't hear or see them.

That had a big
psychological impact.

They were fearing
the sky at any time.

We've struck several terrorist
training camps,

most of the airfields.

We believe we are now able
to carry out strikes

more or less around the clock.

The strike against
the Taliban and Al-Qaeda,

this is a very
deliberate attack.

The degree of destruction
varies depending on what

the desired effect is.
We're inflicting severe blows.

I can report to the American
people and to the world,

the United States has conducted
an operation that killed

Osama bin Laden,

leader of Al-Qaeda and
a terrorist who's responsible

for the murder of thousands
of innocent men,

women, and children.

The killing of Osama bin Laden
will lead to revenge attacks.

The remaining leaders
of the network will seek

to commemorate
bin Laden's death

by pulling off attacks
in his honor.

We are gonna ultimately
defeat Al-Qaeda.

This idea of decapitation
captured Western leaders'

imaginations, whether
political or military.

And yet its use
in military terms,

in campaigns
over the last 25 years,

whether against ISIS
or the Taliban

or destroying Russian military
headquarters and their generals

in Ukraine, it hasn't
been enormously successful.

This decapitation strategy
relies on a military

that is commanded
from a single supreme commander,

one individual who runs
everything else.

But the reality is that Al-Qaeda
was not following

some rigid military structure
with one head.

It wasn't like a snake.
It was more like a hydra,

that had multiple heads,
and every time you cut one off,

two more would grow
in its place.

The Pentagon says all it took
for insurgents in Iraq

and Afghanistan to hack
into video feeds

from US Predator drones
was a $26 piece of software.

The first case of American
troops killed

by a missile strike
from a US drone.

Frightened villages
being mistaken for the enemy.

Last night, the United States
carried out an airstrike.

General Milley called it
a righteous strike.

And admits that drone strike
was a tragic mistake.

General McKenzie now says
that strike was a mistake.

This strike was taken
in the earnest belief that it

would prevent an imminent
threat, but it was a mistake.

And I offer my sincere apology.

It is a hard fact
that US Strikes

have resulted
in civilian casualties.

For me and those
in my chain of command,

those deaths will haunt us
as long as we live.

There were several incidents

where civilians were killed.

One particularly shocking case
was in the last year

of the US presence
in Afghanistan.

The MQ-9 operators were
following an individual

for more than eight hours,
suspecting that he was

a member of ISIS-K.

After the strike,
they determined

that the suspect
was actually the employee

of a US-based company.

And that strike cost the lives
of ten innocent people,

seven of whom were children.

What was needed was a more
precise weapon, something that

would respond to the political
and military demands

of campaigns as they evolved.

On Saturday, the United States
successfully concluded

an airstrike and killed
the Emir of Al-Qaeda,

al-Zawahiri.

After a 21-year manhunt,
the breakthrough came in Kabul.

US Intelligence agencies
had tracked al-Zawahiri

to a safe house downtown.

Significant blow to Al-Qaeda

and its global network
of affiliates.

He is getting the same justice
from our maker

that bin Laden got.

At 6:18 AM Sunday morning,
he ventured onto the terrace,

and a CIA drone fired
two Hellfire missiles

at the building.

The Americans say no civilians
were killed in the strike,

which used blades,
not warheads,

to slice rather than blow up
the target.

The Reaper carrying RX-9
modified Hellfire missiles

was used in the targeted strike
on al-Zawahiri.

This missile doesn't detonate,
but instead,

blades open just before impact,

slicing through the target.

These are so accurate,

they have flown
through windows,

eliminated targets,
and left little other damage

to the room or vehicle.

Drones were, for decades,
an exclusively

military technology.

But then, in the 2010s,
civilian drones,

commercially used drones,
really took off.

In 2006, the Federal Aviation
authority allowed drones to be

used for the first time
in the US homeland.

This was largely
due to requirements

in Hurricane Katrina.

Hurricane Katrina is closing in
on the Louisiana coast now.

