Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

China Taking on U.S. in Cyber Arms Race

Zonk posted more than 7 years ago | from the messier-than-a-tac-nuke-in-its-own-way dept.

Networking 262

Pabugs writes with a CNN story about an uncomfortable development in world politics and information technology. According to General Robert Elder, an Air Force military man setting up a 'cyber command' in Louisiana's Barksdale Air Force Base, the nation of China is already in the process of developing their own 'cyber warfare' techniques. While Elder described the bulk of China's operations as focusing on espionage, they and others around the world have more serious goals in mind. "The Defense Department said in its annual report on China's military power last month that China regarded computer network operations -- attacks, defense and exploitation -- as critical to achieving "electromagnetic dominance" early in a conflict. China's People's Liberation Army has established information warfare units to develop viruses to attack enemy computer systems and networks, the Pentagon said. China also was investing in electronic countermeasures and defenses against electronic attack, including infrared decoys, angle reflectors and false-target generators, it said."

cancel ×

262 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No surprise to those watching China (5, Informative)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#19517983)

China can be expected to increase strategic intelligence operations with respect to the United States and its other adversaries, especially as it continues its campaign for "multi-polarity". China employs a wide range of intelligence efforts with respect to the United States, many of which can be traced directly to intelligence capabilities within China's military and government establishment. Because China believes that the United States is a primary adversary, even as the US provides a good deal of the facilitation of China's growth, China can still be expected to continue and increase its strategic intelligence operations with respect to the US.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, China in some ways became the de facto ideological leader of the worldwide Communist movement. China found that it could use international Communist groups and networks, just as the Soviets did, to find persons sympathetic to the causes of Communism and socialism. Indeed, China has actively interacted with and supported international Communists, even persons or organizations known to be involved in criminal activities such a counterfeiting and money laundering. Chinese government officials have been known to meet with those in Communist organizations and student groups abroad, and there are indications such resources are leveraged in a similar fashion as with Russian intelligence.

As something of a flag bearer for world Communism, Beijing has become a "second Rome for Marxism-Leninism". China's Communists, much like the former Soviet Union's, believe world socialism is inevitable and that the Americans are a symbol of what is standing in their way. With the Soviets, the watchword was American "imperialism"; with the Chinese, American "hegemony". However, the Chinese also understand that many in the United States and the West in general view Communism negatively. As such, resources are also devoted to putting forth the images of Capitalism and quasi-democratic ideals, even as the vast populace of China enjoys no such benefit therefrom.

Part of China's strategic campaign is aided by its own system of government. As a system of government with control over much its own press, and even considerable influence over foreign press, China is executing an internal propaganda campaign against the United States with China's own people. At any opportunity, US intentions are painted as at best questionable and at worst aggressive and malicious. This environment, over time, will continue to enhance any support among the general populace for anti-US policy, or actions that must be taken against the United States, possibly with respect to quasi-autonomous disputed areas, such as Taiwan. Without access to multiple viewpoints on a situation, the Chinese people are fed a picture of the world as the Communist leadership wants it seen. Today, that includes mass censorship of the internet, and any sites associated with resistance movements, reformist groups, human rights organizations, and so on.

The propaganda does not stop at China's borders. The effort extends internationally, as China labors to appear clothed in the ideals of Capitalism and free markets - which it, in turn, knows will be seen by many experts as indicative of the decline of Communism. Some propaganda operations are not so subtle, with international news organizations living under the threat of losing their Beijing presence if information that is perceived too negative is published about China.

The continuing enhancement of these ideas lead to easing of trade restrictions, which in turn increases the transfer of high technology into China, and, especially, the finances so critically needed for the silent buildup of China's strength, military and otherwise. China is diligently working to continue to build its conventional army and navy, while also growing its strategic and high technology military capabilities. Chinese military theorists have envisioned new battlefields, where conflict does not happen in open warfare but also on the Internet, via the world of finance, and in the academic and scientific realms. Ironically, the United States is enabling the lion's share of this growth of capabilities.

