Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I hope they force NK to give us their fusion technology!

lets get out guys out of the ME and go rape N. Korea so we can get our prestige back...

In the exact same way that the Chinese want nothing to do with Palestine, America and everyone except Russia/China/Japan should probably not get all hot and bothered over this.

Kim is no Hitler, there is no Axis, and his neighbours are cautious enough about him already. Take this to the UN? Start a war? ya...................... because ending the cold war with russia was just a pretext to start one with China?

Just let north and south korea duke it out... I want nothing to do with it.

No one wants to start a war with North Korea, what is the gain? It's a relatively poor country and Kimmy is getting old, better to wait him out and then make a move, if one is to be made.

I do somewhat think Kim might make an attack once he older and closer to death, the nut.

Yeah, I read about that... the ends of that nation are near, imo.

Guys, Hilary just said that n. Korea must pay for the attack.

http://m.yahoo.com/w/ynews/article/topstories/1%3B_ylt=A0WTc49pjPZLSmoAjQMp89w4?url=http%3A%2F%2Fxml.news.yahoo.com%2Fus%2Fnews%2Frss%2Frichstoryrss. html%3Fu%3D%2Fap%2F20100521%2Fap_on_re_as%2Fas_cli
nton_asia&.tsrc=yahoo&.intl=US&.lang=en

good thing the butch b#@##$ isnt in office..

but seriously who gives a sh#$ what she says most time they say crap just to get noticed... and why in the hell would the UN interfere when it is a two country problem.. every time we stick our noses where it doesnt belong we make things worse not for the leader but for the ppl.

sanctions dont effect anyone but the lower class and makes them suffer and yes even die just to spite the leaders

IT ..IS ..INEVITABAUW

What?

TINGS AAH INEVITABWY GOING TO CHANGE

that was so obnoxiously not funny >\

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
that was so obnoxiously not funny >\

My guess would be you have no clue what I'm referencing but that's nothing new seeing as you clearly have no clue about most things.

N K should be taken out of the picture. Blow them up first. They are an consistent pain in our asses.

Originally posted by jaden101
My guess would be you have no clue what I'm referencing but that's nothing new seeing as you clearly have no clue about most things.

it has more to do with the fact that it just wasnt funny. that aside, im a young adult. every young adult has seen team america. "you have failed!"

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
it has more to do with the fact that it just wasnt funny. that aside, im a young adult. every young adult has seen team america. "you have failed!"

1: I can guarantee not every "young adult" has seen Team America.

2: Your grammar is absolutely atrocious. Especially for someone supposedly in higher education.

3: No one cares about your opinion because you are vacant of anything worthy of paying any attention to.

4: Your initial use of the word "obnoxiously" clearly shows you don't even know what the word means or how to use it as it makes absolutely no sense in the context you've used it in.

So yeah...Put an egg in your shoe and beat it.

Originally posted by jaden101
1: I can guarantee not every "young adult" has seen Team America.

2: Your grammar is absolutely atrocious. Especially for someone supposedly in higher education.

3: No one cares about your opinion because you are vacant of anything worthy of paying any attention to.

4: Your initial use of the word "obnoxiously" clearly shows you don't even know what the word means or how to use it as it makes absolutely no sense in the context you've used it in.

So yeah...Put an egg in your shoe and beat it.

awww. im sorry, i didnt mean to hurt your feelings. there there, heres your bottle. shhhh. its okay.

Probably caused by North Korea to cause more aggression.

But we can't rule out that it might be a foreign power like the US orchestrating this entire event. We must remind ourselves why the Korean war started in the first place.

South Korea's been in a very tight spot for a long time now, the last thing that region needs right now is another damned war. Not sticking up for North Korea either, fascist military regimes aren't really in my book for government of choice.

Hm, the UN will probably get involved and do some sort of "investigation". I don't think it will escalate to a conflict, if anything it will just increase tensions.

Originally posted by Liberator
But we can't rule out that it might be a foreign power like the US orchestrating this entire event.

I swear, you are a secretly a computer that's been designed to spout radical left propaganda.

How and why would the US orchestrate such an event? Think before you post.

i highly doubt that the US is involved. we're not looking for a fight with N. korea, and south korea cant defeat N.korea, so if a conflict arises we would have to intervene, which is something we dont want to do.

anything that would stir up more aggression between north and south korea is something that we do not want.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
awww. im sorry, i didnt mean to hurt your feelings. there there, heres your bottle. shhhh. its okay.

I don't have feelings. I had them surgically removed when I was four years old.

But nice try to save face....Didn't work though.

I'd point out the irony in your opening retort as well but it'd only be lost on you.

Anyway...Moving on...

North Korea is getting increasingly isolated as China distances itself from the regime because it knows it's getting more benefit on the international stage than it will from supporting its old ally.

I personally think that North Korea are more dangerous without China's backing than with it. China was the primary input into NK's economy...Without its backing NK will collapse entirely and it'll force them either into finally cooperating with the world or into taking stupid and desperate measures to secure its economy (Like Iraq did in Kuwait)

Originally posted by jaden101
I don't have feelings. I had them surgically removed when I was four years old.

But nice try to save face....Didn't work though.

I'd point out the irony in your opening retort as well but it'd only be lost on you.

there, there. its okay. shhh.



without backing from china, how long do you think N.korea would last in any type of engagement if it made a power play?

Originally posted by Autokrat
I swear, you are a secretly a computer that's been designed to spout radical left propaganda.

How and why would the US orchestrate such an event? Think before you post.

