The other day I was looking at this – http://www.datalex.org/ [0] – presented with a situation, it asks you questions about it, and then generates a legal opinion on your situation. It shows all its reasoning (in natural language) to arrive at that legal opinion. That's the same basic thing a human advisor does – if you get a formal legal opinion from a lawyer, it doesn't just give you the conclusion, it also explains the arguments and reasoning and considerations it used to arrive at that conclusion.

So I don't see why a strategic military advice platform couldn't do the same basic thing.

[0] Here's a working example: http://beta.datalex.org/app/?rulebase=http://austlii.communi...

It sound more like a prolog program. It takes a set of rules and facts and can infer other facts from there and show you all the steps of the process. Although it is a branch of AI it is not what one thinks of nowdays hearing the term AI. One thinks of some fancy powerful self learning black box, which can do miracles but can't explain how it does it.

I'll rephrase what I'm saying.

What if the AI lies?

What if the AI lies and civilians die because of it?

I think we're pretty far away from the kind of AI that could intentionally trick its operators to achieve a goal.

Giving a reasoned opinion is a huge unsolved problem in AI.

Yes, and I referred to that hypothetical AI as "far more sophisticated".