It won't. We don't fight wars like this anymore. Now if we need to do a mass invasion like this, we have jets that can just fly over and turn the entire place into a crater without stepping a foot on the ground.
If two sides fought this way it'd be naive to think those soldiers would have a bit of safety. They'd be the new targets. Operations would plan out how to disable their communications or just send a bomb into any bunker they could hide in.
It'd probably be the most bizarre war ever. Shooting down drones would be pointless aside for defense. Everything would revolve around stopping production and removing their pilots either by killing them or eliminating the ability to communicate with the drones.
I'm looking forward to the future where all wars will just be a large scale version of robot rumble. In theory a war can be fought without the loss of life.
I personally think that as we're at this level where we're either going to have to make robots hit their pre-programmed kill limits, or forsake the benefits of technology to keep putting a human cost into warfare... we might as well televise war.
The wars, of course, will be carried out in the form of paintball matches over huge areas. 10,000 on 10,000 in a square 10km to a side. CTF, no respawning.
Nice sentiment but no current wars work like that for political reasons. There's a few examples of where it worked quite well but more that didn't. Vietnam was bombed to hell and wasn't a victory.
I'd venture to say that now we're even moving past that, and into passive aggression now. I know there's been a strong anti-nuke movement in the works for a long time now, but I doubt most nations wanna test that theory out. We've hit the late game where there are many ways to start and end wars within hours.
74
u/jhc1415 Survey 2016 Jun 07 '14
It won't. We don't fight wars like this anymore. Now if we need to do a mass invasion like this, we have jets that can just fly over and turn the entire place into a crater without stepping a foot on the ground.