Obviously they're planning to provoke a war with North Korea in order to create the final Crest of Blood for their planetary transmutation circle.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
there, there. its okay. shhh.



Touch me down there and I'll be fine.



Against who?...Just SK?...They'd lose

Unfortunately for NK, SK has far more allies than they do.

The OECD countries and APEC countries.

Of course there's the small matter that there's 28,000 US troops (USFK) permanently stationed in SK to take into consideration also.

Originally posted by Autokrat
I swear, you are a secretly a computer that's been designed to spout radical left propaganda.

How and why would the US orchestrate such an event? Think before you post.

Hahaha.

Well it's just a theory, you can't rule out all possibilities when dealing with international affairs like this. It's no secret US/North Korean relations are bad, perhaps an event like this will make the North Koreans seem even worse and thus creating a call to action?

I don't know just a speculation.

Jaden, please drop it. There is no need to insult people because they didn't like your all-caps big-size text. Keep to the discussion at hand or there will be consequences.

Just like North Korea...?

I don't think there should be another war, but I'll be damned if Kim can just start shooting people and nothing happens.

Originally posted by REXXXX


I don't think there should be another war, but I'll be damned if Kim can just start shooting people and nothing happens.

Probably verbal warnings and some petty sanctions then.

Originally posted by REXXXX
Jaden, please drop it. There is no need to insult people because they didn't like your all-caps big-size text. Keep to the discussion at hand or there will be consequences.



It was already dropped.





Well then damned you are because nothing will happen because of it, at least not militarily. Sanctions at worst.

Agreed, you can only push people so far before retilation breaks out. I'm surprised it hasn't come already to be honest.

"South Korea’s Lee Myung-bak announced his retaliation plan for the attack on the Cheonan this morning in Seoul. Although restrained like he has been for the past two months, the president finally referred to the possibility of war:

“If our territorial waters, airspace or territory are militarily violated, we will immediately exercise our right of self-defense.”

Here we go again

Originally posted by Robtard
No one wants to start a war with North Korea, what is the gain? It's a relatively poor country and Kimmy is getting old, better to wait him out and then make a move, if one is to be made.

I do somewhat think Kim might make an attack once he older and closer to death, the nut.

You should be a defence secretary for USA. And I mean this.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
You should be a defence secretary for USA. And I mean this. irony?

Originally posted by Parmaniac
irony?

Not at all, his proposed approach would actually avoid unnecessary conflict.
And Kim is not that stupid to attack anyone - if he wanted to, he would have done so by now.
He would simply not. China would freak out, and so would Japan and USA, and then he'd be annihilated.

If USA is to go in, however, not as easy. China would freak out and possibly Russians too, and noone would have a happy easy ride.

"what is the gain? It's a relatively poor country"

That was the part that disturbed me, what if the country was rich or had mineral resources, then it would be ok to attack it?

Originally posted by Parmaniac
"what is the gain? It's a relatively poor country"

That was the part that disturbed me, what if the country was rich or had mineral resources, then it would be ok to attack it?

I think he was referng to the countries ability to fight a prolonged war campagn. With few resources and money not to mention the affect of sanctions would limit their ability to really threaten anyone, except S.Korea.

Originally posted by Parmaniac
"what is the gain? It's a relatively poor country"

That was the part that disturbed me, what if the country was rich or had mineral resources, then it would be ok to attack it?

*whoosh*

n. korea's asking for it, isn't she; thing is there's probably more to it though..

it's as if they want to be attacked because either they know they're communist downfall's gonna happen inevitably anyway because of how small the world's gotten technologically speaking or they want the (frail) u.s. to engage them so as to give China (n. korea's ally and the u.s. largest debtor) a perfect excuse and have a cause to go to war with the u.s. hence winning the day for n. korea even if they win or lose, as long as the u.s. finally falls. they'd consider it a sacrifice worth going for.

basically they know that they're gonna go down they're just gonna make a huge mess of it all and leave as big a scar as they can.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
n. korea's asking for it, isn't she; thing is there's probably more to it though..

it's as if they want to be attacked because either they know they're communist downfall's gonna happen inevitably anyway because of how small the world's gotten technologically speaking or they want the (frail) u.s. to engage them so as to give China (n. korea's ally and the u.s. largest debtor) a perfect excuse and have a cause to go to war with the u.s. hence winning the day for n. korea even if they win or lose, as long as the u.s. finally falls. they'd consider it a sacrifice worth going for.

basically they know that they're gonna go down they're just gonna make a huge mess of it all and leave as big a scar as they can.

china cant do squat to us. if they declare war on us for attacking korea we'll laugh in their faces and decimate their army and annihilate their economy. if they demand that we pay all our debt we'll laugh in their face, and if they try to take it by force we'll annihilate their economy and decimate their army.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
china cant do squat to us. if they declare war on us for attacking korea we'll laugh in their faces and decimate their army and annihilate their economy. if they demand that we pay all our debt we'll laugh in their face, and if they try to take it by force we'll annihilate their economy and decimate their army.
they got the biggest army in the world (amount of soldiers) and nukes if it comes hard to hard and goes all out I don't think anyone will be left to laugh.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
china cant do squat to us. if they declare war on us for attacking korea we'll laugh in their faces and decimate their army and annihilate their economy. if they demand that we pay all our debt we'll laugh in their face, and if they try to take it by force we'll annihilate their economy and decimate their army.

(I actually thought n. Korea had the largest standing army on the planet at 1 million, parmaniac.)

mrs.marvel, you grossely underestimate china's capabilities and they're war machine. Taking them lightly is what they want. They're not called a sleeping giant for no reason.

