Slashdot Mirror
While the U.S. and Iran Negotiate, War Commences In Cyberspace
An anonymous reader writes "A series of reports shows that the U.S. and Israel are engaged in a cyber war with Iran to stop it from developing nuclear weapons. Oddly enough, at the same time, the United States and others nations are trying to negotiate with Iran. As America and others start the world's first undeclared cyber-wars, dangerous precedents are being set that this type of warfare is without consequences. Such ideas could not be further from from truth."
As crazy as this may sound, talking with each other is usually the best option.
All Iran needs to do to win this cyberwar is just unplug the internet. Problem solved.
This isn't 'Nam there are rules
Is it just me or does anyone actually support the actions of our government besides the government?
"As America and others start the world's first undeclared cyber-wars, dangerous precedents are being set that this type of warfare is without consequences. Such ideas could not be further from from truth."
Oh please. The French have been doing this kind of thing since before the United States even had a name for it. It's called industrial espionage, and they're so good at it that the executives of major companies are frequently told to never use the fax machines in hotels, or the phones, or the internet (unless it is an encrypted VPN), because the French government aggressively works to steal industrial secrets from other countries and provide it to their own businesses. People think because you add the word "Internet" to a social problem, that suddenly makes it new and special... le sigh.
All the internet did was make it faster and more efficient; Which is (wait for it) what computers in general do to socioeconomic processes.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
The USA is beginning to look an awful like an awful country run by despotic psychopaths.
The complete history of the endless war over the last 60 years has conclusively proven the USA to be quite evil.
Each action is seemingly taken as a response to provocation, but it is very clear that it openly engages in hostilities well and truly before any open warfare. Being the bully and then pretending the victim is the reson d'être. Pearl harbour, Vietnam, desert storm, 911 and now this. The USA had very deliberately stuck its dick in another counties ass, claims to be the wronged when the victim retaliates, then mobilises the very next week. It is prepared for war instantly. it is premeditated and very deliberately provocative.
The school bully uses this same method. They invariably go to jail or end up in a shit job. Soon, perhaps, the world will react against this menace.
Just bought a new quantum computer, but I'm uncertain how it works.
Somebody set us up the Stuxnet!
For sale: 5,000 slightly damaged nuclear centrifuges.
As-Is for parts
Best offer. U pickup.
Contact M.Ahmadinejad.01@facebook.com
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
. The U.S. had already been at war against Japan for several years, bombing & killing their soldiers in China
What? No. They had an oil embargo, but that was a peanut response to the occupation and attempted colonization of China, which America was nominal allies with.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.
The Flying Tigers were not US Military -- they were a force of trained Pilots who volunteered their service to a non-US Military effort out of a personal interest and as such, took their lives into their own hands -- hence the Blood Chit that the Tigers had tacked to the back of their flight jackets since the US had no significant military presence in the theatre to perform rescue operations on downed pilots and any US forces present were engaged in civilian relief operations and humanitarian roles only.
So no -- the US was not at war with Japan prior to Pearl Harbor.
a scientific approach to why we keep doing this "lets fight a war every 4 years in the middle east" baloney. Some have speculated its a doctrine incepted by the former president carter, others say its driven simply by the military industrial complex, but im really curious to see if anyone can come up with a reason why we have to erect a punching bag like clockwork each presidency. both sides might bicker on finances and the budget, but both bob their heads in agreeance each time an expensive protracted excursion into war comes along without much dissonance.
The fact that the united states needlessly and violently attacks the middle east whenever it sees fit was something that Osama Bin Laden and Anwar al Awlaki touched upon. OBL actually had the nerve to insist we stop doing it as a condition upon which he would stop attacking america. It was a very reasonable request; a negotiated ceasefire.
Nothing doing so it seems. We partner up with the only nation in the region that seems to vitriolically hate iran and start coming up with the same clever chicanery we used to sabotage gas well computer control systems in soviet russia. Israel is a state sponsor of terrorism and hasnt signed any of the nuclear treaties we're shoving toward iran, but they havent made it into anyones axis of evil. Why do they get to have nuclear power and iran, a much larger state by population alone, doesnt?
Good people go to bed earlier.
>>>So no -- the US was not at war with Japan prior to Pearl Harbor.
A distinction that matters not when you're Japan and your soldiers are getting blown to bits by U.S. airplanes flown by U.S. servicemen by direction of a U.S. general answering to the U.S. president. Next I suppose you'll claim the U.S. was not at war with Iraq in the 1990s (even though we blew-up a lot of them). If you cannot understand that our victims would desire revenge after watching their comrades die, then you must have ZERO empathy.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Which isn't exactly a new idea - both stealing secrets and sabotage.
Preventing a theocracy from getting a nuclear reaction is inarguably a good thing. Additionally, put it in the context of every single nation being involved in corporate hacking. Instead of doing hacking to make money, the way China or every other nation does, it's to prevent theocracies from developing nuclear weapons.
In before "the US is the biggest theocracy of all!"
Oh, and this is a dupe of an article from a week ago.
Fixing India's and Pakistan's nuclear arsenal should be the number one priority for the international community.
Iran is a game changer the same way NK is a game changer. No real game changer.
But if India goes nuclear on Pakistan or viceversa we will find ourselves in a world of hurt.
