It&#x27;s annoying that the article doesn&#x27;t actually explain <i>why</i> they are getting out of the &#x27;warbot business&#x27;.<p>&#x27;The big buys are over&#x27; does not explain why it is a good time to sell the division. If it&#x27;s true, then it would be a terrible time to sell off a division since you&#x27;d get very little money for it. Presumably Arlington Capital Partners think that it is a good business to be getting into, even with the associated chaos and confusion that&#x27;s inevitable when a company sells off a division of itself.<p>IMO it&#x27;s also unlikely to be a reputation issue either - not many people know that Roomba also sells to the military, and besides, their robots aren&#x27;t exactly killbots, they are saving the lives of their users. If anything, it should be a positive role.<p>Perhaps it is because the company wants a single focus? But even then, if a division of your business is large enough to sell and survive on its own, then you should also be able to keep it and run it separately from your house-cleaning division, with no downsides.<p>The shared research and development of both divisions must be an advantage, but the news article doesn&#x27;t even mention that selling the division would lose these advantages.<p>So tell us again, Washington Post, why is the maker of Roomba vacuums getting out of the warbot business?