Not to undermine the u.s. but do you really think we can afford and/or withhold a war on 4 fronts effectively enough especially against 2 nuke ready army superpowers? I don't think so, lady .

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
(I actually thought n. Korea had the largest standing army on the planet at 1 million, parmaniac.) http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9905/28/china.military/

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
china cant do squat to us. if they declare war on us for attacking korea we'll laugh in their faces and decimate their army and annihilate their economy. if they demand that we pay all our debt we'll laugh in their face, and if they try to take it by force we'll annihilate their economy and decimate their army.

China has a very strong army, most are required for service and even in school the children are taught to fight.

I think you're mistaken, the vast majority of US business is outsourced to China, in other words, the United States relies on China for simple goods like clothing.

Imagine if everything with a 'Made in China' sticker vanished, thats essentially what would happen (not really just production to the US would stop).

China is the Eastern powerhouse, they don't really need the US to function... a war with China would mark the fall of the US, I agree.

Originally posted by Liberator
China is the Eastern powerhouse, they don't really need the US to function...

thats silly

No, not really....

China is perhaps the worlds largest production facility. A lot of everyday items are developed and produced there due to relatively cheap labour policies. Her military assets technology wase is a little bit behind US tech, (Being as much of it was originally based on pre fall Soviet tech then expanded on) but because of higher manpower and better productivety, they have vastly superior numbers.

and where do the products they build go?

the chinese economy would bust almost immediatly if it had nowhere to export all its cheap crap

China's exports are not exclusively to the USA...

Many countries worldwide purchase their products, Do you beleive that they could possibly have formed that incredible level of wealth they have simply from US exportation? I don't think so...

http://internationaltrade.suite101.com/article.cfm/chinas_top_trading_partners

Originally posted by Parmaniac
http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9905/28/china.military/

Originally posted by inimalist
How do I have to understand that?

Originally posted by Parmaniac
http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/asiapcf/9905/28/china.military/

!

whoa.

now i really know. thanks.

Originally posted by Parmaniac

they got the biggest army in the world (amount of soldiers) and nukes if it comes hard to hard and goes all out I don't think anyone will be left to laugh.

this would mean something 40-50 years ago when warfare meant running around in trenches and foxholes and shit and having a lot of warm bodies meant something. now a days, not so much.

do you realize that we have at least 10 active air craft carriers, some under construction, and around 40-50 that are decommissioned that could be restored and brought back into service? do you know how many china has? it has, zero active, zero in reserve, 1 under construction, and 0 decommissioned. they dont have an air force either.

so explain to me how china is going to even get their "largest standing army" over here to our soil? theyre gonna swim?

chinas not a threat for a number of reasons, but, more than anything any military action they could make would effortlessly crushed. if they declared war on us tomorrow, we'd be like "alright, well.... i guesss we'l give you guys five years to build some boats to get here... one more decade to build a competent air force so that we dont sink your boats... good luck." and then just go back to raping korea.

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
this would mean something 40-50 years ago when warfare meant running around in trenches and foxholes and shit and having a lot of warm bodies meant something. now a days, not so much.

do you realize that we have at least 10 active air craft carriers, some under construction, and around 40-50 that are decommissioned that could be restored and brought back into service? do you know how many china has? it has, zero active, zero in reserve, 1 under construction, and 0 decommissioned. they dont have an air force either.

so explain to me how china is going to even get their "largest standing army" over here to our soil? theyre gonna swim?

chinas not a threat for a number of reasons, but, more than anything any military action they could make would effortlessly crushed. if they declared war on us tomorrow, we'd be like "alright, well.... i guesss we'l give you guys five years to build some boats to get here... one more decade to build a competent air force so that we dont sink your boats... good luck." and then just go back to raping korea.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/nuke/index.html

EDIT:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army
scroll down to "Weapons and equipment" and click on the world map

There is nothing to laugh about this stuff no matter how advanced the military weapons of your country may be.

China doesn't have advanced military tech like the united states or other industrial countries granted, but they have the biggest army and nukes that's FAR more than enough to take them serious. I don't think you will laugh when your kids start to walk around with 3 or 4 legs.

Originally posted by Parmaniac
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/china/nuke/index.html

EDIT:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army
scroll down to "Weapons and equipment" and click on the world map

There is nothing to laugh about this stuff no matter how advanced the military weapons of your country may be.

China doesn't have advanced military tech like the united states or other industrial countries granted, but they have the biggest army and nukes that's FAR more than enough to take them serious. I don't think you will laugh when your kids start to walk around with 3 or 4 legs.

Cyber-warfare:
So? We have this to.
C4ISTAR:
Literally every developed nation has this.
Firearms:
I don't think we seriously need to worry about Chinamen with arms made of fire
Land-based weapons:
So China has 7000 old tanks. The US has 8000 old tanks.
Nuclear weapons:
I'm sure we're friends with whatever country developed that technology in the first place. It shouldn't be too hard for the US to build a nuke.

I, uh, could go on if you wish.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Cyber-warfare:
So? We have this to.
C4ISTAR:
Literally every developed nation has this.
Firearms:
I don't think we seriously need to worry about Chinamen with arms made of fire
Land-based weapons:
So China has 7000 old tanks. The US has 8000 old tanks.
Nuclear weapons:
I'm sure we're friends with whatever country developed that technology in the first place. It shouldn't be too hard for the US to build a nuke.