Funny how Pakistan, a country that finances and supports terrorism is given a free pass to having a nuclear arsenal. Yeah nothing could ever go wrong eh ?
Interesting comment. Let's talk about 9/11 then, what was the role of Afghanistan and why did the US bombed them ?
The US was actively involved in supporting the nationalist Chinese government (not the communist red army, the group that fled to Taiwan and founded the government of Taiwan) in repelling the Japanese assault. Supplies and planes were ferried from UK controlled India and provided to the Nationalists. There were also US pilots, planes and bombers actively working to destroy Japanese supply lines to assist the nationalists.
Several dozen US service members were killed by the Japanese in mainland China long before Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt knew war was coming with Japan and he was damn well determined to have the US prepared when it happened and that included supporting forces actively fighting the Japanese (China, Philippines, etc). This the basis of the Conspiracy theory that Roosevelt knew in advance of the Pearl harbor attack and choose not to react so he had justification for war with Japan (which I might add is totally silly in that he wanted to be ready to fight them and that wouldn't include putting the pacific fleet on the bottom of pearl harbor, had he known they were coming he likely would have put the entire force out to sea and engaged the jap fleet directly as it still would have been seen as a treacherous sneak attack by US citizens).
I'm confused. In the first paragraph you say the USA is like 1941 Japan, yet in the second you say Japan of 1941 had plenty reason to justify what it did. So in establishing the parallel, you're saying that in the case of Stuxnet/Flame, when viewing the actions of the USA, we're in need of understanding and sympathy for it, and that the USA isn't the primary instigator, but justifiably reacting to hostile action by others (in your comparison, the parallel of 1941 USA being modern Iran). However, from the tone of your post, I sense that's the opposite of what you're trying to say.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
If by "not US Military" you mean "composed of pilots from the United States Army (USAAF), Navy (USN), and Marine Corps (USMC)" (source). And by "civilian relief operations and humanitarian roles only" you mean "trained in Burma before the American entry into World War II with the mission of defending China against Japanese forces" (same source). Then yes, the Flying Tigers were just civilian humanitarians.
While the Flying Tigers first combat was after Pearl Harbor, singling out this fact ignores a lot of American preparations for war with Japan. The Japanese attack of a military outpost on Hawaii was not the surprise that Hollywood movies make it out to be.
The American's negotiating, concurrently with initiating Internet attacks on Iran, is also not a big surprise. Actions and talk are often unrelated. Whether the attacks are ethical or warranted, and their long-term effects, is perhaps also a worthwhile discussion.
Preventing a theocracy from getting a nuclear reaction is inarguably a good thing.
This is rubbish. You are using a premise as its own justification. Israel is not in danger from an Iranian nuclear attack. Such an attack would be complete suicide for Iran. At best, Iran wants to play the game of using the Bomb as a political weapon as does everyone else. It isn't e very credible game, given the force asymmetry between them and Israel. Israelis know Iran is not a substantial threat, as some of their intelligence officials have pointed out. The question is, why are Israel and the US conducting open hostilities against Iran, including operations by US Special Forces on Iranian territory and support of terrorist attacks in Iran by Mujahedin e Khalq as well as Flame, Stuxnet, etc.?
In the past one could have speculated that they help maintain the illusion of great instability in the Middle East, which helps justify huge financial support of the US and international arms industry (where Israel is an important player, BTW) as well as high petroleum spot market prices (the traditional reason to ensure that there is always conflict somewhere vaguely near our political allies' oil fields, but not too near). Oddly, though, oil prices have fallen in the recent past, presumably due to unusually weak demand (in spite of that all-time favorite: "The Summer Driving Season"). Military spending has not diminished, however, and in the US Republican politicians are constantly trying to take military spending "off the table" when budget cutting activities heat up.
Frankly, I never am able to figure out why such things occur until well after the fact when the other shoe drops and it becomes clear who is making the big bucks out of the deal. Make no mistake, though. This is about money, one way or the other. The "Israel is in mortal danger from the crazy mullahs" scam is pure horse shit. I guess we'll have to wait for Steve Coll to quietly write a book 10 years from now with the details.
Funny how Pakistan, a country that finances and supports terrorism is given a free pass to having a nuclear arsenal
You really have to wonder about that. Since the 1980's they have supported a wide variety of Sunni extremists, often in direct military conflict with US soldiers. Iran has never done that. Why then is Pakistan considered an ally and given billions in military aid even though it has been a Saudi-financed supporter of active enemies of the US for decades? Why is Iran the big enemy even though it has done far less direct harm to the US or our interests? It is an opaque war between powerful bands of international mobsters that drape themselves with sappy pseudo-patriotic treacle, which is unfortunately swallowed whole by the news media and their vast audience.
No. There were PRIVATE CITIZENS working for the Chinese gov. helping them. Basically, they were mercs.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Not to mention that the Flying Tigers were the employees of CAMCO - an American company formed for the purpose of fighting in China, and that permission to resign from US military service to go to work for CAMCO was granted and some individuals later returned to US military service, retaining their rank etc.
CAMCO was a mercenary force effectively, approved by the US president of the time, employing US service personnel to fly aircraft sold by the US government to CAMCO, and apparently paid a bounty for each successful kill.
It couldn't have been much more transparent or artificial as an arrangement really.
"The first time I got drunk, I got married. The second time I bought a chimpanzee, after that I stayed sober" Arian Seid