If the point was to uncover the entire truth of the incident it would have been released as is without any editing. Your news footage analogy doesn't apply because they have a defined time span in which to present as much news as possible within that time span. The "Collateral Murder" video was edited to purposely show only those events that supported a certain viewpoint and party line. In fact the release of the all the data has been stage managed to make sure certain viewpoints are supported while any information that might contradict their position was purposely excluded or released at a later date. I also still don't know why Wikileaks needed millions of dollars just to post the data online. Sites like Wikileaks are marketed as a place where people can upload data anonymously. Wikileaks should have posted the information the same way they obtained it but instead they chose to politicize the release. Assange even tried to dictate conditions to the news services like he owned the data. My argument is not about the contents of the video or the war but I have my own viewpoint just like anyone else. What I am arguing against is the way the information was released to the general public.
Maybe reporters need to stop embedding themselves in groups known for violence. The reporters were in a group of people that included some armed people. They voluntarily put themselves in harms way. Carrying a telephoto lens that resembles a possible RPG is also just asking for trouble. How do you determine civilians from insurgents in the middle east? They wear no uniforms and regularly launch their attacks hiding behind civilians for cover. The children that were in the van were not visible to the Apache pilots and they were collected and immediately taking to US medical facilities to treat their injuries. The plain fact is that the "resistance" groups are responsible for more civilian deaths because they use human shields and really don't give a shit when non-combatants get killed. They use civilian deaths to justify their actions and propaganda. The most egregious examples are Hamas and Hezbollah because they use schools, hospitals, and Mosques to stage and launch their attacks from. Every militant group in the middle east does the same thing and the fanatic anti-war groups never acknowledge this fact.
The full unedited video was released after the edited one. They practically ran a global advertising campaign to draw attention to the edited version. The edited version was used to support a certain view point about the specific incident and the war in general. People who have already made up their mind on a subject will use the first piece of evidence they find to justify their opinion and ignore anything that might contradict their beliefs. Also, ask yourself why they created an edited version in the first place if the truth was self evident in the video?
After the people released the edited and highly produced "Collateral Murder" version of that particular incident they ruined their credibility as people just trying to get the "truth" out. Government spin is attacked and labeled as criminal but apparently it's OK if you are supporting your own biased viewpoint. Unfortunately people do get killed in wars and everything you mentioned was true. There were ground troops 3 blocks away engaged with armed militants at the time. The copter was doing forward reconnaissance in support of those ground troops. There was even audio of the helicopter pilots getting permission to fire from their commanders who were in turn being advised by JAG lawyers assigned to the group.
"Yeah, the UN is really meant to keep member states from attacking one another. I guess it's been pretty good at that." I really hope you are joking with this statement.
Didn't say it was manned. I said they were working on a scaled up manned version. Working out the kinks out on the unmanned version before creating a manned version makes a lot of sense.
It is re-usable and they are working on a manned version. A lot of the tech involved in it's creation was gathered from the original shuttle program. That program went on for over 20 years so it provides a great deal of information for building future vehicles. One interesting mission for this type of craft would be attacking another countries satellites. They don't even need missiles they can just alter it's orbit. The really funny thing is how everyone has been moaning about the US giving up on their space programs.
These guys underestimated the resources of the various law enforcement agencies ability to find them and vastly over estimated their own abilities to remain hidden.
We have transitioned to a digital age and a lot of our existing laws were not written for this type of environment. New laws are being formulated, old laws are being modified or held inapplicable but it doesn't happen overnight. One of the most glaring examples is the law against receiving stolen property. If I steal a car and give it to you and you take it knowing I stole it you have broken the law. If I illegaly download data from a computer system and give it to you is that still breaking the law? If it is against the law would a site like Wiki leaks be guilty of accepting stolen property? If I gave a car to someone it would have to be registered and licensed which usually requires some proof of prior ownership or transfer of ownership documentation to happen. Would a site like Wiki leaks need to obtain proof that the information given to them was not stolen by requiring some type of notarized release? I don't know the answer and it seems people are not against criminalizing illegal data theft if they approve of the content and are for criminalizing the act if they have a problem with the content. If it is government data that's good but if someone hacks into a corporate banking system and releases my personal banking information it is bad. You can't have it both ways.