China has also instituted a coordinated campaign to influence American politics in its favor. One mistake the United States has made in recognizing and analyzing this effort is the assumption that such influence must necessarily be associated with a desire for some particular point of concession; some specific act performed in-kind. Upon finding no such obvious evidence, the links are more easily viewed by some as innocuous or incidental. In reality, China is simply trying to generically influence popular and political opinion in its favor over the long term. A Senate Intelligence Committee report found that there was a concerted, coordinated effort by China to influence American politics. But there is no one task or favor: simply a relaxation of vigilance that ultimately leads the United States being unprepared for or inattentive to any real threat.

China's intelligence operations are many-faceted, extending beyond typical intelligence channels to trade organizations, academic and cultural exchange groups, policy think tanks, the press, and anywhere China can assert a position that makes it appear friendly or benign to US interests. China is also fully aware that American business desperately wants access to the Chinese marketplace; conversely, China greatly needs the influx of cash, technology, and growth that will continue to enable its growth. Therefore, China needs to ensure that an environment exists where such business is not only allowed but encouraged and seen as positive. All the while, China expands its military and naval powers, enabling it to project its influence far from its own shores.

Chinese intelligence, of course, does not ignore the value of well-placed agents within the United States government itself. China has extensive operations to cultivate spies, including spies within the United States Intelligence Community, particularly in areas of China expertise. The value of this more conventional aspect of spycraft is not lost on the Chinese. It appears that China prefers to maintain a very "hands off" approach to managing its agents, avoiding any direct or overt links that may lead to their discovery. It is via this mechanism that much critical US intelligence, defense, and scientific information may have already ended up in the hands of China.

While China is clearly a growing world power, nearly all of this power is derived from pure manpower and numbers. China still wants to maintain control over its population, and ultimately believes that Communism will prevail on a global scale. But, in order to achieve this, many leaders still believe this level of control must be exerted. This includes control of information and people internal to China. While the intelligence operations may be materially effective at performing these tasks for a time, they will ultimately undermine any external national security objectives. As more Chinese become educated and knowledgeable, the thirst for freedom of information, and more freedoms in general, will grow. China will need to devote more intelligence resources to this issue, again repeating the cycles that can be seen in many former Soviet states and the Soviet Union at large. Government existing in an adversarial or controlling position with respect to the internal population is the downfall of Communism.

China's strategic intelligence approach with respect to the United States is broad and multifaceted, targeting many areas simultaneously. China will continue to use deception, disinformation, influence of American politics and the press to divert attention from its growing power until it is too late to reasonably react. To this end, China will continue to use all of its resources to learn the workings of the American systems of society and government, and can no doubt be relied upon to use techniques of propaganda and perception management in the short term, and potentially overt aggressive action in the long term. The United States must maintain an open mind on the Chinese issue, and not be blinded by a belief that Capitalism has prevailed while a Communist threat bent on its own new world order silently grows.

Recommended reading:

Gertz, Bill, The China Threat: How the People's Republic Targets America [amazon.com] (Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, 2000).

Various authors, "China", Defense Intelligence Journal [jmicfoundation.org] , Vol 10 No 1 Winter 2001 (McLean, VA: National Defense Intelligence College, 2001).

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

ReidMaynard (161608) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518005)

I would mod you +1, but I am out
so..have a cookie

Re:No surprise to those watching China (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518105)

"The propaganda does not stop at China's borders. "

Additionally, the propaganda does not stop at the U.S.A. [whitehouse.org] borders.

Patriotically,
Kilgore Trout, C.E.O.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (4, Insightful)

DJ_Maiko (1044980) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518207)

& the U.S. doesn't do any of this?

I swear, we as Americans are so freaking self-righteous! We're the ONLY ones that can protect "our" internet. We're the ONLY ones who can monetarily profit from the expansion of China. We're the ONLY ones who should own nuclear weapons & should dictate who else can & can't!

I'd give you a +1 just for the length if your long, drawn-out diatribe wasn't riddled with subtle rifts of "I'm American, Hear me Roar!" You speak of "the spread of propaganda" & the use of "deception, disinformation & influence" by the Chinese yet we, as Americans, have been doing it for MUCH longer! As Robert Burns said in a poem:
"Ah that there would be someone to give us Eyes to see ourselves as others see us"

Re:No surprise to those watching China (4, Interesting)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518297)

It's comfortable on the chair of moral relativism, isn't it?

