Slashdot Mirror

This is old news, folks. The Chinese government has always actively used the internet defensively (censoship) and offensively (information warfare). For example:

The Internet and State Control in Authoritarian Regimes: China, Cuba, and the Counterrevolution

http://www.ceip.org/files/publications/HTMLBriefs- WP/WP_Number_21_July_2001/20009535v01.html

"Finally, the Chinese government is developing a strategy for information warfare that will allow it to more effectively project its power on an international scale. Recent writings by Chinese military specialists show that China is increasingly focusing on "asymmetric warfare" options, including guerrilla war and cyber attacks against data networks.57 In recent years, U.S. newspapers have reported suspected Chinese hacker attacks on U.S. weapons labs, and military experts believe that China is willing to reduce its standing army while increasing its reliance on a "multitude of information engineers and citizens with laptops instead of just soldiers."58 Although Chinese hacker attacks on U.S. web sites in May 2001 did not demonstrate the offensive capacity Chinese military analysts have envisioned, the continuing study and development of information warfare can be seen as a top-priority proactive measure in line with the country's goal of modernizing and transforming its military strategy."

The paper also mentions that China has plans or is already developing an internal network (not connected to any outside networks) to handle all of its security/military information. What is the US waiting for?

No, you're not listening. We don't have enough firepower to cover any more than a fraction of the surface area. There's nowhere near enough weapons to wipe out all life on Earth.

I heard you and you are WRONG. Not to be rude or anything, but I suggest you take a modern history class.

You complained that the Russian equipment always outnumbered ours. That's not as true as it was made out to be, and there equipment ended up being non-comparable to our own.

We always knew our equipment was better. That was no surprise. What did come as a surprise was that they didn't have as much of their less advanced as we thought they did. Even so, they still had to spend gobs of money to attempt to keep up with us. That still doesn't change my basic premise.

Uneducated is not the same as no higher education.

It depends on whether you think a high school diploma makes you educated or not. Given the value of a high school education these days, one could argue either way.

Experience is not the same as education. That is why people separate the two.

They would, if it weren't for one minor issue: Where do they get the Plutonium from? The method for generating sufficient plutonium is a nuclear reactor. In case you haven't noticed, nuclear reactors are carefully controlled by the UN. All nuclear materials must be accounted for or there will be hell to pay.

Iran has had the materials to build a nuclear weapon for some time. Tell me, why haven't they.

A spy is just as much of weapon as a nuclear bomb.

No, a spy is not capable of killing everyone within a 50 mile radius and making the land uninhabitable for the foreseeable future.

Even so, the knowledge of French gives you no specific ability to spy. My 50 year old aunt knows French. She has no more ability to spy than I have without knowing French. In fact, I would say I would make the better spy.

However, my father-in-law who happens to be a nuclear engineer certainly would have some knowledge that could be used to make a weapon.

Me: I don't particularly care about saving lives in China, Cuba, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Libya, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Sudan, and Syria. However, I do care if they incease their ability to make nuclear weapons.
You: Aren't you selfish?

No, my reasoning is NOT selfish. THEY do not need to know ANY knowledge that COULD be used to create these weapons. These countries could EASILY use the knowledge gained from our educational programs to create weapons for use against ALL OTHER COUNTRIES.

In fact, it has been PROVEN that this HAS occurred in the past. China is the prime example.

It requires a significant industrial infrastructure to process Uranium and Plutonium.

Then I guess you couldn't create a bomb all by yourself.

Note that pretty much every country that gains a sufficient industrial base has nuclear weapons. India is a perfect example of a country that recently gained such a base. Nuclear weapons followed not long after that, despite efforts to keep them from obtaining such weapons.

Most of Europe lacks nuclear weapons despite having such an industrial base.

A more detailed look at the Patriot missle system is very telling of the current status, viability and danger of fully automated weaponry.
http://www.raytheon.com/products/static/node3832.h tml
http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/resources/p atriot.htm
Please search further results.
Personally I don't think man should be trusted with a tool more devastating than a stick, but that's just me....

>Do you want to keep sending these guys money and stuff?

Sanctions on Iraq.

Sanctions on N Korea.

Details of Fuel Oil program for NK.

In other words, they aren't getting "tons of free stuff" and NK developed, broke its reactors seals, etc under the "cowboy diplomacy" of the Bush admnistration, not Clinton. There are solutions to problems and if you can keep UN inspectors in and nukes out by bribing someone with fuel oil than so be it. We are witnessing the "tough guy" alternative. Are you ready to be drafted to fight a couple more wars for "cowboy diplomacy?"

They will be touted as the perfect solution to a problem with heretofore only imperfect solutions (until, say, a passenger aircraft is accidentally shot down of course).

The biggest differences between this and previous missile defense systems are cost and multiple-use capability. You're not talking about using multi-million dollar missiles to shoot down incoming missiles, so you don't need to be so selective about when firing the thing off. And if you miss, you can try again ... and again.