You can also find many references declaring that Egypt won the war. It's actually taught in Egyptian schoolbooks that Egypt won that war and regained the Sinai through military victory when in actuality they had to negotiate to get the Sinai and their POWs returned. And I am sure there were instances where Israeli and Arab forces killed POWs. It's hard to stop killing people who were trying to kill you and your friends a few minutes ago. The only difference is in the Arab world it is pretty much official state policy to kill any Israeli POW after a suitable amount of torture if you have the time. They only alter this doctrine if they want to use the Israeli for ransom demands. This policy also applies to US or NATO soldiers as well.
Most statistics in these wars vary depend on who is telling the story but one of the most inclusive archives on the subject can be found in the "The Encyclopedia of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Political, Social, and..." book. It chronicles the Israeli-Arab conflicts going back to 1940's with input from all sides involved. Each statement made is referenced and the validity of the reference is cross checked when possible. The US comes off pretty bad in it's behavior during this time period because they were more afraid of upsetting the Russians than they were about the holocaust the Arabs were attempting to wage against the Jews with Russia's help. In fact the US only agreed to re-supply Israel after Golda Meir let the code phrase "Temple" be used and over heard on purpose by those listening in which was the command to arm it's Jericho missiles and F-4 mounted nuclear warheads. Only then did the US agree to the re-supply operation. That's why Israel maintains a very good domestic weapons program so they don't have to rely on anyone for help. About the only thing they don't produce for themselves are aircraft which they purchase from the US. Their tanks, drones, infantry weapons, and missile systems are all domestic made and they buy US weapons to bolster their abilities with the aid package they receive each year which has the added benefit of letting the US weapon manufactures make money.
Israel launched the 6 day war because it faced 5 Arab countries massing troops and equipment on their borders. Nasser removed the UN forces, closed the Suez canal to Israeli shipping, and was issuing daily grandiose threats about Arab victory. Too bad they got the shit kicked out of them in just a few days. When the Arabs tried again in 1973 with full support from the USSR they also got their assess handed to them. They had Russian SAMS, wire guided tank missiles, and integrated infrared targeting systems in their tanks and still lost. The US resupplied Israel after the issue was no longer on doubt. The US supplied no other support to Israel. The only thing the US did was help talk Israel out of marching into Damascus and Cairo to finish the job once and for all since both Syria and Egypt were at Israel's mercy due to the losses they had already suffered.
The Israelis surrounded and captured over 8000 Egyptian troops in the Sinai but provided them with food and water until the 2 governments could come to an agreement. If the roles had been reversed there would not have been a single Israeli left alive to walk out of that desert.
And I know someone will bring up the famous "Liberty atrocity" but it was just an example of how you shouldn't sail into an active war zone with a ship equipped with intelligence gathering capabilities. Especially a war zone were one side was literally fighting for it's very existence. The incompetent US military and intelligence agencies at the time were to blame for this foolish incident. After all these were the same geniuses who ran the Vietnam war. Today an incident like this would be called "friendly fire".
Rommel was indeed a honorable and military professional. All the documentaries and other sources of data seem to support this. His biography revealed a man devoted to protecting his country. He also had no direct association with those who committed war crimes. According to his biography he found out about the concentration camps and that led him to talk with some people about the plan to kill Hitler. He did not come out and support the assassination but did meet with some of the conspirators and that ultimately caused his downfall. And he did lose France. It was in his operational area and he was at home when the invasion started because he believed the weather would prevent any large scale invasion. He also fell for Montgomery's use of regular vehicles to create dust clouds that created the illusion that they were tanks which resulted in him retreating faster.