Where we saw Predator drones
being used for the first time

to search for survivors
and look at damage to provide

to US Authorities about what was
happening on the ground.

And within four years,
we had surveillance drones

controlled by smartphones,
the ability to stream video

in real time
down to individual phones

owned by individual people.

The drone technology has
evolved significantly,

where there are so many uses
beyond just the battlefield.

Whether you're talking
about last mile logistics

and delivery for Amazon
or for UPS,

or you're talking about
some cutting-edge cinematography

in the movie industry

or to do remote surveillance
of crops or oil pipelines.

You're seeing an explosion
of opportunities for drones

to be used
in the commercial space.

There are drones
going over the prison

and dropping drugs
into the prison.

A loot carried by two drones
over prison.

The number of banned items
dropped into London prisons

has doubled.

Harsher sentences
to deter criminals

from this escalating crime.

Well, that's
the downside of technology.

In the wrong hands,
it can be used for wrong deeds.

You're starting to see cartels
use drones to smuggle drugs

across the border
or into prisons.

You're starting to see
criminals use drones to case

a potential target.

Civilian drones are now
returning to the battlefield.

Non state actors,
in particular, such as ISIS

in Iraq and Syria, have been
using drones for surveillance

and reconnaissance,
and then started to booby trap

their drones to attack
enemy soldiers.

The sheer number of small
drones that meet the individual

soldiers can be targeted
in a way

that they have
never been before.

It has changed how war
has had to be fought.

Drones have become ubiquitous
on the battlefield,

playing a major role
in global hot zones

like Syria and Ukraine,

and also in territorial wars

such as between
Azerbaijan and Armenia.

And on the front lines, it is
a mix of old school trench

warfare and modern
drone technology,

the ultimate reconnaissance
and targeting tool,

especially in
mountainous terrain.

Even in Nagorno-Karabakh,
we had a demonstration

of how soldiers have become
reliant, if not dependent,

on aerial coverage
for surveillance.

For almost two decades,
both sides were at a stalemate

with the Armenians
basically holding ground

in a very mountainous region
called Nagorno-Karabakh.

The Armenians had been
strongly supported

by advanced Russian artillery
and anti-aircraft systems.

What happened, though,
is the Azeris took basically

commercially modified drones,
mounted them with ordinances,

both cameras, but also explosive
devices, were able to identify

these positions and for really
next to nothing

from a financial spend
standpoint, able to neutralize

a significant amount
of advanced Russian hardware.

But the use and availability
of drones

doesn't guarantee success.

In the second battle of Susa,
the defenders relied enormously

on their drone coverage

for surveillance and warning.

And yet, when the weather
closed in, when visibility

was down, the attackers were
able to use this, exploit it,

and overcome their adversaries.

The ubiquitous nature of drones
in the battlefield

had made the defenders lazy.

Local commanders and soldiers
had become reliant on drones.

The biggest development
in the area of drones

in the last decade

is the rise
of the commercial drone.

And their main advantage is
that they are expendable

because they are so cheap.
They don't need to come back.

And so we come back to this idea
of a kamikaze system,

and indeed we call them
kamikaze drones,

because they're one way drones
that we send out,

attack a target,
and explode with it.

We've seen a real evolution
in terms

of how drones have been used.

Modified commercial drones.

And drones play
a key role in this.

Widescale Russian drone attack.

Drones were intercepted.

One of the Ukrainian responses
to the Russian invasion in 2022

has been to broadcast
an enormous number of attacks

and responses on TikTok
and social media.

This idea that we are
normalizing attacks

on individual troops,
on battlefield footage

using drones,
attacks on platforms,

means that the use of drones

is becoming normalized
not just for soldiers,

but across societies.

During the initial invasion
of Ukraine, you had billions

of dollars of Russian armaments
pouring into the country

and driving towards Kiev.

All the analysts
basically thought

that within a matter of days,
Kiev would fall.