I, uh, could go on if you wish. I'm just talking about the nukes man, do you really wanna risk a nuclear war with china? Their technology from 2006 already allowed them to reach the united states and going by their current development I'm sure it's possible for them to already build the systems that were in development in 2006.

This is not who will be left after that, a war should never be started under the impression "No matter what they throw at us in the end we will win" this war would most likely end in a pyrrhic victory.

Again nothing to laugh about at all.

A war between the US and China would be catostrophic, and what about other international ties? India and China hate each other so I would foresee India jumping aboard the US side, but Russia.

What about Russia? I have a feeling they'd go along with China, do you understand the man power they could pump out? And if those two countries unified the industry would be switched to a war economy, imagine if China focused solely on the production of warfare...

And wouldn't the US over extend themselves, you can only fight so many wars at once, and if the Chinese began to help fund terrorist organisations... well you've got another problem on your hands.

Not even including Russia.



Inimalist, what about US dependency on China?
US corporations outsource to China, they'd lose quite a bit of their money swapping back over to reform in america, and they'd also have to follow the United States' labour laws causing even more profit to be lost. And with the economy already going downhill do you think the US could sustain themselves?

To anticipate what would happen if North and South Korea resumed the Korean War, you only have to look at the country before the armistice in 1953. North Korea was propped up by the People's Republic of China, whereas the South was supported by the United Nations (though basically the United States). If North Korea attacks South Korea, then the outcome really depends on if China decides to back North Korea.

If North Korea goes in alone, the United States would most likely respond militarily, especially if North Korea used nuclear weapons in its initial assault on the south. Due to North Korea's dependence on foreign aid for food stuffs, they would probably fold relatively quickly- you can't really fight with an army that's long starved to death (or a disgruntled starving populace for that matter). If China backed North Korea, which is unlikely due to their interwoven economic ties with the west, they would, at best, assume a defensive role on their side, fighting only to maintain the current North Korean state.

If South Korea attacks first, then its a pretty easy scenario. China would probably defend North Korea, but with the United States' armed forces already enveloped in two wars (arguably more depending on your definition of "war" they would not be as likely to get involved and would probably only provide economic support like they did in the seventies to stem Vietnam's Unification under the north (1973-1975). At most they would provide air support to the ROK I'll bet. With North Korea's burgeoning military and their Songun policy in place, they would probably overwhelm the south pretty quickly. Whether or not they could hold it would be another matter, dependent on the flow of information into the north, the possibility of insurrection, etc.

In either case, a hypothetical war would undoubtedly bring an end to the North Korean government, which is already unstable, if not on the verge of collapse. This, whether it be seen as good or bad, would cost a great amount of human life, especially considering three of the four main contenders are nuclear powers.

war

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
this would mean something 40-50 years ago when warfare meant running around in trenches and foxholes and shit and having a lot of warm bodies meant something. now a days, not so much.

do you realize that we have at least 10 active air craft carriers, some under construction, and around 40-50 that are decommissioned that could be restored and brought back into service? do you know how many china has? it has, zero active, zero in reserve, 1 under construction, and 0 decommissioned. they dont have an air force either.

so explain to me how china is going to even get their "largest standing army" over here to our soil? theyre gonna swim?

chinas not a threat for a number of reasons, but, more than anything any military action they could make would effortlessly crushed. if they declared war on us tomorrow, we'd be like "alright, well.... i guesss we'l give you guys five years to build some boats to get here... one more decade to build a competent air force so that we dont sink your boats... good luck." and then just go back to raping korea.


you know what you have a point there. didn't look at it that way. nowadays, and more and more, ground combat is going the way of modern warfare or tecnological warfare. things are much more sophisticated now.

sort of like it's not the size of the dog in a fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog. today, it's not the size of a country's standing army that counts it's the the strategic military capabilities and technologies a country's war machine has, isn't it?

hm.

hm

Originally posted by Parmaniac
I'm just talking about the nukes man, do you really wanna risk a nuclear war with china? Their technology from 2006 already allowed them to reach the united states and going by their current development I'm sure it's possible for them to already build the systems that were in development in 2006.

This is not who will be left after that, a war should never be started under the impression "No matter what they throw at us in the end we will win" this war would most likely end in a pyrrhic victory.

Again nothing to laugh about at all.

so, it took them until 2006 to have ICBM capability?

in any serious analysis, the only nations that have the ability to engage in nuclear war are the Americans and the Russians.

By this, I don't mean simply dropping a nuke on someone, I mean able to engage another nuclear powered nation with ICBM technology and tactical nuclear deployment.

American nuclear missiles are aimed tactically at Chinese nuclear command and control sites. In a first strike scenario, they have the tactical ability to severely cripple, if not totally annhiliate a Chinese nuclear counter offensive in less than minutes. I'm sure the Chinese have some type of radar warning system for this type of thing, but they don't have the nuclear infrastructure that America and Russia do to be able to launch back before a first strike scenario.

There is also the fact that, and we can debate their effectiveness or whatever, America is the only nation on the planet that has some real type of anti-ballistic missle defense. So, even if we say it is only 5-10% effective, that is still a huge advantage over a nation with no such defense.

China is a strong regional power, and they will need to be because their own military interests are involved in central asia and its resources, but as far as engaging in tactical nuclear warfare, the cold war made Russia and America the only two players in that game really.