Rommel was "punished" because he was accused of participating in the attempt to assassinate Hitler. Most historical records raise serious doubt about his involvement but back then just being accused was an automatic death sentence. He was lucky to be given a choice between being executed and committing suicide and he accepted suicide to safe guard his family. A public executoin would have been bad press in Germany so the government promised not to harm his family if he took the suicide choice which could be blamed on natural causes or even battle injuries. As far as being one of the best generals on either side goes he retreated from Africa in defeat and failed to stop the invasion of France. He was a good officer but calling him the best is a stretch.
People tend to confuse "anonymity" with "privacy". The US government and anyone else willing to invest the time has had the ability to gather data about an individual way before the Internet was even born. It just took longer to compile the information. Some readily accessible sources of information includes public utility bills, drivers license's, property titles, vehicle titles, credit history, marriage licenses, school registrations information at all levels, and of course tax related information. None of these sources require cameras or the Internet.
It is totally possible for someone to reduce their online footprint and preserve some privacy if they want to but most don't take the time to do so. People who post their life stories on Facebook or similar sites are voluntarily giving away information about themselves but then turn around and complain about their "privacy" being violated.
Radiation signatures and other weapon characteristics such as estimated yield can often be traced to the point of origin. It might take some time though. The countries currently seeking atomic weapons would be committing suicide if they used them. Even if they succeeded in detonating one device in a large US city the retaliatory strike ability would not be impaired. One submarine armed with nuclear missile carrying has enough fire power to level the majority of the middle east. One reason the US and Russia built so many nuclear bombs was to guarantee that no matter how bad the original attack was it would be impossible to prevent retaliation. If Iran wants a nuclear bomb who cares? If they are stupid enough to use it against Isreal the Israeli's also have redundant retaliatory strike capability. I wouldn't be surprised if Isreal didn't have the coordinates of every middle east country already hard coded into their missile systems. Isreal is so small that even one nuclear weapon would destroy practically the entire country and if that was to happen Isreal would most likely do the world a great favor and take out all of the large middle eastern countries without worrying one iota about who was responsible. They would have nothing to lose.
Of course requesting evidence is out of the question. It might undermine someones political beliefs and we certainly can have that. Stratfor is just ONE source of many that the government or any other subscriber uses to compile their assessments. More independent sources means better a larger data set to analyze.
Well they probably didn't really care since the Polish and England scientists already figured it out. And the "folks" making the statement you mentioned were most likely utterred by an one or two individuals not the organization as a whole. The US was more interested in moving nuclear physics from the white board to real world applications such as building nuclear weapons. Wasting resources on something already accomplished by others would have been a waste. And by the way England had a large head start with the information 2 Polish scientists were able to get out of the country before the Germans took control. The early versions of the enigma machine were targeted at business uses and had been around a while before it was applied to military uses. The Poles got their hands on one of these earlier machines before the war even started and security protocols were not as stringent as they were during the war. People make the mistake of judging US capabilities displayed in the past with the capabilities it now possesses.
What efforts has the government did to take down Wiki-leaks? It was the private companies who denied financial transactions. Bradley Manning at the very least broke military laws regarding the distribution of classified documents. Just because you have a hard on against the government doesn't mean you can dismiss certain violations of the law to support your opinion. If the government wanted Wikileaks taken down it would already be done. It is also the governments responsibility to investigate how this incident occurred so they can change their processes in the future. They have not charged anyone with a crime besides Manning. The plain fact is that Wikileaks is supposed to provide a way for information to be freely disseminated without identifying the source of the data. Instead they have politicized the information, demanded money from news organizations, and placed restrictions on the release of the data. They selectively release data to bolster their owners political viewpoints and have no way to ensure the data they do release has not been modified prior to release.
They have had remote control capabilities with fighter jets for a while. Ever seen the video of a fighter shooting down another to test a new missile system? And no, the pilot doesn't eject because the canopy is still intact before the missile hits. This remote capability is not for real world war applications but for testing it works just fine. And I thought we already had a pilotless nuclear bomber called an ICBM.