Well, in reality, what you saw
is a handful of Ukrainian

special operations soldiers
on ATVs with modified consumer

available drones with explosive.

For a couple million dollars

worth of training and equipment
and manpower were able

to massively nullify, if not
eradicate, a billion dollar

armament or convoy
that was approaching Kiev.

The Ukrainian invasion has,
in some sense, seen the Russians

waging a traditional war
of entrenched warfare,

with the Ukrainians simply
flying drones overhead

and dropping grenades
into those trenches,

causing tremendous
amounts of damage.

On today's battlefields,
the idea that every drone

gets through is a fallacy.

In Ukraine, they've been known
to fly ten drones,

and only one gets through.

But those nine drones
that you've flown previously

each require an expensive
missile to take them down.

Your adversary is bleeding cash
as he takes down your drones

while you still have
the tenth one

to get through
and kill him.

If you flood the battle space
with maximum resources,

you can basically overrun
your enemy both economically

but also in terms
of sheer numbers.

There is a development
towards combat drones,

so drones that are able
to engage other drones

or indeed manned aircraft
on future battlefields.

We will most likely have drones
that are able to autonomously

defend themselves,
even against other drones.

As these new drones develop,

so will the strategy
for using them.

The term "drone swarm"
doesn't just describe

a lot of drones flying together.

Drone swarms means that you
have several units--

it can be dozens,
it can be hundreds,

that operate together so that

they are able to communicate
with each other and fly largely

autonomously and are
relatively intelligent.

They can carry out
different types of missions.

They can overwhelm
enemy air defenses.

Right now,
we aren't quite there yet.

We see a lot of drones
on the battlefield,

but they aren't necessarily
working together.

The reason why there's so much
interest in drone swarms

is that it gives you
new military capabilities.

You can imagine flying
minefields that basically

interdict the territory
to the enemy.

You can imagine
waves of attacks,

where the first wave of drones
is carrying out one attack,

and then another wave arrives.

And you can also overwhelm
enemy air defenses.

So drone swarms really give
you military capabilities

you didn't have before.

The idea of drone swarms is
forcing the military to adopt

new tactics to try
to defeat them.

For example,
do you go and attack

the communications center
on the drone?

Or do you try to interrupt
the communications

between the drones?

Or do you attack
the drone itself?

Is there a way that we can come
up with something that attacks

all three systems
at the same time?

I mean, it's not as if drone
swarms cannot be defeated.

They can.

Precision airstrikes to destroy
two ISIL training camps.

A battle that's been going on
for days now...

The airstrikes killed more
than 80 ISIL fighters.

Smoke rising from another hit.

In Libya, between 2020 and 2022,
the use of counter drone

technologies in an evolutionary
spiral of attrition,

measure, and countermeasure,

but swarms can't just
be intercepted.

They might be controlled.

You could use a electromagnetic
pulse, an EMP, that would

knock out the controlling
resistors and microchips

inside each of the drones and
make them fall out of the sky.

On the other hand,
you could hijack

or take control,
potentially,

of the drones
and even the swarm,

turning them against
the attacker themselves.

The current generation
of drones

are relatively vulnerable.

They can be shut down
or jammed easily.

And so right now, we're seeing
a move towards drones

that are more stealthy
or can fly higher and faster,

so they can't be shut down
and fought too easily.

Many of these susceptibilities
of drones and swarms come

because of the requirement
to have a human in the loop.

Remove that, give the drones
and the swarms autonomy,

and A truly autonomous system of
drones and swarms

may arrive sooner than we think.

Artificial intelligence...

Artificial intelligence
has enormous potential.

I am optimistic
about the future of AI.

I think that AI is going
to unlock a huge amount

of positive things.

Alongside the benefits,
AI will also bring dangers

like powerful autonomous weapons

or new ways for the few
to oppress the many.

The potential to revolutionize
many aspects of our life

in ways never before possible.

The rise of
powerful AI will be

either the best
or the worst thing

ever to happen to humanity.

