Slashdot Mirror
US Military Uses Spam, Internet Explorer
chundo writes "CNN reports that the United States government has been secretly encouraging the defection of senior Iraqi officials via email. Iraq is responding by shutting down some of their internet gateways to prevent these emails from getting through, forcing the US to find alternate means to deliver the message. Maybe they should have enlisted this guy - emails from him keep showing up in my inbox no matter what I do." This story about the growing military network bandwidth crunch shows the U.S. military trying hard to get every soldier online, all the time.
RE: Pictures of Alah! Download now!
RE: Make money selling burkas from your home.
RE: Gain weight now!
So with all the spam, now the Iraqui leaders get a chance to help all those Nigerians get money out of the country. I bet they also have 12 inch penises, have overcome hairloss, and have lost 10 pounds just this past week. What are we trying to do...create a race of wealthy, well hung, rich guys to fight against?
I don't know about your email servers, but don't you go under the assumption that your email is being read by your ISP, or your boss?
How does the US expect their defectors to reply to the offers? They can't very well send them by email for fear of being nabbed. Maybe they tell them to draw a big 'V' in the ground so the spy satellites can see that they want to vacate Iraq?
Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
Mr. IRAQI PERSON,
You MAY be SURPRISED to receive this, but THE OFFICE GIRL said that you were a most TRUSTWORTHY PERSON. I beg you Forgive me for contacting you without prior contacting your office, but I am looking for a WORTHY business PARTNER to donate the sum of USD 124.5 million dollars. I am the son of the FORMER president of the U.S.A GEORGE BUSH who initiated a MILITARY CAMPAIGN in 1991. During this campaign, we discovered HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of DOLLARS stolen from THE REBELS. OUR economy is IN TROUBLE and we MUST get this MONEY overseas before the people DISCOVER it. We will gladly be willing to pay you the SUM of 26 MILLION DOLLARS for ASSISTING US. I pray to GOD that you will HELP US get this MONEY out of the country. ALL we need FROM you is your PASSPORT and SIGNATURE which you can fax to me or my colleauges to initiate the transfer of the MILLIONS of dollars. I remain your most humble SERVANT, and PRAY that you will be OUR SAVIOR.
SINCERELY,
MR. PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
Iraq has no diplomatic relations with Nigeria.
Try sharing 256K over an encrypted up and down link through microwave radios to satellite throughout your 100+ user network. Don't forget the Marine Corps only uses NT 4.0 servers and Internet Explorer. Then watch some idiots who claim they NEED their LAN drops install AIM and Kazaa and forward a money making scheme from "Bill Gates" to your whole network and kick your Exchange server's ass in the process.
Then fantasize about your Linux boxes at home as you try to salvage some idiot officer's "important files" from his Outlook virus infested brand new Dell laptop that he didn't deserve and no one loaded Norton on since he took it home every night and "was too busy" to let some enlisted IT guy fix w/ our standard program load.
Can you tell I'm not looking forward to deploying?
This guy is way out there
But, if the US military is sending public key encryption to Iraqis, doesn't that violate the US Dept of Commerce's commercial encryption export laws?
Tuus crepidae innexilis sunt.
To: centralcommand@us.mil
From: WhiskeyBravo49@iraq.us.mil
Subject: Request Instructions
Priority: High^H^H^H^HCritic^H^H^H^H^HANSWER ME NOW DAMNIT!
We're being shot at. Please advise. Thanks.
Lt. James Parker, USAF
555-555-5555 x555 (M-F 8a-5pm)
Of course, Central Command probably just has an autoreply set up.
Thank you for contacting Central Command. We are experiencing a higher than normal email volume due to the war in Iraq. Please be patient while we get to your email in the order that it was received. Your comments and questions are important to use, and thank you for risking your life for the USA.
Here are a number of things that had at first confused me.
1) Ranking senators in the intelligence committees saying they had not been shown any further evidence that made them conclude that Iraq had WMD.
2) The Administration's insistance that the group it shares the information with from the UN be *larger* than the current group of inspectors. Larger? WTF? If you want something to be secret you tell as few people as possible. Even the IAEA has mentioned that it would be helpful to them if the US has such informatin that they turn it over to the UN.
3) Ok, so assuming that the Administration knows that their allegations are false, then what? Why pick on Saddam now? His army is far weaker, though better entrenched, than it was in 1991, and the real threats to US forces would likely be post-Saddam ethnic violence.
So why Iraq and why now?
15 of the 9-11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, and I believe that the Administration feels that probing too closely into any aspect of the Saudi nation or government fundamentally undermines US capability in the Middle East. First we have the fact that they are THE MAJOR source of foreign oil (not a big deal, we could always get it from Russia, or Iraq...), but the bigger issue is not about oil.
We are immensely dependent on two nations in the Middle East for basing rights-- Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
I suspect that the idea is that we can position US bases in a Post Saddam Iraq because, just as we are doing in Afghanistan today, we will continue to create a divisive system which needs some oversight by US troups.
But I think the focus on Iraq is that a
"liberated" (occupied) Iraq would make Saudi Arabia dispensible, and that we would no longer have to pull our punches regarding that regime-- expect it to replace Iraq in Bush's Axis of evil.
In the end, I grudgingly supported operations in Afghanistan because I felt that Al Qaeda was a direct result of US aid to and recruitment for the rebels against the Soviets. But I am deeply concerned that if the US continues to sponsor the various warlords, that the rule of law will not return to Afghanistan, and it will be a place that will end up being the further breeding ground of terrorism. If we turn the middle east into our playground for witch-hunts, we will be encouraging the very thing we claim to be fighting, just as we did in Vietnam.
I will disagree with you though-- the North Korea situation is complicated--
1) North Korea we think was probably restarting their nuclear program in 2000, but only admitted to it more recently. On the other hand, the 1994 framework was supposed to give North Korea fully normalized relations with the US and membership in the world bank. These parts were never implimented, so one could argue that we broke it first (what the hawks think in North Korea, I would bet).
2) The reactor was restarted when we suspended fuel shipment-- this gave them the excuse to restart the reactor because they do need the electricity. When the IAEA complained that the refusal to allow inspectors was a violation of the Nonproliveration Treaty, North Korea withdrew from the treaty.
The unfortunate likely result is that North Korea will go nuclear-- we cannot negotiate with then for fear of encouraging nations, maybe including Iran, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia from starting nuclear programs. And failure to respond diplomatically, will result in North Korea going nuclear. Does this scare me? No-- North Korea has been a very repressive regime, but their policy towards the US has been one of deterrence.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP