Work automation even if linked to war automation is a slightly different beast with IMVHO not much a tech issue but a human one, while war automation is also a tech issue alone: take for instance construction tools like elevators, excavators, hammers, drills, augers, ... yes they deeply cut the number of needed workers per construction site and hyper-slash construction time itself, BUT workers now have far less fatigue than before, so work automation is double edged, on one side help humans, on another might be weaponized against humans. The issue here is much in social terms: we are trained by most dictatorships that we live to work, with a purpose, we have to struggle to do something for a far future etc the refrain is the same from Chinese workers to Franklin idea of a cannon in every street to force people out of the bed earlier in the morning. That's make automation an issue because less work is needed so less workers are needed. However if we change mindset, we work to live, not the opposite and our target is arriving at a sufficiently automated point that we can just work for our own pleasure because work to live will not be needed anymore, than automation is not an issue: we work less, in a society not based on infinite growth, and live more still having all the products we need and like.

War automation is another game: war is a classic way cohort of humans act against other cohort to gain advantages, or just to survive, so war MUST be a human thing in the social sense, have war automated that means some parts of the society can ignore to a certain extent the war and so they might be more interesting in approving wars not just to survive but for mere advantage gain, witch is a very bad idea if we want evolve. If a war touch a whole society than the whole society think much before accepting war, is not they just can do like stadium fan inciting a team, sitting in comfy setups because war is just a show. In that case when things go bad no one can revolt, because automation makes those few who control and know it fully armed and the rest of the society powerless.

That's why for instance, as a pacifist, I do like the classic Swiss model: mandatory conscription 1 month per year for 18-28 years old with guerrilla training an weapons/ammo at home. That's the classic si vis pacem para bellum, or the perfect balance of power: a country organized like that is very protected against invasions but not much good at invading others, a small permanent army hold the big war gear and represent the State, while all Citizens are mostly armed and trained so if the State derail try to pushing from Democracy to dictatorship Citizens know very well and have all the means to ensure such a bad bloodbath for all party that no one want to try moving toward ad dictatorship. Giving weapons ONLY after proper training and evaluation ensure social safety. On contrary I fear society where very few control basic tech we need, especially if those few are private non public bodies. Just imaging what can happen in a modern city in case of a real unrest against an oppressive move:

- closing the city is normally easy, people inside in modern world have less and less private transport means and those are more and more connected and controllable by the OEM, not by the formal owner, so basically locking few roads suffice to lock down many many many humans;

- since water is pushed with few centralized networks typically coming from the outside of the city, so electricity etc is easy to disrupt any of those service;

- it's also easy to leave people starving since in a city all eat but essentially there is no food production, just a small transformation.

Essentially a prison. While in a Swiss like scenario, in a more spread country it's impossible to lock down peoples, they know how to revolt, they can do so, they have infra explicitly built for guerrilla (against exterior invaders, but that does not change much the game) and they are trained in their own territory.

Those are the main difference I see:

- automation is good as long as the society is in control, witch means for instance that research is public so anyone can know how to build any tool of use, there is no private oligarchy/monopoly on infra etc;

- automation is extremely dangerous if only few have&know it.

Witch can be summarized: if we are all almost on-par we are cooperative friend and casual litigates does not harm much the society, we there is a significant imbalance in power than we are doomed to end up really badly.