China does have an advantage in cyber warfare, and shutting down domestic financial and quality of life based infrastructure would cause havok in the American population, but in a conventional nuclear or military engagement, it isn't going to make up for the huge asymmetry

Originally posted by Ms.Marvel
this would mean something 40-50 years ago when warfare meant running around in trenches and foxholes and shit and having a lot of warm bodies meant something. now a days, not so much.

do you realize that we have at least 10 active air craft carriers, some under construction, and around 40-50 that are decommissioned that could be restored and brought back into service? do you know how many china has? it has, zero active, zero in reserve, 1 under construction, and 0 decommissioned. they dont have an air force either.

so explain to me how china is going to even get their "largest standing army" over here to our soil? theyre gonna swim?

chinas not a threat for a number of reasons, but, more than anything any military action they could make would effortlessly crushed. if they declared war on us tomorrow, we'd be like "alright, well.... i guesss we'l give you guys five years to build some boats to get here... one more decade to build a competent air force so that we dont sink your boats... good luck." and then just go back to raping korea.

Except for the fact that the US military is stretched thin of active soldiers as it is with its 2 tiny wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The US has very little capability to launch a war against anyone at the moment. If the US could "effortlessly crush" China then it would have made even lighter work of the Taliban but as it stands the Taliban actually has a bigger strength now than it did at the start of the war in Afghanistan.

You only have to look at the way the US reacts when a genuinely powerful nation tells them to mind their own business (Russia with regards to South Ossetia). What did the US do?...It butted out and minded it's own business...Why?...Because it knew that the relationship with Russia was far more important than the relationship with Georgia....Same applies to Korea...Even more so now with the US economy being highly dependent on China's massive economic growth.


Back to the topic at hand though seeing as I'd rather not pander to the US contingent on the board that seem to try and force the US's military "might" into every discussion on every conflict on the planet.

Analysts are predicting that even without nuclear weapons there would be 1,000,000 deaths in a conflict between NK and SK in the 1ST WEEK.

Originally posted by inimalist
China does have an advantage in cyber warfare, and shutting down domestic financial and quality of life based infrastructure would cause havok in the American population, but in a conventional nuclear or military engagement, it isn't going to make up for the huge asymmetry

i'd like to think that the u.s. has a more technologically advanced defense system than whatever the chinese have. surely we're more advanced militarily but doesn't technology go hand in hand with it when it comes to warfare digital and/or otherwise hence ultimately winning any cyber battle race of any sort.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
i'd like to think that the u.s. has a more technologically advanced defense system than whatever the chinese have. surely we're more advanced militarily but doesn't technology go hand in hand with it when it comes to warfare digital and/or otherwise hence ultimately winning any cyber battle race of any sort.

We (US) also have the aliens on our side.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
We (US) also have the aliens on our side.

ha.

mexicans? we don't need their scum.

j/k.

but yea grays are actually providing both sides with advanced weapon tech, fyi.

LOL!

I love these threads. Everyone turns military strategist and the outcome is always the same. US loses the war....well, I can't really blame you all for thinking that... With this current Administration the nation looks like a bunch of pansies. This administration can't even take care of an oil spill much less could it take care of a full scale war.

Anywhoo, here is the latest.

China not too happy with N.Korea:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100526/ap_on_re_as/as_china_koreas_beijing_s_bind_2

Just keep playing your Risk and Axis and Allies board games.

The article makes a very grave error in calling China and North Korea Communist.


Anyways. China seems to want to keep itself out of trouble then, but don't get them wrong. If the US joins in with South Korea I can only see the Chinese backing the North Koreans again because it will be one less ally in an ever growing sea of enemies.

Edit.

Originally posted by FistOfThe North
i'd like to think that the u.s. has a more technologically advanced defense system than whatever the chinese have. surely we're more advanced militarily but doesn't technology go hand in hand with it when it comes to warfare digital and/or otherwise hence ultimately winning any cyber battle race of any sort.

not in this case

the whole china/cyber-warfare issue is crazy complex, but in a nut shell, their individual hackers are often tied to the government, and they have been specifically finding weaknesses in American/etc systems for years.

America's defense against such measures is growing, and there are limited advantages at this point (nobody is going to hack control of unmanned drones or anything like that anytime soon), but just as far as a state having a branch of the military trained to do cyber attacks, people sort of suspect China is at the forfront of this.

Originally posted by inimalist
(nobody is going to hack control of unmanned drones or anything like that anytime soon)

That already happened in Afghanistan, well not control of it but they got far enough into the system to see what the drone was doing.

oh, I take that back...

Originally posted by jaden101
Except for the fact that the US military is stretched thin of active soldiers as it is with its 2 tiny wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The US has very little capability to launch a war against anyone at the moment. If the US could "effortlessly crush" China then it would have made even lighter work of the Taliban but as it stands the Taliban actually has a bigger strength now than it did at the start of the war in Afghanistan.


You only have to look at the way the US reacts when a genuinely powerful nation tells them to mind their own business (Russia with regards to South Ossetia). What did the US do?...It butted out and minded it's own business...Why?...Because it knew that the relationship with Russia was far more important than the relationship with Georgia....Same applies to Korea...Even more so now with the US economy being highly dependent on China's massive economic growth.



thats not a fair comparison to make though. there is a very distinct difference between battling an "invisible" army while occupying a country on the other side of the planet, and defending ones own country from an attack. in the hypothetical situation that i am specifically discussing, one where china declares war on the united states and makes an attempt to attack our nation, chinas efforts would result in failure.

now if the scenario was america invading china, or american backed south korea vs. china backed north korea, id probably agree with you. thats completely different from the scenario im discussing, though.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That already happened in Afghanistan, well not control of it but they got far enough into the system to see what the drone was doing.

thats really surprising actually...

is it that I am underestimating the sophistication of hackers or overestimating the sophistication of the American networks?

