Slashdot Mirror
New Technology May Cut Risk of Giving Syrian Rebels Stinger Missiles
Hugh Pickens writes "PBS reports on a proposal of arming Syrian rebels with a force equalizer to make a decisive blow against Bashar al-Assad's ruling regime — an idea that has so far failed to take hold inside the Obama administration because of serious concerns about flooding a troubled region with dangerous weapons that someday might fall into the wrong hands. Could sophisticated weapons, such as anti-aircraft missile systems, be outfitted with mechanisms that would disable them if they fell into the wrong hands? According to military analyst Anthony Cordesman the U.S. could modify Stinger anti-aircraft missiles and anti-tank weapons with batteries that cease functioning in a few weeks or months or the weapons could be built to require authentication codes before they are enabled to work. "I think it would be relatively decisive," says Cordesman. ... Another idea is to install GPS-disabling devices so that Stinger missiles only worked in a designated geographic area, such as only in Syria. Such weapons, it is believed, might tip the balance in favor of the rebels in the same way that Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, provided by the United States to the Afghan Mujahedeen, helped expel the Soviet Union from Afghanistan. Cordesman stressed that this type of weapon would have to be thoroughly tested to make sure the controls work and could not be undone. 'You could not transfer these types of weapons without these types of protections. You simply have no way to know where they would end up, how they would be transferred, what would happen to them.'"
paging DVD Jon
We don't want these guys using this stuff against our own troops once our gov't betrays them (isn't that Uncle Sam's standard MO?).
If you give them an 'expiry date' then they can't be used for future incidents. Couple that with geographical lock and it should be fairly safe.
Help I am stuck in a signature factory!
"force equalizer to make a decisive blow"
The batteries in my stinger missile have gone dead! What will I do?
The poster picked an apt comparison: it's just like when the US trained and gave weapons to the Afghans against the Soviets. How's that one working out for you guys?
Everything can be hacked, given time and effort, and what this plan will do is to encourage the crazies of the world to get a better understanding of how to make even more lethal weapons. Please don't.
It seems that the US and Russia are fighting a proxy war over middle east oil by alternately propping up and destabilizing the already unstable Islamic regimes there. There is probably legitimacy to this. Without the middle east, Russia will become Europe's oil supply, and thus Europe will lean toward supporting the least stable major power and probably involve itself in another exciting world war.
A better answer here might be to heat up this cold war, as Reagan did in the 1980s and Mitt Romney suggests he may do, by talking tough to the Russians and the Europeans both, and making it clear what's on the table here. International politics is a purely Machiavellian matter because as cruel as Machiavellianism can be, it saves lives and empires from the dustbin of history.
Oh yeah, because this sort of technology worked so well in Fast and Furious when Mexican drug lords used American assault weapons against us after the batterries in the GPS tracking system meant to locate them failed. I am not very convinced this sort of technology would be very difficult to override. The comparison of the Syrian rebels to the Afghan Mujahedeen, aka Taliban, who we are still fighting now, demonstrates an unfornate grasp of history by the people behind this idea. It's still not clear if the Syrian rebels should get military aid from us period -- they are still not a cohesive group, and elements of the rebellion still engage in things like torture and attacks on civilian targets.
The military are not arms peddlers. They are consumers. This is Hillary making a sale. The "DRM" is an attempt to make it look palatable. If they could cut off all weapons sales, there wouldn't be a war in Syria, or that the very least, a much less destructive one.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
The rebels in this case are committing attrocities left and right, they're flying the flag of Al Queda, they're not our friends, and they're not the enemy of our enemy in a way that makes it valuable to help them out. We have no business being in any of these rebellions from Libya all through the middle east.
That's just insanity and screw you main stream media and leftists and democrats for not screaming bloody murder about it.
Like the previous poster I replied to, you also need to learn what you're talking about.
The MB was not the ones responsible for the attack on our ambassador.
Nor did "we put them in power" or "give them two countries".
Nor do those countries have "very substantial arsenals".
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Maybe we could add a GPS tracker that way we could track the weapons and know exactly where and how they are used...I know! We need a good name for this operation...hmm...missiles go fast, so maybe we could call it "Operation Fast and Furious!"...oh wait...
We have no business being in any of these rebellions from Libya all through the middle east.
On the contrary, we have BIG business in these 'rebellions'. Just remember, it's strictly business.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
History fail.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
history will simply repeat itself if we don't learn from it.
Sadly, the kind of people who study history are not the kind of people who wind up in power.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Look how well that worked out.