The majority of white folk are happy to sit in their nanny state sucking on the government tit. Why bother doing anything productive when you can sit around demanding 35 hour work weeks and 6 weeks of vacation? The European "white folk" are becoming less relevant by the day. Sad to say it will probably take another world war to knock some freaking sense into those who have forgotten what it means to get off their pampered assess and do something besides blame all the worlds problems on the US thereby absolving themselves of responsibility for any troubles plaguing the world today.
"It is fueled by the "outwardly religious" (proselytizers) that try to reject science and get creationism"
Your generalization of the US attitude towards science is idiotic and unsupported by the facts. First off the US is the most culturally and religiously integrated country in the world. A US green card or H1-B Visa are still one of the most sought after credentials in the world. The "proselytizers" represent a tiny percentage of the total population and the same tiny percentage applies to political ideologies as well. Rash generalizations are worthless and do nothing but raise the level of animosity and obscure the actual facts.
Please explain why the US is the home of just about every major SW and HW company in the world. Most foreign countries do nothing but manufacture products designed in the US which give them the chance to steal the technology for themselves in an effort to keep up. Please explain the US ability to produce the sophisticated weapon systems with technologies that eventually end up being used for non-military related products. Please explain why foreign students flock to the US to attend universities. I could go on but the idea that technological advancement is some how blocked by religious organizations is total bullshit.
"If they were smart" I think the designers who created the bot have already shown how smart they are. These guys are also continually trying to improve their bot designs based on the number of computer systems they have successfully penetrated and the feedback they get back from those who detected it. The real question is can someone design a bot that nobody can detect until after it has already infected millions of machines? There is a already a window of time between detection and creating counter measures. The harder it is to detect and create countermeasures the more time for the bot to work. It's also got to the point where those tasked with fighting these types of attacks have a hard time figuring out a solution that will not adversely impact any other legitimate programs. Just the regression testing must be a bitch.
Slashdot Mirror
If the point was to uncover the entire truth of the incident it would have been released as is without any editing. Your news footage analogy doesn't apply because they have a defined time span in which to present as much news as possible within that time span. The "Collateral Murder" video was edited to purposely show only those events that supported a certain viewpoint and party line. In fact the release of the all the data has been stage managed to make sure certain viewpoints are supported while any information that might contradict their position was purposely excluded or released at a later date. I also still don't know why Wikileaks needed millions of dollars just to post the data online. Sites like Wikileaks are marketed as a place where people can upload data anonymously. Wikileaks should have posted the information the same way they obtained it but instead they chose to politicize the release. Assange even tried to dictate conditions to the news services like he owned the data. My argument is not about the contents of the video or the war but I have my own viewpoint just like anyone else. What I am arguing against is the way the information was released to the general public.
Maybe reporters need to stop embedding themselves in groups known for violence. The reporters were in a group of people that included some armed people. They voluntarily put themselves in harms way. Carrying a telephoto lens that resembles a possible RPG is also just asking for trouble. How do you determine civilians from insurgents in the middle east? They wear no uniforms and regularly launch their attacks hiding behind civilians for cover. The children that were in the van were not visible to the Apache pilots and they were collected and immediately taking to US medical facilities to treat their injuries. The plain fact is that the "resistance" groups are responsible for more civilian deaths because they use human shields and really don't give a shit when non-combatants get killed. They use civilian deaths to justify their actions and propaganda. The most egregious examples are Hamas and Hezbollah because they use schools, hospitals, and Mosques to stage and launch their attacks from. Every militant group in the middle east does the same thing and the fanatic anti-war groups never acknowledge this fact.
The full unedited video was released after the edited one. They practically ran a global advertising campaign to draw attention to the edited version. The edited version was used to support a certain view point about the specific incident and the war in general. People who have already made up their mind on a subject will use the first piece of evidence they find to justify their opinion and ignore anything that might contradict their beliefs. Also, ask yourself why they created an edited version in the first place if the truth was self evident in the video?