I don't know, wouldn't it be possible for the American's to design hardware just completely incompatible with any comercially available stuff?

Originally posted by inimalist
thats really surprising actually...

is it that I am underestimating the sophistication of hackers or overestimating the sophistication of the American networks?

I don't know, wouldn't it be possible for the American's to design hardware just completely incompatible with any comercially available stuff?

Possibly a little of both:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126102247889095011.html

The US knew about the security flaw but assumed no one would know how to exploit the stream of unencrypted data from the drones. Some Russian file sharing program happened to be able to pick up the signal.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
the stream of unencrypted data from the drones.

wow, thats retarded...

thanks for the link

"unencrypted data:. what does that mean? the signal wasnt coded or something?

i am not computer literate at all

basically.

It would be like making your secret code channel 97.5 on the FM dial

EDIT: just to compare, it is already known that criminals in Brazil are able to hack into the computers of financial institutions remotely through the use of this:

http://oreilly.com/catalog/wirelesshks2/figs/I_6_tt457.png

having a unit that is sending and recieving information remotely, which is not encrypted, is basically just assuming that nobody is going to tune in

Originally posted by inimalist
not in this case

the whole china/cyber-warfare issue is crazy complex, but in a nut shell, their individual hackers are often tied to the government, and they have been specifically finding weaknesses in American/etc systems for years.

America's defense against such measures is growing, and there are limited advantages at this point (nobody is going to hack control of unmanned drones or anything like that anytime soon), but just as far as a state having a branch of the military trained to do cyber attacks, people sort of suspect China is at the forfront of this.

There's also the solice that the US has the largest 'advanced' hacker community in the world. Even in little OKC, the worlds largest hacker community for Wireless technologies has it's presence.

China MAY have more hackers, by far, but they are almost, the lot of them, script kiddies. They subsist on the programs, 0 days, and scripts that hackers in the US, Ukraine, and Russia create. Very little "new" malicious code comes from China. They mostly mod existing stuff and create massive botnets.


The difference? Easy: there's a much bigger backing from their government, than in the US. If the US would recruit and actively fund all of the hackers in the US, no country would be safe from our cyber-warfare.


Here's the problem with the US: we only accept "the few, the proud" into prestigious cyber security programs. They have to have immaculate criminal records and excellent grades. Sure, the government sponsered chinese hackers do, as well, but its not really the same at all: there's is more grassroots and haphazard.



Originally posted by inimalist
basically.

It would be like making your secret code channel 97.5 on the FM dial

EDIT: just to compare, it is already known that criminals in Brazil are able to hack into the computers of financial institutions remotely through the use of this:

http://oreilly.com/catalog/wirelesshks2/figs/I_6_tt457.png

having a unit that is sending and recieving information remotely, which is not encrypted, is basically just assuming that nobody is going to tune in

lulz...we did a project like that: pringles can "wifi discovery"...and ....other things....

And some more news on the topic:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10170019.stm

The situation is getting worse and worse, with all ties being severed to South Korea, North Korea has isolated itself. And by making additional threats it seems that the only thing North Korea has on its mind right now is war.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Here's the problem with the US: we only accept "the few, the proud" into prestigious cyber security programs. They have to have immaculate criminal records and excellent grades. Sure, the government sponsered chinese hackers do, as well, but its not really the same at all: there's is more grassroots and haphazard.

I was under the impression that for the NSA and CIA that was just the official stand.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I was under the impression that for the NSA and CIA that was just the official stand.

Not at all. You won't find very many people working for the CIA and NSA that have criminal records. If they are, it's for "little" things like a DUI when they were 16 or something like that. I was told that the NSA is starting to open up a bit and contract out hacking teams to do projects for them.....but I don't know any groups that have been contracted.

Originally posted by dadudemon
There's also the solice that the US has the largest 'advanced' hacker community in the world. Even in little OKC, the worlds largest hacker community for Wireless technologies has it's presence.

China MAY have more hackers, by far, but they are almost, the lot of them, script kiddies. They subsist on the programs, 0 days, and scripts that hackers in the US, Ukraine, and Russia create. Very little "new" malicious code comes from China. They mostly mod existing stuff and create massive botnets.


The difference? Easy: there's a much bigger backing from their government, than in the US. If the US would recruit and actively fund all of the hackers in the US, no country would be safe from our cyber-warfare.


Here's the problem with the US: we only accept "the few, the proud" into prestigious cyber security programs. They have to have immaculate criminal records and excellent grades. Sure, the government sponsered chinese hackers do, as well, but its not really the same at all: there's is more grassroots and haphazard.

ok, and I do get that most chinese hacking attacks can, if at all, only loosely be traced back to the government, and there is a sense of national heroism to these non-governmental hackers, but if America is so awesome with its cyber-warriors, why are its national security networks so vulnerable.

Like, I'm sure you are more aware of the military companies and governmental bodies that get hacked frequently, and all the data that has been copied and all that, how come we can't just shut them out?

Granted, I'm not super knowledgeable about this, but if America really has the best of the best as you describe, shouldn't that not happen?

Originally posted by inimalist
ok, and I do get that most chinese hacking attacks can, if at all, only loosely be traced back to the government, and there is a sense of national heroism to these non-governmental hackers, but if America is so awesome with its cyber-warriors, why are its national security networks so vulnerable.

It's hard to say, really: it's a combination of really high security and really low security. For real. You'll have an unpatched server sitting right next to an utterly armored server, in a DoD datacenter.

