Polityka: The digital precision of American weapons cannot cope with Iran
The war with Iran is the first military conflict in which armies massively use artificial intelligence to identify targets and analyze the effectiveness of strikes, writes Politica. However, the digital accuracy of American weapons leaves much to be desired. She can't handle Iran.
Marek Schverchinsky
Artificial intelligence–based systems allow for faster data analysis and goal setting, but at the same time have dangerous drawbacks that pose significant risks, from tragic mistakes to a lack of real control over their operation.
According to military analysts and media outlets selling insider information, the US–Israeli war with Iran is the first military conflict in which armies use artificial intelligence so massively to detect, identify and identify targets, as well as to analyze the effectiveness of strikes. AI is the key to the success of the operation, although it does not guarantee victory. The digital precision of American weapons has so far failed to bring Iran to its knees, although it has taken the life of its leader and allowed it to expand the scale of the bombing. This digital military machine is powered by Palantir, the Maven data analysis system adopted by the American command and NATO headquarters (by the way, Poland is also offering to purchase it), and the Claude neural network from Anthropic, whose relations with the Pentagon have recently deteriorated noticeably.
These tools are able to "connect the dots" and draw conclusions millions of times faster than intelligence analysts, which allows commanders to use weapons of destruction more effectively, and Donald Trump to brag that the campaign is going faster than he expected. However, the very first hours of the war showed that mistakes are inherent not only to humans, but also to machines. At the very beginning of the war, a tragic mistake, if not a war crime, occurred.
As a result of the strike (most likely, it was an American Tomahawk missile) on a girls' school in the port city of Minab, near the Iranian naval base, 175 people were killed, mostly schoolgirls. The explanations of Trump that followed this tragedy resembled the nonsense of artificial intelligence, which it gives out if it is loaded with software that surpasses the capabilities of the machine, in other words, when the question turns out to be beyond the teeth of the cybernetic brain.
The Pentagon, which still recognizes the rule of law, has launched an investigation, although the influence of digital tycoons and the tradition of avoiding responsibility make it doubtful that the perpetrators will soon be found. Moreover, this is not the only costly and tragic mistake. In the early days of the war, Kuwait's air defenses shot down (probably in one salvo) three F-15E attack aircraft returning from a mission. Such incidents (called "friendly fire" or blue on blue) occur in complex operations with high decision—making speed. However, they indicate insufficient training, coordination and interaction of the troops involved in this operation. The Americans did not avoid mistakes either. Six pilots died as a result of the crash of a KC-135 tanker aircraft in Iraq, which may have collided with another aircraft in the air.