If you believe that Communism and freedom and democracy are just two sides of the same coin, I can see your line of reasoning. Sure, Capitalism is in the mix as well, but Captialism only exists and flourishes in a manifestly free society. Some believe that neither model is "better"; just different - the old "Under Communism, man exploits man - under Capitalism, it's the other way around" bit.

Thankfully, many people don't see it that way, and have recognized the benefits of freedom, free access to information, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and so on. Sure, freedom is tempered with the rule of law, and no system of government is perfect, but to quote Winston Churchill, "Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

DJ_Maiko (1044980) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518545)

Must be nice cherry-picking what you want to hear. You totally missed the point: I'm not saying democracy vs communism. Your whole 20 page paper of a post talked about China doing all this shady intelligence stuff & all I'm saying is the U.S. does the exact same thing. Noone's arguing the merits of freedom here but people who live in glass houses shouldn't be hurling stones...

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1, Insightful)

trippeh (1097403) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518563)

I'd argue that Capitalism is the only viable system as it's a natural extension of the basic instincts and desires inherent in the human psyche and Democracy is only the facade of competing autocracies But there again, I tend to say really stupid things sometimes. Democracy and Communism aren't diametrically opposed, you got that right. But freedom and democracy aren't automatically inclusive either, despite what the rhetoric would have us believe.

Basically, I think you said all you needed to say in your first line: Moral relativism makes any sort of value-judgments. Which is why I took umbrage at your use of the word freedom. Ain't no such thing, dude. Ain't no truth, ain't no beauty, ain't no right, ain't no wrong. I'm sure it looks just as wrong from the other side of the wall.

Uh... I don't have a pithy quote to end this on, so I'm just going to go with something irrelevant.
...asking 'can I live?' It's how these asinine kids imply they're dead already, they are, get a new car, release the brakes, put it in neutral, I'm going to steer you wrong, this way to the future, follow along...
- Paul Francis

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

oliverthered (187439) | more than 7 years ago | (#19519013)

'Captialism only exists and flourishes in a manifestly free society'

Many people say that China is more capitalist than the USA with their recent growth.
China is hardly a free country. (and it's certainly not communist either)

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

trippeh (1097403) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518305)

Americans, have been doing it for MUCH longer!

I'm pretty sure China's a much older civilisation, so they'd have been doing it longer by default. And I don't approve of your mea culpa attitude, although I see the merit in your words.

Props for the Burns quote, though.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (2, Insightful)

GeckoX (259575) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518475)

There was nothing in that post that took a decidedly pro-american stance. The poster could easily be from any country in the free world.

The fact is that china puts a lot of energy into it's relationship with the US, and vice versa.

What China is doing, rather, what was presented as what China is doing, has no bearing on how good or evil the US is. There was no insinuation of what you suggest whatsoever.

Rather, I hear a massive anti-us stance in _your_ post.

And as someone else mentioned, China is orders of magnitude older than the US. Learn some history and politics before you start flinging excrement around, you're showing yourself for the monkey that you are inside. Use that brain of yours and elevate yourself above. Your post was WAY more guilty of doing exactly what you have accused the gp's post of doing.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

DJ_Maiko (1044980) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518807)

I wasn't favoring one side or the other, I was just opining for clarity's sake based on the spin & semantics being used by said gp.

Sorry if you took offense, that's your right but it wasn't intended as such. I'm quite learned in history & politics & all I was saying was "let's look at it from the other side" or as Trippeh put it "from the other side of the wall." Then again, how dare I do that?! I should just allow the blinders to stay on, eh? TGIF!!!

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

GeckoX (259575) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518823)

Very interesting that this whole branch has been modded the way it has.
The original post was not condemning China, it was merely indicating the way things are. No one said the US was any better in their own right.

And yet unless you outright bash the US, you get modded into oblivion.

Interesting.

And I'm no american, and have very little love for the politics and position of the US within the world.

Interesting.