And, if America's "cyber-warriors" actually cared even a little about securing their own nation, maybe you'd have a point. They do it, literally, for the lulz and prestige.

Originally posted by inimalist
Like, I'm sure you are more aware of the military companies and governmental bodies that get hacked frequently, and all the data that has been copied and all that, how come we can't just shut them out?

I am aware. I get those reports, via e-mail. However, significant breachers aren't as often as you're making it out to be. If you saw some of the hacking traffic captured, you'd sh*t your pants. There's just so MUCh of it and the vast majority is really stupid amateur stuff that has been patched up a decade ago. The "good" stuff comes internally, from the US. Those attacks are successful, far more frequently.

Originally posted by inimalist
Granted, I'm not super knowledgeable about this, but if America really has the best of the best as you describe, shouldn't that not happen?

Sure, if the hackers actually gave a sh*t about our country...and our intelligence agencies were willing to work with ...well...criminals. Since neither of those scenarios hold true (with the latter seeing a tad bit of lax in recent days), we end up with the best hackers in the world, hacking for the lulz while China churns out thousands of low-quality hackers, each year, working for their nation.



Its very simple to secure you shizer...but don't tell anyone this stuff:


1. Default deny all on your external firewall. (After all of your business need exceptions are put in.)
2. Implement internal protection such as spoofing rules (these things come pre-written and have been a loooong time.)
3. Educat your employees.
4. Create a rigorous patch testing an deployment plan.
5. Contigency plan and document the crap out of it and update it frequently.
6. Follow ITIL best practices.
7. Bla bla bla: heuristic IDS/IP definitions that are frequently tested and updated.



Pretty simple to do all of those if you have a good CIO. No joke.


The problem:

Not everyone does that stuff. They do well on some and crappy on others or they don't do any of those very well.



Nothing can protect you from an 0 day, so you have to rely on the vendor/software developers to patch/hot fix that stuff. It's just how it goes.




So, I can sum up my whole post like this:

Chinese hackers: simple, massive numbers, and work together in loose pockets. Nationalistic or at least work for the government, "unofficially."
US hackers: Diverse skill levels with most of the world's best. Invividualistic, egotistical, and they don't play well with the US government.




Cyberwafare advantage: Chinese.


My job future: bumpy and complex but I'll always have a job.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Good.


Hopefully, we'll see some war, but no one gets killed.....?

I wish wars were fought in Cage matches by the presidents and other elected officials.

You couldn't of put it in any better way.

Originally posted by dadudemon
It's hard to say, really: it's a combination of really high security and really low security. For real. You'll have an unpatched server sitting right next to an utterly armored server, in a DoD datacenter.

And, if America's "cyber-warriors" actually cared even a little about securing their own nation, maybe you'd have a point. They do it, literally, for the lulz and prestige.

im sure I'm in no position to criticize here, I can't imagine our cyber security is any better, but how big of a deal would it be for the Americans to actually secure their networks? Is it simply a matter of no willingness, or an older generation not understanding computers, or is there something specific stopping it.

Also, I remember reading lots of stuff, I'm sure a lot of it conspiratorial crap, about this stuff call Promis software. Any thoughts on it? Is it real?

Originally posted by inimalist
im sure I'm in no position to criticize here, I can't imagine our cyber security is any better, but how big of a deal would it be for the Americans to actually secure their networks? Is it simply a matter of no willingness, or an older generation not understanding computers, or is there something specific stopping it.

Why do you think the average pay for a CISO is over $150K a year? If the average Joe knew how to mitigate cyber threats, it'd be a common job. Quite literally, there is a massive tug of war with the IT department's needs for cyber security funding and all of the other organizational units in the enterprise. It's hard to sell the business need for a threat that COULD happen, but hasn't happened. To ignorant executives, they think other facets are more important and funneling too much into cyber security (which includes paying qualified and skilled individuals to execute a cyber security program in the org). Wouldn't those "additional" funds be better suited for the advertising department? Wouldn't those funds be better suited for the legal department? Those are the questions that the enterprise has to consider, the CISO has to sell, and the organization has to weigh.

This boils down to a very fundamental business concept: Return of investment.

Will the funding of cyber security projects save more money than they cost? The question is VERY hard to answer as the results are very much intangible to a laymen...such as a CEO or a stock holder that can only comprehend the bottom line. Sure, you can sell the business need for a hearty cyber security infrastructure AFTER a severe threat has come to fruition (such as the loss of thousands of your employee's personally identifiable information (SSN, address, phone numbers, medical history, etc.)).



Those problems are compounded by the centric mentality of Americans. We are capitalists and proud of it. If you need me to go into depth on what I mean here, I can...it'd just take several paragraphs.

Originally posted by inimalist
Also, I remember reading lots of stuff, I'm sure a lot of it conspiratorial crap, about this stuff call Promis software. Any thoughts on it? Is it real?

I believe it is completely real and is not a conspiracy, at all. This kind of shit happens all the time. Do you think that contractors don't screw the government over? The US government gets screwed over far more often than contractors getting screwed by the US government. That does NOT justify their actions in the PROMIS case/problem. I don't see very much of it be conspiratorial at all when the final stages of the case hinged on the "government/panel" asking Inslaw to prove derivatives of the software were used by the government during the period in question. That's just absurd on so many levels. How the HELL would they prove that without treason-like espionage against the very same government that was funding them during that period? Sooooooo retarded on so many levels. One of the biggest pieces of shit ever to go through a legal process. It was so obvious what had happened.



