Monday, March 6, 2017

Do wars drive technological advancement?


http://www.livescience.com/41321-military-war-technologies.html

The article I found lists forms of technology that have transformed warfare. On that list were drones, submarines, missiles, aircrafts, space weapons, and nuclear bombs. I believe that modern technology can be used as a weapon. Today, technology is becoming more precise and lethal. The missiles, which can strike with pinpoint precision, are now given much importance. The war fare equipment’s built today are so advanced that one cannot even imagine the way wars will be fought in the future, which can also be a very scary thought. Military technology is the application of technology for use in warfare. ... Weapons engineering is the design, development, testing and lifecycle management of military weapons and systems. I believe that as new weapons enter the battle, the battlefield will continue to expand.  

2 comments:

  1. I would agree with wars advancing technology. The normal types of explosive during WW2 were gunpowder and TNT. If the US wanted to drop a bomb of equivalent energy as the Little boy bomb dropped on Hiroshima a 30 million pound TNT bomb would be needed while the Little Boy was just under 10 thousand pounds. The US wanted a small "capable of being carried in a bomber" weapon. We advance our technology in war in order to make the most destruction as cheap as possible with the most destruction as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I feel that it is amazing how much we have progressed in technology since World War 1. However, I also feel that it is extremely dangerous. Today, we use our technological abilities to threaten other countries whenever they are overstepping their boundaries and they do the same for us. If there was a war today, there would only be nukes and nuclear bombs. It is scary to think that through one explosion a whole society could be wiped out. As technology is helping us significantly, I believe it is important for us to remember the negative impact it could have.

    ReplyDelete