After the people released the edited and highly produced "Collateral Murder" version of that particular incident they ruined their credibility as people just trying to get the "truth" out. Government spin is attacked and labeled as criminal but apparently it's OK if you are supporting your own biased viewpoint. Unfortunately people do get killed in wars and everything you mentioned was true. There were ground troops 3 blocks away engaged with armed militants at the time. The copter was doing forward reconnaissance in support of those ground troops. There was even audio of the helicopter pilots getting permission to fire from their commanders who were in turn being advised by JAG lawyers assigned to the group.
"Yeah, the UN is really meant to keep member states from attacking one another. I guess it's been pretty good at that."
I really hope you are joking with this statement.
Didn't say it was manned. I said they were working on a scaled up manned version. Working out the kinks out on the unmanned version before creating a manned version makes a lot of sense.
A kinetic weapon would be the best option because it would eliminate any radiation hazards after a nuclear strike. It would also be cheaper.
The surest way to get funding is working on projects that might have military uses.
It is re-usable and they are working on a manned version. A lot of the tech involved in it's creation was gathered from the original shuttle program. That program went on for over 20 years so it provides a great deal of information for building future vehicles. One interesting mission for this type of craft would be attacking another countries satellites. They don't even need missiles they can just alter it's orbit. The really funny thing is how everyone has been moaning about the US giving up on their space programs.
These guys underestimated the resources of the various law enforcement agencies ability to find them and vastly over estimated their own abilities to remain hidden.
We have transitioned to a digital age and a lot of our existing laws were not written for this type of environment. New laws are being formulated, old laws are being modified or held inapplicable but it doesn't happen overnight. One of the most glaring examples is the law against receiving stolen property. If I steal a car and give it to you and you take it knowing I stole it you have broken the law. If I illegaly download data from a computer system and give it to you is that still breaking the law? If it is against the law would a site like Wiki leaks be guilty of accepting stolen property? If I gave a car to someone it would have to be registered and licensed which usually requires some proof of prior ownership or transfer of ownership documentation to happen. Would a site like Wiki leaks need to obtain proof that the information given to them was not stolen by requiring some type of notarized release? I don't know the answer and it seems people are not against criminalizing illegal data theft if they approve of the content and are for criminalizing the act if they have a problem with the content. If it is government data that's good but if someone hacks into a corporate banking system and releases my personal banking information it is bad. You can't have it both ways.
You can also find many references declaring that Egypt won the war. It's actually taught in Egyptian schoolbooks that Egypt won that war and regained the Sinai through military victory when in actuality they had to negotiate to get the Sinai and their POWs returned. And I am sure there were instances where Israeli and Arab forces killed POWs. It's hard to stop killing people who were trying to kill you and your friends a few minutes ago. The only difference is in the Arab world it is pretty much official state policy to kill any Israeli POW after a suitable amount of torture if you have the time. They only alter this doctrine if they want to use the Israeli for ransom demands. This policy also applies to US or NATO soldiers as well.
Most statistics in these wars vary depend on who is telling the story but one of the most inclusive archives on the subject can be found in the "The Encyclopedia of the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A Political, Social, and ..." book. It chronicles the Israeli-Arab conflicts going back to 1940's with input from all sides involved. Each statement made is referenced and the validity of the reference is cross checked when possible. The US comes off pretty bad in it's behavior during this time period because they were more afraid of upsetting the Russians than they were about the holocaust the Arabs were attempting to wage against the Jews with Russia's help. In fact the US only agreed to re-supply Israel after Golda Meir let the code phrase "Temple" be used and over heard on purpose by those listening in which was the command to arm it's Jericho missiles and F-4 mounted nuclear warheads. Only then did the US agree to the re-supply operation. That's why Israel maintains a very good domestic weapons program so they don't have to rely on anyone for help. About the only thing they don't produce for themselves are aircraft which they purchase from the US. Their tanks, drones, infantry weapons, and missile systems are all domestic made and they buy US weapons to bolster their abilities with the aid package they receive each year which has the added benefit of letting the US weapon manufactures make money.
