Apparently, autonomous kill vehicles are on the Pentagon's plate. The pros and cons of this are, from a military perspective, many. What I noticed from the attached link to an article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, was a very informative piece that addressed important ethical issues regarding robo war but which fails to address mundane matters of command and control.

A robot army would need a much smaller command and control structure to operate. Far fewer human personnel would be required in such a military. That translates into reduced personnel costs that can be diverted to technological development. It would also vastly increase the power and reduce the numbers of those able to wage war.

Robo soldiers would always follow their programed orders without ethical or emotional considerations. Such an armed force could be used against any foe foreign or domestic without fear of dissension or mutiny within the ranks by those controlling the political decisions and the technology.

An oft repeated concern over our professional military is that only a small fraction of the populace is directly affected by the waging of war. Robo soldiers would greater reduce even that fraction.

http://thebulletin.org/us-killer-robot-policy-full-speed-ahead

and nobody came? Would it change anything? Does voting do anything other than legitimize the status quo? What if millions of people chose not to vote and let it be known it was an act of conscience rather than apathy? Does the failure of the overwhelming majority to vote delegitimize the representation of a representative democracy? What would happen?