Autonomous drones may be
where we're heading,

as military
intelligence embraces

artificial intelligence.

One of the things we're seeing
right now is the explosion

of artificial intelligence,
or "AI," on the battlefield.

Artificial intelligence
is gonna be a significant

force multiplier that's gonna
allow for more complex

and more advanced drone systems,
whether it's for commercial use

or for more conventional
military use

on the battlefield.

One of the problems
in modern warfare is time,

the speed at which
things are happening.

Do we have time for a human
to be in the loop

to make a decision?

Would it be more militarily
effective to have

a human outside the loop?

Where does this evolution
in drone technology end?

There is no good definition
of the difference

between autonomy
and automation.

A lot of military systems
already do many

things automatically.

That's not just the case
for drones, which may be able

to take off or hover
automatically, but this is also

the case for other military
systems such as the F-35.

As drones become
more sophisticated,

they also become
more autonomous.

And this isn't just something
we're thinking about

for the future.

The Israeli Harpy 2
is sophisticated enough

to be launched
against one target

to detect another higher
priority target in flight

and redirect itself
without human intervention

to destroy
the higher priority target.

Some people might
call these systems

"Lethal Autonomous
Weapon Systems," LAWS.

There's a big discussion
at the United Nations in Geneva

happening at the moment on LAWS
and whether they should be

banned or whether other
regulations should be found

to make sure that there aren't
being used fully autonomously

on a battlefield.

We're getting to the point
that machine learning is rapidly

replacing human decision-making
on the battlefield.

It can react much more quickly,
but there are three

major concerns regarding lethal
autonomous weapons systems.

First is technological.

Second is ethical and moral.

And third is security.

First, there are
technological issues.

Question being, do they work
as well as advertised?

Are they too vulnerable
to sabotage?

Can you even tell
if they're being sabotaged?

We actually need to make sure
that we're hardening

those systems
from a cybersecurity standpoint.

Last thing you wanna do is go
into battle with a complex

system of autonomous devices
that are supposed

to help you win the battle.

But if your adversary can
actually hack them,

disable them, or use them back
against you, that's obviously

something that we want
to try to avoid.

The second basket is ethical
and moral concerns.

Should a machine and artificial
intelligence be allowed

to decide over life and death
of another human being?

So one of the things you're
starting to see now is less

of a reliance on a human being
on the battlefield.

That means less exposure
for a son

or a father or a mother

being on the battlefield
and for them to come home.

But as with any automated
system, there's always room

for misinterpretation.

Was that an adult male
carrying a weapon

or was it actually
a farmer carrying a tool?

Was that a group
of terrorists gathering

or was it a number of people
attending a funeral?

The counterargument is,
if the drone has the ability

to take a shot right there
and kill the target,

what does it do?

Machines only learn
what we tell them,

and war is ruthless.

The last type of concern
surrounding lethal autonomous

weapon systems
is security policy.

The procurement of lethal
autonomous weapon systems

by states may lead to an arms
race where countries feel forced

to acquire and then use
autonomous weapon systems

because the opponent
does that as well.

And also, there's a danger
of flash wars, where

one autonomous system reacts
to another autonomous system,

and we may end up
in a military confrontation

that no one actually wanted.

Once we remove humans
from the fighting,

we change the moral impetus
and impediments for war.

The world will become
more violent.

We'll see more wars,
more casualties,

more civilian deaths,
and more collateral damage.

The arrival of AI
on the battlefield has only

really been discussed
for about the last five years.

Much of the current
contemporary thinking

in the West, certainly

at government
and military levels,

is there will always be
a human in or on the loop

of any weapon system.

There will always be
a human pulling the trigger.

The advancements of technology
are massive, but they're also

putting more and more power
in the hands

of less and less people.

Is that a good thing
or is that a bad thing?

It is imperative for us
to maintain a true,

uh...

kind of a moral compass and
a true north, and making sure

that we have good,
strong ethical and moral values

in our decision-making.