Israel launched the 6 day war because it faced 5 Arab countries massing troops and equipment on their borders. Nasser removed the UN forces, closed the Suez canal to Israeli shipping, and was issuing daily grandiose threats about Arab victory. Too bad they got the shit kicked out of them in just a few days. When the Arabs tried again in 1973 with full support from the USSR they also got their assess handed to them. They had Russian SAMS, wire guided tank missiles, and integrated infrared targeting systems in their tanks and still lost. The US resupplied Israel after the issue was no longer on doubt. The US supplied no other support to Israel. The only thing the US did was help talk Israel out of marching into Damascus and Cairo to finish the job once and for all since both Syria and Egypt were at Israel's mercy due to the losses they had already suffered.
The Israelis surrounded and captured over 8000 Egyptian troops in the Sinai but provided them with food and water until the 2 governments could come to an agreement. If the roles had been reversed there would not have been a single Israeli left alive to walk out of that desert.
And I know someone will bring up the famous "Liberty atrocity" but it was just an example of how you shouldn't sail into an active war zone with a ship equipped with intelligence gathering capabilities. Especially a war zone were one side was literally fighting for it's very existence. The incompetent US military and intelligence agencies at the time were to blame for this foolish incident. After all these were the same geniuses who ran the Vietnam war. Today an incident like this would be called "friendly fire".
The real danger was the people who knew of the vulnerability for quite a while and did nothing to fix it.
Rommel was indeed a honorable and military professional. All the documentaries and other sources of data seem to support this. His biography revealed a man devoted to protecting his country. He also had no direct association with those who committed war crimes. According to his biography he found out about the concentration camps and that led him to talk with some people about the plan to kill Hitler. He did not come out and support the assassination but did meet with some of the conspirators and that ultimately caused his downfall. And he did lose France. It was in his operational area and he was at home when the invasion started because he believed the weather would prevent any large scale invasion. He also fell for Montgomery's use of regular vehicles to create dust clouds that created the illusion that they were tanks which resulted in him retreating faster.
Rommel was "punished" because he was accused of participating in the attempt to assassinate Hitler. Most historical records raise serious doubt about his involvement but back then just being accused was an automatic death sentence. He was lucky to be given a choice between being executed and committing suicide and he accepted suicide to safe guard his family. A public executoin would have been bad press in Germany so the government promised not to harm his family if he took the suicide choice which could be blamed on natural causes or even battle injuries. As far as being one of the best generals on either side goes he retreated from Africa in defeat and failed to stop the invasion of France. He was a good officer but calling him the best is a stretch.
People tend to confuse "anonymity" with "privacy". The US government and anyone else willing to invest the time has had the ability to gather data about an individual way before the Internet was even born. It just took longer to compile the information. Some readily accessible sources of information includes public utility bills, drivers license's, property titles, vehicle titles, credit history, marriage licenses, school registrations information at all levels, and of course tax related information. None of these sources require cameras or the Internet.
It is totally possible for someone to reduce their online footprint and preserve some privacy if they want to but most don't take the time to do so. People who post their life stories on Facebook or similar sites are voluntarily giving away information about themselves but then turn around and complain about their "privacy" being violated.
Radiation signatures and other weapon characteristics such as estimated yield can often be traced to the point of origin. It might take some time though. The countries currently seeking atomic weapons would be committing suicide if they used them. Even if they succeeded in detonating one device in a large US city the retaliatory strike ability would not be impaired. One submarine armed with nuclear missile carrying has enough fire power to level the majority of the middle east. One reason the US and Russia built so many nuclear bombs was to guarantee that no matter how bad the original attack was it would be impossible to prevent retaliation. If Iran wants a nuclear bomb who cares? If they are stupid enough to use it against Isreal the Israeli's also have redundant retaliatory strike capability. I wouldn't be surprised if Isreal didn't have the coordinates of every middle east country already hard coded into their missile systems. Isreal is so small that even one nuclear weapon would destroy practically the entire country and if that was to happen Isreal would most likely do the world a great favor and take out all of the large middle eastern countries without worrying one iota about who was responsible. They would have nothing to lose.