Sure would be nice if the world was as black and white as /. moderators appear to think it is.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

dhakbar (783117) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518681)

How did you get modded insightful? Your reply is bullshit; the parent post wasn't riddled with subtle rifts of "I'm American, Hear me Roar!" That's fucking retarded.

Anyone who cannot make out the qualitative difference between global domination by the US or China deserves to be sent to the gulags now. You spew your bullshit via the freedom of speech that the Chinese would deny you if they had control over you.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518715)

Kudos on quoting Burns.
 

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

smoker2 (750216) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518907)

Or even :
May the Lord have the gift to give us,
to see ourselves as others see us.
Allegedly when his trousers fell down (NOT).

Stupid Amerikuns paying China Billions a year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518227)

Stupid Amerikuns paying China Billions a year in trade. Stupid, stupid. Made by Chinese is cheap but stupid amerikuns like cheap.

Re:Stupid Amerikuns paying China Billions a year (1)

GeckoX (259575) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518557)

My SO just bought me a nice little tea infuser yesterday, came in a nice little package, nice little ceramic bowl as well, nicely painted even.

$3.99 CDN.

Normal price, not marked down at all.

That thing simply can NOT be made for that low a price, period. Can't be done. Let alone make a profit. Shit, I couldn't ship it to the other side of the world for that price.

Made in P.R.C.

I took it back and paid ~20 for one made closer to home. NOT because I wouldn't want my money going to China mind you, but because I don't believe in selling out our futures to benefit ourselves in the short term.

Given that we live in a capitalist society, we have the power to change these things, WAY more than any politicians do that is for certain.

Don't bitch about it, DO something about it.

Re:Stupid Amerikuns paying China Billions a year (1)

trippeh (1097403) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518657)

Well, if I could find a tea-infuser ANYWHERE, I'd buy it no matter who made it. Lucky bugger... I have to jerry-rig my own out of a teapot, wire, muslin and paperclips...

As for selling out your future, a teapot is a good place to start. Snaps for making a stand.
Although... how much closer to home?

Re:Stupid Amerikuns paying China Billions a year (1)

GeckoX (259575) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518737)

Actually, to be fair, not made a lot closer to home physically.

Ten Thousand Villages [tenthousandvillages.ca]

I know that by buying through ten thousand villages, that the people that actually made this item got paid for the work they put into it.

Re:Stupid Amerikuns paying China Billions a year (1)

DJ_Maiko (1044980) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518969)

Yup, props on the tea infuser...been meaning to get 1 of dem for the longest (so thx for that link as well). Giving back to the actual artisan groups is a good thang.

Re:Stupid Amerikuns paying China Billions a year (1)

Nullav (1053766) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518769)

Granted, you're just trolling, but I really have to point out that everyone likes inexpensive goods. That's the whole point of trade - getting what you can for the least amount of money.

China-watchers (1)

trippeh (1097403) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518239)

Doesn't help that China feels as if it is being excluded and threatened by a potential alliance between Japan, Australia, the US and India. More on this if I can work out where I put my newspaper...

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

bdjacobson (1094909) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518253)

So, now more than ever would be the time for the government to switch to Linux. Goodness knows they've got Windows by the balls; there are ~32 legal copies of XP over there. Security through obscurity is clearly working for Microsoft.

If we get into a "cyber war" you can bet your McDonalds toys we'd be safer running an open source solution.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

Nullav (1053766) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518917)

There are plenty of UNIX worms out there. Why stick to any publicly-available OS if there's such a perceived threat? It would be rather expensive to make an OS and the needed applications from scratch, but you can't attack something if you don't even know what it is.
Besides, it looks like the US is putting some money into counter-attacking, so why not just use that money to make the other side's attacks do nothing at all (except frustrate the attackers)?

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

ch-chuck (9622) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518257)

Who cares as long as we get cheap stuff from WalMart.

A Communist once said, "We'll bury you!" - the Chinese are actually doing it, with cheap disposable consumer products - taking factories and long term capital in exchange.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (4, Insightful)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518271)

China in some ways became the de facto ideological leader of the worldwide Communist movement
Communist? Certainly they're still authoritarian, but China hasn't been communist in decades.

