Tech is insufficient and unnecessary for battlefield victory.
Hickman 20 - (Peter L. Hickman, PhD from Arizona State University in International Relations and a Master of Military Operational Art and Science in Joint Warfare, Defense Legislative Fellow for a member of the House Armed Services Committee, former Requirements Manager on Air Combat Command HQ staff and the Chief of Weapons and Tactics at the 225th Air Defense Squadron; 5-12-2020, War on the Rocks, "The Future of Warfare Will Continue to Be Human," url: https://warontherocks.com/2020/05/the-future-of-warfare-will-continue-to-be-human/
The character of war continues to evolve, and there is no doubt that AI will significantly contribute to elements of that evolution for the foreseeable future. However, there are risks to an overestimation of the rate of technological change and the role of advanced tech in future victory. In spite of many exciting technological developments, history and data suggest that we are probably in an evolutionary rather than revolutionary period. Furthermore, at least since the beginning of the modern age technological overmatch has been neither necessary nor sufficient for victory, and is about as predictive as a coin toss.
In its understandable zeal for technological advantage, the military should remember enduring truths about warfare. The nuance of force employment is key to any battle, and an over-emphasis on technology risks allowing blind spots that our future adversaries will be sure to exploit. Though we should certainly strive for cutting edge technology, if that pursuit comes at the expense of force employment investments, we may be unknowingly entrusting future success to little more than a coin toss.