Korma: Good
I think he means more like abusing and executing POWs. Plus a little using snipers against civilians, that sort of thing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/world/middleeast/united-nations-warns-syrian-rebels-over-atrocities.html?_r=0
Can we just stop trying to solve all our problems with more weapons?
captcha: captive
The rebels in this case are committing attrocities left and right, they're flying the flag of Al Queda, they're not our friends, and they're not the enemy of our enemy in a way that makes it valuable to help them out. We have no business being in any of these rebellions from Libya all through the middle east.
That's just insanity and screw you main stream media and leftists and democrats for not screaming bloody murder about it.
ah you've seen "Charlie Wilson's War", then, i take it? remember the analyst's advice? the CIA *funded* the Taliban in a fight against Russian-funded incursions in a black-ops operation that started out with a budget of i think it was $USD5m that ended up around half a BILLION dollars.
the same analyst *also* said, "look - these guys you're funding - the Taliban - yes you're winning the 'war' but you're tearing their country apart to do it. afterwards, you're going to have to help rebuild their infrastructure, otherwise they're going to get PISSED. it's not going to cost much, but you've gotta do it".
so, this guy - charlie - takes the analyst's advice and goes off back to congress, just like he did for the other operations. the film dedicates i think it is about 1 minute to this part of the war. in this scene, the film portrays - against a background of silence devoid of "dramatising music" to get the point home - some unbelievably crass politician basically says, "well we won the war, what are you complaining about, son?"
you might want to think about that before mouthing off about things are going out there, yeah?
It was called "The System" Whenever you picked up a weapon, your DNA was checked against a database. No approval means no shooting....until you visit a Drebin (black-market gun launderer) ;-)
Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
I would argue that the people in power did study history and want to repeat it.
A shadowy jihadi group believed to have ties to al Qaeda fought alongside rebels who seized a government missile defense base in Syria on Friday
Being aided by people [possibly] linked to al Qaeda makes you al Qaeda now? What I read from this is that they're linked by a common enemy, I won't lower myself to uttering the cliché. Do you honestly believe that US politicians gave a crap about the Koreans, the Vietnamese, and the Afghans during the cold war? Every country - mine included - has accepted the help of some pretty awful people to further their agenda.
The world has to get over this idea of al Qaeda being a group of uber-terrorists with laser beams coming out of their eyes*. They're a bunch of people who have got lucky a handful of times and the thing about suicide bombers is that the good ones can't repeat their work, and the shit ones tend to fuck up, get scared, or get caught.
If you want to live your life scared of these people, fine, do so. However, keep in mind that they don't hate you because of your freedom, it's for a range of reasons - some valid (stop fucking around in their affairs), but mostly invalid.
* With apologies to Bill Bailey
Not necessarily. There are ways to protect a device even when an attacker has physical access. HOWEVER these ways involve techniques that are unacceptable to a consumer end-user, and so are never used in consumer devices.
And the Sony PS3 took over a year to get compromised.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
thing about suicide bombers is that the good ones can't repeat their work, and the shit ones tend to fuck up, get scared, or get caught.
You can't really be a good suicide bomber, you can be a good suicide bomber handler. Screw catching the suicide bombers (well before the op anyay) most of them are just uneducated and desperate people, you want the ops guys behind them.
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
And you'd be right if this was an argument where we were trying to talk sense into this isotope of Phil. But it's not an argument. It's a debate in a public forum. One guy says something, the other guy disagrees, the wisdom of the crowd votes one up and one down. The rest of us are informed about which idea is crazy and which is rooted in sanity, and the masses are better off for it.
Bullshit. Plain and utter bullshit. It started in Hama. In 1982. It restarted in Hama last year. But it originally started with Assad's father and the Muslim Brotherhood. And it started IN Syria. A lot of people who are fighting Assad now are foreigners but not the majority by any means. And the only reason there are hardline religious factions there at all is because they are the only ones who are willing to help (whatever their reasons). Everyone else for whatever reason is staying well clear. If you need help in a life and death match, you'll take it where-ever it comes from. We all would. And Assad is not innocent in terms of using hardline religious fanatic terrorists either. In partnership with Iran, he uses Hezbollah as his surrogate army to control Lebanon and to indirectly maintain Syria's war with Israel. And it's evident he is bringing them into play again.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Whether they are quote unquote allied with al Qaeda frankly isn't the point, the point is history will label the "Arab Spring" with a more appropriate label which is "Islamic Spring" as every place that has had an Islamic Spring has seen the rise of the ultra militant Islam movement and their gaining more power.