 

Re:No surprise to those watching China (2, Interesting)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518377)

Communist? Certainly they're still authoritarian, but China hasn't been communist in decades.

I don't even know where to go with this, except to say that you are a shining example of everything I just said in the very post to which you responded.

And if you're going to get all semantic about it in the same way that some people say "the United States isn't really a 'democracy'; it's a federal republic," then go for it. But otherwise, it's perfectly acceptable and indeed correct to refer to China as Communist.

China has had a massive, documented, and concerted effort to get people of all stripes, from authors to analysts to politicians to government officials to individuals members of societies such as yourself, to believe they are no longer "Communist". Apparently it's working quite well.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518513)

I guess red baiting is a hard habit to break for some people. If China is pretending not to be communist, as you say, then they sure are putting on a great act with all of that private business and land ownership. Isn't NOT having a capitalist economy one of the requirements for being a communist country?

Re:No surprise to those watching China (2, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518757)

Thanks for continuing to prove my point. China's leadership is just as Communist, in ideal and much of the practice, as they ever were. "Red-baiting" has nothing to do with it. Call the leadership pragmatic if you wish, but China is still solidly a Communist nation.

Also, the United States has pockets of what could be called "socialism" in government and government programs. Does that mean the United States is socialist, or isn't Capitalist/Democratic? Of course not. To say that the existence of elements traditionally antithetical to pure "Communism" is proof that China is no longer "Communist" completely misses the larger point, and ignores the fact that China actually has significant intelligence programs dedicated to making people outside of China believe they are no longer Communist, and hint: it's not because they "really aren't any more".

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518687)

China has had a massive, documented, and concerted effort to get people of all stripes, from authors to analysts to politicians to government officials to individuals members of societies such as yourself, to believe they are no longer "Communist". Apparently it's working quite well.
Right... It's all a big conspiracy. 1000 million Chinese are all in on it!!!!!!

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/db3a3248-19be-11dc-99c5-00 0b5df10621.html [ft.com]

It's actually much worse than communism. Now, the whole world is going to have to compete with the chinese.

 

Re:No surprise to those watching China (3, Insightful)

daveschroeder (516195) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518859)

*Sigh*

Yeah, China has pockets of Capitalism where it's convenient. Even to the extreme in some cases. They also leverage Hong Kong in this respect to great advantage. Capitalism where it benefits the goals of furtherance of the ideals of the Chinese leadership.

And as I just said in another post:

The United States has pockets of what could be called "socialism" in government and government programs. Does that mean the United States is socialist, or isn't Capitalist/Democratic? Of course not. To say that the existence of elements traditionally antithetical to pure "Communism" is proof that China is no longer "Communist" completely misses the larger point, and ignores the fact that China actually has significant intelligence programs dedicated to making people outside of China believe they are no longer Communist, and hint: it's not because they "really aren't any more".

It's interesting folks like yourself think it's all about "red-baiting", or artificially calling the Chinese "Communists" because it makes them a more palatable adversary. China has invested a significant amount of intelligence resources over the last twelve or so years into making people erroneously believe that they have abandoned Communism and are really now a quasi-Capitalist state, because they know that appears "friendly" to the West, and primarily to the United States. This is thoroughly and well-documented, and your refusal to believe that might actually be the case is interesting.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (4, Interesting)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518383)

As something of a flag bearer for world Communism, Beijing has become a "second Rome for Marxism-Leninism"

A 'second Rome', or a 'Constantinople'?

I don't ask to be some semantical nazi or anything, but this phrase piqued my interest a bit... When Rome basically went splat and fell into the dark ages, Constantinople was basically it. There are a lot of the same parallels, too - The Eastern Roman Empire wasn't nearly as outgoing, wan't nearly as -how do I put it- 'extroverted'? Also, Rome wasn't nearly as refined. The paralels are starting to pile up at this point.

China does do one thing different, though - it welcomes outsiders and uses as much as it can from them. It also exists in a far different geopolitical environment.