As a defensive tool, these are, quite honestly, awesome. As an accident-waiting-to-happen in the hands of an overly-enthusiastic operator, they are, well, a little bit scary I guess.

If these rogues ever got in front of a
grand jury, they would be wearing stripes:

BushCo Statements About WMD

Cheers,
W00t

Read the Bushistas Statements About Weapons Of Mass Deception

Thank you and have a ncie weekend,
W00t

II. The two sides will move toward full normalization of political and economic relations.

1) Within three months of the date of this Document, both sides will reduce barriers to trade and investment, including restrictions on telecommunications services and financial transactions.

2) Each side will open a liaison office in the other's capital following resolution of consular and other technical issues through expert level discussions.

3) As progress is made on issues of concern to each side, the U.S. and DPRK will upgrade bilateral relations to the Ambassadorial level.

III. Both sides will work together for peace and security on a nuclear-free Korean peninsula.

1) The U.S. will provide formal assurances to the DPRK, against the threat or use of nuclear weapons by the U.S.

• The US could have a good go, but im sorry the sum of every other Nation out there DOES outweigh the US...

• you could destroy a heck of alot, but theres alot of nukes in other countries also,

• and far bigger armies.

• You may have the hi-tech, but it will only last so long.

• So Yes, we do have nukes/ICMBs,

• yes we do have spies in all areas of the world

• although the only area to really count is the US so we at least can concentrate on there,

• hell the US was so shocked that someone would attack it on its home turf the aircraft sent up at 9/11 were not even armed.

Simply because they got nukes and they are pointed at Los Angeles. I doubt US will intervine if say Chinese government decided to invade Taiwan tomorrow. There is too much at stake. Saddam is small fish, China is a superpower. There lies the difference.

Summary:
In this paper the authors illustrate how two authoritarian regimes, China and Cuba, are maintaining control over the Internet's political impact through different combinations of reactive and proactive strategies. These cases illustrate that, contrary to assumptions, different types of authoritarian regimes may be able to control and profit from the Internet. Examining the experiences of these two countries may help to shed light on other authoritarian regimes' strategies for Internet development, as well as help to develop generalizable conclusions about the impact of the Internet on authoritarian rule.

The whole document is here

Conservatives will not be able to govern America over the long term if they fail to offer a more elevated vision of America's international role.

What should that role be? Benevolent global hegemony. Having defeated the "evil empire," the United States enjoys strategic and ideological predominance. The first objective of U.S. foreign policy should be to preserve and enhance that predominance by strengthening America's security, supporting its friends, advancing its interests, and standing up for its principles around the world.

[The Rebel Alliance's] victory over the Empire doesn't liberate the galaxy--it turns the galaxy into Somalia writ large: dominated by local warlords who are answerable to no one.

American hegemony is the only reliable defense against a breakdown of peace and international order. The appropriate goal of American foreign policy, therefore, is to preserve that hegemony as far into the future as possible. To achieve this goal, the United States needs a neo-Reaganite foreign policy of military supremacy and moral confidence.

Hmm... that old chestnut. Missile defense was supposed to take care of asteroids AND missiles, as mentioned in this and this article. Somewhere along the line, the populist (and governmental - often one and the same, but that's another article) opinion was that the system would point in more than out. That's where the problem lies.

Now big tents on the other hand...

Read it here China's Dot-Communism

and read about the restriction of innovation on the internet here: The Internet Under Seige by Lawrence Lessig

tcd004

Actually it's estimated that Israel has about 200 nukes: http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/resources/i srael.htm

According to articles here, here and here, it doesn't sound like the Chinese will be knocking on our door (with nuclear warheads or troops) any time soon. Given the current Chinese disputes with Russia, Japan, Malaysia and the Philippines (over islands) as well as mounting tensions with Taiwan, China is in no mood (or ability) to go to war. There will be plently of posturing, but this dispute is purely politics.

China has a lot to sort out internally before they are any sort of major military threat. That doesn't mean that there couldn't be regional conflicts that escalate (after all, that is how WW I got started), it only means that conflict between our two nations is unlikely. Do a little reading at Janes or other sites before rattling sabres. China has a long history of spying and tough talk (like the USSR, USA, et. al.), but they currently pose little threat.

If you want something to really worry about, start paying more attention to the escalation in the Middle East.

www.spaceimaging.com (the first ones to sell commercial high-res imagery, very cool site with sat photo dowonloads)

A report by the Carnegie Endownment For Internatinal Peace
on the effects of commercial High-res.
Secrets for Sale

www.spaceimaging.com (the first ones to sell commercial high-res imagery, very cool site with sat photo dowonloads)

A report by the Carnegie Endownment For Internatinal Peace
on the effects of commercial High-res.
Secrets for Sale

tcd004 Here's my Microsoft Parody, where's yours.