Posted on 02/06/2013 5:46:15 AM PST by Sir Napsalot
Hack on The New York Times is latest incident to illustrate China's dominance in the new era of warfare, and the U.S.'s inaction
In the campy remake of the 1980s classic Red Dawn, MGM last year recast the titular enemy as not the Soviet-era Russians, but the Chinese. The movie may have been panned, but it did have one thing going for it -- it was uncomfortably close to reality.
I. A New War
China is unlikely to ever raise its guns or tank barrels on the U.S. It does not need to. The ultimate goal of all conquest is money, power, and influence. Today we stand on the brink of a new age, an age in which warfare has moved from trodden soil into the buried tracts of internet cable beneath it.
Today any country still has to deal with the far more familiar face of physical threats, be it "terrorists" or domestic dissidents. These threats will surely persist for a time, as much of the world -- for example, large tracts of the Middle East -- still exists in a pre-industrialized state. Even in regions with some digital capabilities like Iran, access is stifled under crippling walls of censorship and poverty, leading citizens to take up traditional, terrible blood-filled methods of conflict.
But if we listen careful, we hear the sound of change. The time of physical battles is coming to an end. Because in every way digital war is far superior to the wars of yore. .... (Please read the rest at link)
(Excerpt) Read more at dailytech.com ...
[In case you are not aware of this.]
It was the NORKS, not Chi-Comms. But what’s the diff?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Dawn_(2012_film)
Do you guys know what bothers me? Articles that attribute 0’s lack of action to spinelessness. He may be spineless, but that’s not why he fails to defend America. That’s not why he bows to dictators. He does that because of his philosophy. Philosophies have consequences.
Will the White House Finally Grow the Backbone...
________________________
They would first have to HAVE a backbone.
All of them admire (and had been admiring) tyrrants and thinking them ‘the great philosophers of the 20th century’.
BUT. The US government does not comprise of only Obama and his ilk. At least some of his security advisers should have spines to point the obvious out.
The USA already has an active offensive team going after China, Russia, etc.
I thought we had a large anti-hacker op in place, dedicated to thwarting that stuff, and hacking into enemies’ networks. Big duh on me.
But according to the article and the NY Post article, the effort is not enough.
The cyber security team is to prevent hackers, not on the offensives. We have to recognize the cyberwarfare is a real legitimate warfare first.
“We have to recognize the cyberwarfare is a real legitimate warfare first.”
Pretty basic, straightforward line of thought, seems to me, but what the heck do I know. My BP is rising...
Can anyone explain the rationale of keeping hostile nations connected to our corner of the Internet?
The Chinese have a mole in the White House, so don’t expect anything real to happen.
SN,
We have both defensive teams deployed by the government to guard our own computing infrastructure and offensive teams deployed by the government to find and exploit weaknesses in the computing infrastructure of other nations. It is already a constant battle that we are involved in.
I’ve talked extensively with one member who has been on both teams.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.