I also think that China's political system is (slowly) being changed over time, and could not survive for long if a hard enough adversity hit them - either politically or economically. Something on the order of the Great Depression (a global one, like in the early 1930's) would likely foment some very bad mojo in Beijing, and traditional tolerance by the masses aside, I don't think the Chinese gov't could withstand it w/o either collapsing or going back to the iron fist.

I guess that, while it is good that the West does see them as something to be reckoned with, I believe that the Chinese political system is an increasingly fragile one, but will hold up - as long as times are good.

/P

the chinese are old school authoritarian (2, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518463)

they don't represent an ideological threat they represent a power center threat. that's a big, fundamental difference, and a crucial one in how to view china

ideologically, the chinese are severely compromised: a communist system only in name. in actuality the chinese are more capitalist than the worst excesses of the gilded age under the robber barons. witness the latest scandals just today: disgusting child labor [news.com.au] and fake and deadly products [cnn.com]

this hypercapitalism is resulting in gated communities of ultrarich next to a countryside of desperate and teeming poor. communist my ass. china is orders of magnitude more capitalist than any society on this planet. and ruled by a "Communist Party". ha!

ideologically bankrupt, china is therefore just a power center. the only real threats to the united states and the west are ideological ones. centers of power without an ideological center cannot grow and spread, but merely sit there. in actually the reverse holds true: power centers without ideology fall under the sway of other foreign ideologies, and the chinese in that respect are ripe to fall under the influence of a new ideology. the only real model close to anything china coudl become being a western democratic one

i actually hold no illusions that democracy will cheerfully and without resistance spread across china any time soon. china is historically bureaucratic and authoritarian, and will in fact take generations to go truly democratic, if ever. but if china is on course anywhere, however slow, it is towards that kind of enlightenment. it's either that or the continuation of the longstanding chinese historical tradition of stifling authoritarianism and layers of indolent bureaucracy. which would be a shame, as it would doom china to the long term decay and inwardness and lack of progress that it faced centuries before. china in fact has a chance to democratize now, with difficulty, and with every passing decade the chance of that becomes less, and the certainty of its historical bureaucratic inertia reasserting itself becomes more

there is only one other real ideological threat in this world, something china is not in danger of coming under, and something that is a real threat to the usa: militant islamic fundamentalism. i fear and worry about a theocracy in tehran with an atomic bomb way way more than i worry about the chinese. the chinese are ideologically dead in the water. tehran meanwhile is ideologically muscular and virulent

the west did in fact defeat/ witness the collapse of communism. don't fool yourself into thinking communism is still a threat. the only real threat today to the west is militant islamic fundamentalism. the chinese meanwhile are ideologically toothless, and therefore no real threat. they just want to make money

i say to the chinese: remember and listen to the plan sun yat sen [wikipedia.org] laid out a century before for china. sun yat sen, the hero to both the nationalists and the chinese:

1. expel foreigners. done
2. centralize power. done
3. democratize. not done. yet

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

gregoryb (306233) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518481)

China's Communists, much like the former Soviet Union's, believe world socialism is inevitable....

With the way our government has been going in the past 50 years, it's looking like they're right.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518793)

* I don't see how US differs with respect to strategic intelligence operations from China.
* It is natural US to be an adversary of china. It is an adversary of every nation (except maybe a few like UK) even if they don't admit it for apparent reasons. And this phenomenon is also natural, since they mess up with everything, and piss off everyone.
* With the death of Mao Zedong, china has gone a long way since the Marxism-Leninism ideology. Check the corresponding wikipedia page to learn a bit about China's history.
* Press is controller, more or less, in US also. Just compare to what oversees news agencies report for the same news, and other news items that you cannot easily find in US.
* You are also fed with a picture of the world as the US government wants you to see it. I can guarantee this to you. At this very moment you are fed with messages against China, and Iran.
* The "help" of US to China is called economic interest of companies. Nothing to do with actually providing help for their own sake.
* If you read history, you will see that Taiwan is Chinese, and was always part of china. It just happen to be the place where the competing government settled after the civil war. That doesn't make a good reason for independence. US wants to weaken china by segmenting it as much as possible, the same way it does for other countries in EU.
* All the crap you are talking about spies and networks, are the same and much worse in US and long time already.