Sooner or later the west is gonna wake up and accept that Islam and the west are simply incompatible and that we should be pursuing a policy of containment just as we did with communism. As long as the "moderate Muslims" refuse to stand up to the Mullahs there is NO moderates, because by remaining silent they are actively helping the radicals become more powerful. Remember "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" and that is EXACTLY what we are seeing all over the Islamic world, the radicals are given free reign by a populace that refuses to stand up to them. Even in the west, look at how many mosques have been openly preaching hate, are the mosques empty? Do the moderates walk out when the mullahs preach "death to the west!"? Nope, they still give their money and support.
So the west doing anything to support or encourage an Islamic spring is frankly madness, because ANY government that replaces Assad will be an Islamic theocracy, with the destruction of Israel and the west as its goals.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Course neither party are innocent, or friendly to US interests. Therefore we should stay the hell out of it. I really see no problems at all with two sets of our enemies slaughtering each other. It sucks to be civilians in the middle of it but... oh well. Shit's bad in lots of places. Not our place to fix it.
Or if you do have them fall into the wrong hands, you now have a credible threat that will justify legislation to force the civilian air fleet to install expensive countermeasures. At the same time you will also have justified research projects to develop the next generations of stealth and anti-air missile technology for the military. Finally since the technology will now be well understood by potential nation-state adversaries, you have also justified research projects for the next generation of anti-air portable missile systems.
Qui bono?
No, I don't really buy in to any of this as a motivator - but these reactions do seem to be plausible consequences of letting this type of technology out in to the wild.
It's actually a combination of battery and cooling unit, and it uses Argon gas in order to enable the acquisition indicators, which are needed for the IR and UV targeting systems. Without those parts, you're back to a relatively dumb aiming mechanism. Not that I don't think that any DRM you tried wouldn't be hackable anyway.
Probably they would just get Russian SA-24 "Grinch" missiles instead, which are roughly equivalent to Stingers, with much less DRM than the proposed missiles.
The electronics-based, "DRM" type approaches aren't optimal due to increased complexity. Installing something that requires a GPS lock, time-expiring auth code, etc, reduces the chances of the weapon positively functioning in combat. Furthermore, unless sophisticated Permissive Action Links are used, then any practical solution could potentially be defeated by third-party control/firmware. If they can't keep console hardware from being modchipped without resorting to judicial means, what do you think is going to happen when these diverted weapons end up in the hands of a group with state sponsorship?
Thus, I suggest that the problem be attacked via chemistry. Attempt to develop explosives and rocket propellant that will decompose over time. Yes, this is likely to make the weapons sensitive to storage conditions (thereby altering the "expiration date"). However, a device whose warhead would "expire" in 5 years at room temperature is likely to last at least 12 months in the desert. Other "poison pills" could be added, eg. a compound that would degrade the warhead if it were frozen in an attempt to prolong viability.
Yes, this approach might result in weapons that have to be swapped out frequently, but it would also prevent MANPADS given to erstwhile allies from coming back to haunt us in 15 years. If rogue actors can swap out the propellant and warhead while retaining the appropriate weights & distribution for flight characteristics, then they've probably got state sponsorship anyway (meaning they could get weapons regardless).
Sooner or later the west is gonna wake up and accept that Islam and the west are simply incompatible and that we should be pursuing a policy of containment just as we did with communism.
You don't need to pursue a policy of containment.
The Islamists are mostly isolationsists and just want the Western world to leave them alone.
But as long as there is oil, Israel, and strategic supply routes, they'll never get their wish.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Did you live through the Cold War or just read about it? Because the big lesson was that sweeping generalizations about other systems of government and their danger to Western Civilization are complete bullshit. The Soviets were never capable of a fraction of the things we thought. Communism did not turn out to be a monolithic entity. It turned out to be organized crime running (or mostly not) countries. They weren't looking for world domination, they were looking out for #1. I don't know about you, but I promised myself when the Cold War ended to never be taken in like that again.
Characterizations of Islam as a monolithic threat to our way of life are even less tenable than the threat from Communism. Islam is a religion, not a movement or ideology. Its fractured all over the place. Iran and Saudi Arabia are moral enemies. And Saudi Arabia is by far the most aggressive state in the export of Islamist fundamentalism. The reason Islamic parties are winning elections is because they tend to be not corrupt. They are frequently the only political groups that have the first idea about taking care of citizens rather than getting rich. And I thought the whole point of American foreign policy was the furthering of democracy. Well Islamists were elected in Egypt and Algeria last year, and in Turkey a decade ago. Has one of those countries invaded Israel?
I think the biggest threat to world peace is not Islamists, its Republicans.
the radicals are given free reign by a populace that refuses to stand up to them.
Not universally true: AP report
There seems to be increasing opposition to the nutters in islamic countries, despite the severe hazard to one's health in doing so.
You don't understand American Politics nor what left and right mean in context. Slashdot is definitely left leaning.