Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[misko27]

I don't know if we discussed this, but it sorta seemed to slip by in the News Storm: Pentagon Puts Cyberwarriors on the Offensive, Increasing the Risk of Conflict.

Apparently, and without a coherent policy in place or a specific order from the top, the US has switched to a policy of "aggressive defense". I'm not sure what to think about it. On one hand, the threat of cyberattacks is only becoming more obvious and frightening with time. On the other, I'm not sure whether it'll help actually make us safer, or just provoke people.

[SaberToothTiger]

Misko, your link seems to be broken.

And for the United States' eroding reputation I can only say that among my circle of people the antipathy towards the US is growing more and more towards outright hatred. People who five years ago were ambivalent are losing sympathy for the US and western countries in general. On the other hand, people who have a favourable opinion of the west remain sympathetic.

Seeing as I know only a very limited amount of people my observations are of negligible value, however they could be symptoms of something larger.

[misko27]

And indeed it was. Fixed now though.

The erosion of our national reputation abroad is one of many things which keeps me up at night; the fact that there may not soon be much of a 'West' to feel contempt for is little consolation. I am curious as to the location and demography of your group of friends though.

I mean, it's an open secret (is it even a secret at this point? Tons of articles on the subject) that the US is heinously unprepared for anything on that front whatsoever.

That's true, but I'm not even sure what being prepared looks like. For all I know, Russia, China, North Korea are all equally unprepared, but just aren't actually attacked (meaning offense really would be the best defense, since it would at least posit a sort of "MAD-lite" doctrine to keep the peace). Or maybe they're all completely prepared, I just don't know. I wonder if anyone knows. I'm sure we'll find out if-and-when this policy bears results (for good or ill).

[PTTG??]

Speaking of manipulating public opinion, in a recent news story, one convicted felon had 550 guns in his two houses. After a tip-off, police raided his illegal armory and confiscated the weapons.

ABC Headline: "Over 550 guns seized from home of convicted felon."
Fox Headline: "More than 500 guns seized from Southern California homes."

Because Fox wants you to think that California Liberal Gun Death Squads are roving suburbia and stealing guns at random.

By the way, the body of the articles is nearly identical, although Fox does take the time to suggest that he might have been a collector and didn't intend to do anything violent.

[smjjames]

I don't know if we discussed this, but it sorta seemed to slip by in the News Storm: Pentagon Puts Cyberwarriors on the Offensive, Increasing the Risk of Conflict.

Apparently, and without a coherent policy in place or a specific order from the top, the US has switched to a policy of "aggressive defense". I'm not sure what to think about it. On one hand, the threat of cyberattacks is only becoming more obvious and frightening with time. On the other, I'm not sure whether it'll help actually make us safer, or just provoke people.

Isn't the best defense a good offense?

Still, cyberwar is a real Wild West right now, theres no geneva convention equivalent that sets down what you can and can't do, nor is there an equivalent of MAD. I read in an article recently (forget where though) that the problem with cyberwar/cyberattacks is that it's the opposite of nukes and the fact that it takes so long to find the origin for sure of a cyberattack and theres the problem of escalation and precedence.

Misko, your link seems to be broken.

And for the United States' eroding reputation I can only say that among my circle of people the antipathy towards the US is growing more and more towards outright hatred. People who five years ago were ambivalent are losing sympathy for the US and western countries in general. On the other hand, people who have a favourable opinion of the west remain sympathetic.

Seeing as I know only a very limited amount of people my observations are of negligible value, however they could be symptoms of something larger.

And indeed it was. Fixed now though.

The erosion of our national reputation abroad is one of many things which keeps me up at night; the fact that there may not soon be much of a 'West' to feel contempt for is little consolation. I am curious as to the location and demography of your group of friends though.

I'm concerned about our reputation as a nation as well, going forward. Trump is already starting to alienate those in the West. While much of it is against the Trump admin and could easily turn around with a new President (see the change from Bush to Obama), Trump is antagonizing our allies in ways Bush 43 never did.

If he loses in 2020, perhaps it'll be salvaged relatively quickly, but the damage has already been done to our credibility which will take longer to recover from. If he serves two terms, I'm not sure we'd have a positive reputation at the end of that.

[Dunamisdeos]

@PTTG

To be fair 500 guns could transcend psycho and reach dedicated collector levels? I figure if he was planning on going on a spree he would have stopped somewhere sooner, maybe before he eclipsed his own age.

Anyway, I'm entirely unsurprised to find that kind of manipulative bias.

[SaberToothTiger]

I am from Poland, an eastern european country which is allied to the US. My circle of associates are young poles with a wild array of political beliefs. Radicals of both sorts dislike the US (mildly or greatly), while the more moderate people are more split on the issue.

[smjjames]

I thought Trump was pretty popular with the right and far-right in Poland? That's not to say that there wouldn't be some among the right and far-right who dislike him of course.

[SaberToothTiger]

Not really. The far-right for now has a habit of not liking pretty much everyone who is not an ally. Trump is no ally. The US is no ally. There are very few people who believe that NATO would do more than write an angry letter if Putin put the boot in right into Poland. The far-right likes the white power talk, but seeing as race is a minor issue in Poland (except for the xenophobic fear of the famed "refugee", and even that has become somewhat stale).

The thing is that this is not even Trump's fault. He is considered the stereotypical American, and nobody likes the stereotypical American. He is the personification of what we believed was true about America. Seeing we mostly believe that everything is shit (except for the things that are not, and we can't seem to agree on what those are) having those beliefs come to life only confirms our previous prejudices.

Although don't take my words for granted seeing as I may be a little bit drunk.

[smjjames]

Sounds more like disappointment at the President not being another high society politician like Obama or Hillary than dislike.

An article on how the forward defense could backfire.

The gist of it is that it's an untamed Wild West, there are literally no precedents for escalation and what constitutes warfare and what doesn't or even what constitutes an okay reaction to it. It's like any new form of warfare like say, chemical warfare in the early 20th century, it's a blank slate as far as the rules of war go. Though I hope it doesn't take the cyber equivalent of WWI or WWII for nations to sit down and talk about how things should be done as far as cyber warfare.

[EnigmaticHat]

There were defensive proposals run by Trump and the Republican congress and they rejected it.  Now the primaries are starting in some states, and our cyberwarfare people have 5 months to make something happen.

I would bet money that frustrated generals/admirals in the pentagon proposed this to Trump as a way to make America look powerful without mentioning who we would be targeting.

[SalmonGod]

The thing is that this is not even Trump's fault. He is considered the stereotypical American, and nobody likes the stereotypical American. He is the personification of what we believed was true about America. Seeing we mostly believe that everything is shit (except for the things that are not, and we can't seem to agree on what those are) having those beliefs come to life only confirms our previous prejudices.

This is the most dangerous thing.  I'm American, and can confirm that there are plenty of people here who personify the stereotype of the "Ugly American".  But my internal belief has swayed back and forth over time as to just how prevalent and relevant those people are.  To have that stereotype now be the president and see how our culture reacts to that is a big deal in terms of solidifying a perspective on that point.  It's no longer just a stereotype.  Buying into it can no longer be called confirmation bias.  This isn't just dangerous for global reputation.  It's dangerous to our own self-image as well.

[PTTG??]

So today the USA pulled out of the Human Rights council and also it's national news that border patrol is taking children hostage. Is this... are we literally starting concentration camps?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Yes.

[Trekkin]

Not for the first time, but yes.