In The United Gulags of America: : +1, Seditious (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518913)

( You stated: "The propaganda does not stop at China's borders." )

The propaganda starts with the world's biggest gunrunner [whitehouse.org] .

Sincerely,
K. Trout, C.E.O.

Re:No surprise to those watching China (1)

jandersen (462034) | more than 7 years ago | (#19519025)

You don't have to have been particularly 'watching China' to know these things - anyone with a brain knows that these things happen, and all you are doing is to proclaim banalities in a loud and clear voice. Just a few examples:

China can be expected to increase strategic intelligence operations with respect to the United States and its other adversaries, especially as it continues its campaign for "multi-polarity"

Yes, duh - this is what nations do, even to their 'friends'. Israel spies on America, America spies on UK and the rest of Europe. It would be naive in this context to expect that China - the alleged Great Enemy - would hold themselves too good, when the US don't.

China's Communists, much like the former Soviet Union's, believe world socialism is inevitable and that the Americans are a symbol of what is standing in their way

Yes, communists and socialists do believe that world socialism is what will naturally evolve if civilisation exists long enough. Some want to help this development by means of violent revolutions, but that is idiotic; true communism is not possible until everybody (or most) want it (and then it will happen democratically). American style capitalism is not 'in the way', but it will fail in the end. All we have to do is wait for it to happen.

China has also instituted a coordinated campaign to influence American politics in its favor

And America has never ever tried to influence the politics of other countries, or?

Having read and understood what you write, I come to the conclusion that 1) China is just a country like all others, who pursue Chinese interests vigorously and intelligently, which is why their importance is steadily growing, and 2) you are a paranoid fool who has more or less copied this from a standard factbook about China. If one were to substitute 'China' with 'America' and 'communism' with 'capitalism', it would be just as true.

America's bad reputation in the world is by and large well deserved, because of a) what the American governments have done over the years, b) what American companies do and have done for many years and c) what American military has done and still does. Most people in the world know that ordinary Americans are just people, who are reasonably good and decent, but we can all see what your 'representatives' do, and it leaves an unfortunate impression, to say the least. Perhaps it doesn't look as bad to the average American, but that is mainly because you sit in your comfortable homes and you don't hear all that much about it; and anyway, it happens 'somewhere else'.

This is not about 'the evil communists' trying to deceive us all with propaganda and slander against the 'purehearted and noble Americans'. Sorry, but that's just the way it is.

Mneh (0, Offtopic)

Helen Keller (842669) | more than 7 years ago | (#19517987)

I meneh gnnOVerlords. FRgnnn pissm!!!

Huge purple penis (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518029)

In your butt. [goatse.cz]

And... (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518035)

The American people are paying for it all too. Isn't that nice of them.

 

Re:And... (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518291)

Yes, and unfortunately both major political parties are in the pocket of business interests who want to keep it that way. I will and do pay more for things made in the US or in countries I consider more friendly to us, but by and large people will continue to buy at the lowest price point they can find, and our Government is willingly selling away the store, so to speak.

Probably get modded for Troll, but... (5, Insightful)

DigitalSorceress (156609) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518055)

I gotta say that it feels like that particular war's started already, and it's just that nobody actually told us.

Whether intentional or just a result of all those pirated copies of Winderz, the sheer number of bot-net/zombie attacks coming from China is staggering.

Too bad the "Great Firewall of China" is so concerned about information going IN to the country... I guess its perfectly fine if a citizen's computer sends thousands of emails for v1@gr@ or posts a zillion commercial messages into someone's threaded discussions... Just as long as it doesn't inform the user of how they've got very little freedom and a horrible standard of living, or say anything bad about the Chinese gub'ment!

Re:Probably get modded for Troll, but... (1)

DigitalSorceress (156609) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518275)

Oh, just for clarification... I wasn't meaning to specifically say anything real about the quality of life or amount of freedom in china, just that empirically, it sure seems like that's their government's worry.

Xie xie^H^H^H^H^H^H^Thank You,
A normal American Capitalist worm-baby.

