Conversely removing the threat to human life may reduce the probability of escalation and make a response more measured. For example two men break through a se

Conversely removing the threat to human life may reduce the probability of escalation and make a response more measured. For example two men break through a security fence. A robotic patrol would seem to be much less likely to respond with deadly force than a human patrol would in that situation. If the men were refugees or wounded soilders looking for medical care the more measured response of the robotic patrol may prevent a death and actually de-escalate conflict. Also assume that the two men were hostile and fired on the patrol. The destruction of the mech is much less likely to provoke a political and civilian response than the death of a human and may lead to a more measured response. My bigger concern is that a fully mechanized force may decrease the apparent cost of oppressing a civilian population.