However, I don't know much about the case, for real.

"China "will not protect" whoever sank a South Korean warship in March, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao has said."

"China objects to and condemns any act that destroys the peace and stability of the Korean peninsula," Mr Wen was quoted as saying after talks in Seoul."

Worded very interesting is it not?
Obviously they won't come outright and say they are supporting North Korea but the if the South starts war which it's drifting towards I think China will back the North and say, "South Korea started violence." Regardless of the previous incident.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Why do you think the average pay for a CISO is over $150K a year? If the average Joe knew how to mitigate cyber threats, it'd be a common job. Quite literally, there is a massive tug of war with the IT department's needs for cyber security funding and all of the other organizational units in the enterprise. It's hard to sell the business need for a threat that COULD happen, but hasn't happened. To ignorant executives, they think other facets are more important and funneling too much into cyber security (which includes paying qualified and skilled individuals to execute a cyber security program in the org). Wouldn't those "additional" funds be better suited for the advertising department? Wouldn't those funds be better suited for the legal department? Those are the questions that the enterprise has to consider, the CISO has to sell, and the organization has to weigh.

This boils down to a very fundamental business concept: Return of investment.

Will the funding of cyber security projects save more money than they cost? The question is VERY hard to answer as the results are very much intangible to a laymen...such as a CEO or a stock holder that can only comprehend the bottom line. Sure, you can sell the business need for a hearty cyber security infrastructure AFTER a severe threat has come to fruition (such as the loss of thousands of your employee's personally identifiable information (SSN, address, phone numbers, medical history, etc.)).



Those problems are compounded by the centric mentality of Americans. We are capitalists and proud of it. If you need me to go into depth on what I mean here, I can...it'd just take several paragraphs.

lol, I'm really interested in this stuff, so expand all you want, or if you want, I can make a cyber-security thread.

I guess I don't see why this is even considered an economic thing anymore. Like, capitalism doesn't justify treason, it shouldn't justify, from a national security standpoint, weak network security.

Is the DoD trying to increase corporate security? Are things changing since the google incident?

Originally posted by dadudemon
I believe it is completely real and is not a conspiracy, at all. This kind of shit happens all the time. Do you think that contractors don't screw the government over? The US government gets screwed over far more often than contractors getting screwed by the US government. That does NOT justify their actions in the PROMIS case/problem. I don't see very much of it be conspiratorial at all when the final stages of the case hinged on the "government/panel" asking Inslaw to prove derivatives of the software were used by the government during the period in question. That's just absurd on so many levels. How the HELL would they prove that without treason-like espionage against the very same government that was funding them during that period? Sooooooo retarded on so many levels. One of the biggest pieces of shit ever to go through a legal process. It was so obvious what had happened.



However, I don't know much about the case, for real.

so, as far as you know, derivatives of the PROMIS software are on most Western governments systems, and they do have the backdoor access that was initially programmed into them?

lol, if I find the conspiracy stuff again, I will send it your way. I get that there has to be some truth to it, but what im talking about is literally black helocopter stuff.

Originally posted by Liberator
"China "will not protect" whoever sank a South Korean warship in March, Prime Minister Wen Jiabao has said."

"China objects to and condemns any act that destroys the peace and stability of the Korean peninsula," Mr Wen was quoted as saying after talks in Seoul."

Worded very interesting is it not?
Obviously they won't come outright and say they are supporting North Korea but the if the South starts war which it's drifting towards I think China will back the North and say, "South Korea started violence." Regardless of the previous incident.

if it is just a war between north and south, I can't imagine china getting too involved. NK would annhiliate SK without NATO intervention.

I think they are warning against what most of us have warned against: American involvement on the Korean peninsulla. In such a conflict, American air-superiority would annhiliate NK, and not only would China lose a strong proxy, they would have NATO at their border. Think how America would react if Mexico were invaded by China. They couldn't let it happen for the sole reason that having a Chinese proxy state that close to them would destabalize the region. Look at how bad a small nation like Cuba was. It almost ended the world (and Che said he would have launched the missiles if he got them)

China will help N. Korea where it can in secret, be it weapon crates or intel. Just as the U.S. will help S. Korea in kind.

Again, I don't believe a war will break out over this, but if so, this could be another mini cold-war, not that the cold-war between the US and Russia ever really ended.

Originally posted by Robtard
not that the cold-war between the US and Russia ever really ended.

We're still intact, but their former states quit being a commie and went for capatalism. If by never ended, you mean they're sore at us, then yeah probably.

Although there's a lot of Russian exchange students in American colleges. So either the conspiracy nuts are right (they're a bunch of spies) or theyre genuinely interested in our culture.

i think he means in the way the people who run the military and foreign policy still divide the world into polor oppositions, not the mythology of capitalism vs communism that both nations generated to justify this.

what some call spies others call archeology and Anthropology...

best way to learn about another's culture and society.. even map making

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/asia_pacific/10252477.stm

Looks like Kim's days are finally over.

Interesting, "His promotion will be seen by some as a sign that Mr Kim is putting key personnel in place to ensure a smooth transition of power to his son."

Do you think this fellow is going to give up power so easily to Kim's son? Maybe North Korea will fall into civil war...? Just speculation mind you.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u55/WatchOut_02/JongWife.jpg

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'm sure we're friends with whatever country developed that technology in the first place. It shouldn't be too hard for the US to build a nuke.
While I realize that this post of yours is quite old, I simply couldn't help laughing like a maniac at this. No malice intended of course.