Of course requesting evidence is out of the question. It might undermine someones political beliefs and we certainly can have that. Stratfor is just ONE source of many that the government or any other subscriber uses to compile their assessments. More independent sources means better a larger data set to analyze.
Well they probably didn't really care since the Polish and England scientists already figured it out. And the "folks" making the statement you mentioned were most likely utterred by an one or two individuals not the organization as a whole. The US was more interested in moving nuclear physics from the white board to real world applications such as building nuclear weapons. Wasting resources on something already accomplished by others would have been a waste. And by the way England had a large head start with the information 2 Polish scientists were able to get out of the country before the Germans took control. The early versions of the enigma machine were targeted at business uses and had been around a while before it was applied to military uses. The Poles got their hands on one of these earlier machines before the war even started and security protocols were not as stringent as they were during the war. People make the mistake of judging US capabilities displayed in the past with the capabilities it now possesses.
What efforts has the government did to take down Wiki-leaks? It was the private companies who denied financial transactions. Bradley Manning at the very least broke military laws regarding the distribution of classified documents. Just because you have a hard on against the government doesn't mean you can dismiss certain violations of the law to support your opinion. If the government wanted Wikileaks taken down it would already be done. It is also the governments responsibility to investigate how this incident occurred so they can change their processes in the future. They have not charged anyone with a crime besides Manning. The plain fact is that Wikileaks is supposed to provide a way for information to be freely disseminated without identifying the source of the data. Instead they have politicized the information, demanded money from news organizations, and placed restrictions on the release of the data. They selectively release data to bolster their owners political viewpoints and have no way to ensure the data they do release has not been modified prior to release.
Because the majority of Americans don't give a shit what you think so why waste your time?
They have had remote control capabilities with fighter jets for a while. Ever seen the video of a fighter shooting down another to test a new missile system? And no, the pilot doesn't eject because the canopy is still intact before the missile hits. This remote capability is not for real world war applications but for testing it works just fine. And I thought we already had a pilotless nuclear bomber called an ICBM.
The majority of white folk are happy to sit in their nanny state sucking on the government tit. Why bother doing anything productive when you can sit around demanding 35 hour work weeks and 6 weeks of vacation? The European "white folk" are becoming less relevant by the day. Sad to say it will probably take another world war to knock some freaking sense into those who have forgotten what it means to get off their pampered assess and do something besides blame all the worlds problems on the US thereby absolving themselves of responsibility for any troubles plaguing the world today.
"It is fueled by the "outwardly religious" (proselytizers) that try to reject science and get creationism"
Your generalization of the US attitude towards science is idiotic and unsupported by the facts. First off the US is the most culturally and religiously integrated country in the world. A US green card or H1-B Visa are still one of the most sought after credentials in the world. The "proselytizers" represent a tiny percentage of the total population and the same tiny percentage applies to political ideologies as well. Rash generalizations are worthless and do nothing but raise the level of animosity and obscure the actual facts.
Please explain why the US is the home of just about every major SW and HW company in the world. Most foreign countries do nothing but manufacture products designed in the US which give them the chance to steal the technology for themselves in an effort to keep up. Please explain the US ability to produce the sophisticated weapon systems with technologies that eventually end up being used for non-military related products. Please explain why foreign students flock to the US to attend universities. I could go on but the idea that technological advancement is some how blocked by religious organizations is total bullshit.
"If they were smart"
I think the designers who created the bot have already shown how smart they are. These guys are also continually trying to improve their bot designs based on the number of computer systems they have successfully penetrated and the feedback they get back from those who detected it.
The real question is can someone design a bot that nobody can detect until after it has already infected millions of machines? There is a already a window of time between detection and creating counter measures. The harder it is to detect and create countermeasures the more time for the bot to work. It's also got to the point where those tasked with fighting these types of attacks have a hard time figuring out a solution that will not adversely impact any other legitimate programs. Just the regression testing must be a bitch.