The rules of traditional warfare will still exist, they will just be fought by advanced hyper intelligent AIs instead of humans. Hunter Miller humanoids like Optimus and drones like Anduril will replace humans in war.
War will be the same, but the rich are preparing to unleash a "new arsenal of democracy" against us in an AI takeover. We must be prepared.
> Hunter Miller humanoids like Optimus and drones like Anduril will replace humans in war.
You do not understand how war is fought if you sincerely believe this. Battles aren't won with price tags and marketing videos, they're won with strategic planning and tactical effect. The reason why the US is such a powerful military is not because we field so much materiel, but because each materiel is so effective. Many standoff-range weapons are automated and precise within feet or even inches of the target; failure rates are lower than 98% in most cases. These are weapons that won't get replaced by drones, and it's why Anduril also produces cruise-missiles and glide bombs in recognition that their drones aren't enough.
Serious analysts aren't taking drones seriously, it's a consensus among everyone that isn't Elon Musk. Drones in Ukraine are used in extreme short-range combat (often less than 5km in range from each other), and often require expending several units before landing a good hit. These are improvised munitions of last resort, not a serious replacement for antitank guided weaponry. It's a fallacy on the level of comparing an IED to a shaped-charge landmine.
> but the rich are preparing to unleash a "new arsenal of democracy" against us in an AI takeover
The rich have already taken over with the IMF. You don't need AI to rule the world if you can get them addicted to a dollar standard and then make them indebted to your infinite private capital. China does it, Russia does it... the playbook hasn't changed. Even if you make a super-AI as powerful as a nuke, you suffer from the same problem that capitalism is a more devastating weapon.
>These are weapons that won't get replaced by drones
Those weapons are drones. They're just rockets instead of quadcopters. They're also several orders of magnitude more expensive, but they really could get driven by the same off-the-shelf kind of technology if someone bothered to make it.
And they will get replaced. Location based targeting is in many cases less interesting than targeting something which can move and could be recognized by the weapon in flight. Load up a profile of a tank, a license place, images of a person, etc. to be recognized and targeted independently in flight.
>Battles aren't won with price tags and marketing videos, they're won with strategic planning and tactical effect.
Big wars tend to get won by resources more than tactics. Japan and Germany couldn't keep up with US industrial output. Germany couldn't keep up with USSR manpower.
Replacing soldiers with drones means it's more of a contest of output than strategy.
I am not talking about drones like DJI quadcopters with grenades duct taped to them or even large fixed wing aircraft, I am talking about small personal humanoid drones.
Civilization is going through a birth rate collapse. The labor shortage will become more endemic in the coming years, first in lower skill and wage jobs, and then everywhere else.
Humanoid robots change the economics of war. No longer does the military or the police need humans. Morale will no longer be an issue. The infantry will become materiel.
War will be the same, but the rich are preparing to unleash a "new arsenal of democracy" against us in an AI takeover. We must be prepared.