Arms races are stupid (1)

biscon (942763) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518061)

but at least people won't be killed by these weapons.. perhaps

Re:Arms races are stupid (1)

BlueTrin (683373) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518229)

Maybe not directly, we will just be killed by the tactical/strategic missiles, after they pirated our defense systems.

Beginning... (1)

jshriverWVU (810740) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518067)

of a new Cold War? This time not with nukes, but cyber warfare?

Re:Beginning... (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518279)

I am looking forward to it. Cyber warfare and electro-magnetic dominance means that communication and remote controlling can be disrupted on a battlefield. Logically that would mean that we will see more drones with AI capabilities, able to take decisions even when cut from the HQ. That should bring a lot of army money into the AI field.

Of course this also brings many SF scenarios closer to reality as well.

Re:Beginning... (1)

another_fanboy (987962) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518429)

we will see more drones with AI capabilities, able to take decisions even when cut from the HQ. That should bring a lot of army money into the AI field So long as they are not made in China...

Re:Beginning... (1)

should_be_linear (779431) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518411)

Cold War will not repeat. What is different here is that this time it is not possible to totally brainwash citizens and cut them from _all_ information sources, like Soviets did. and Chinese are doing now with majority of *poor* people there. China citizens are getting more rich and, eventually, they will get to point when they will have access to internet and be able to have all informations they need. In this case, for democratic world, best tactics is "sit and wait" (actually that worked for Soviet Union as well). Evil empire will fall appart from within. Sooner or later, Chenese version of Neo (Havel, Valesa, ...) will pull one card from bottom of regime's card tower of lies.

China's First Move (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518589)

China will strike first by freezing all World of Warcraft gold farming accounts thereby causing chaos online.

Redundant (1)

Zironic (1112127) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518073)

I'm fairly sure I saw almost that exact quote on Slashdot about a month ago. http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/28/183 5250 [slashdot.org]

surprised? (1)

biscon (942763) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518089)

does that come as a surprise to you? ;)

Inframa-watchits?? (1)

tygerstripes (832644) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518083)

Infrared Decoys and Angle Reflectors?

Eh?

The article doesn't seem to explain what the hell these are supposed to be - can someone enlighten me? It seems as though, by branding ICT warfare as "electromagnetic warfare", they've confused the issue somewhat. What does infrared have to do with internet tubes and a bunch of ones and zeros?

If they mean "Chaff and Mirrors", well... what the hell? Whom did they get this info from, and were they trying not to giggle when they said it? Or did I just not grasp the article properly?

Re:Inframa-watchits?? (2, Interesting)

kalirion (728907) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518337)

It's pretty simple. All missiles have an IR port for commands. If there are infrared decoys, the enemy won't know which is the missile to hack! And an angle reflector will reflect the enemy's hacking signals right back at him (think shiny shield against Medusa.)

Re:Inframa-watchits?? (2, Informative)

BlueTrin (683373) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518357)

"China also was investing in electronic countermeasures and defenses against electronic attack, including infrared decoys, angle reflectors and false-target generators, it said."


The article said that in addition of all of this, they also invested in ECMs and general defenses against electronic attacks.

I see your point, but you could also consider that the infrared targetting systems are electronic also ... (chaffs are considered as ECMs because they are a counter for electronic targetting systems)

Re:Inframa-watchits?? (1)

mikiN (75494) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518495)

Infrared Decoys and Angle Reflectors?

If they mean "Chaff and Mirrors", well... what the hell?
More like "Smoke and Mirrors". Those are some of the oldest, still very effective means of deception. Just ask any illusionist worth his salt.

Great (0, Troll)

Mockylock (1087585) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518087)

China's going to defeat the US with pirated copies of it's own OS. It'll be interesting to see how this pans out.

US has advantage (1)

yohanes (644299) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518093)

They got more Holywood computer science fictions movies as their reference while China has more kungfu movies.

China owns a lot of US debt (2, Interesting)

svendsen (1029716) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518097)

I'm more concerned how much of the US debt china owns. Imagine china dumping all the debt and buying Euros. Pretty much most articles I have read said it would crush the dollar. That alone would probably be enough to start and end a war all at once.

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

DigitalSorceress (156609) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518179)


Lt. Gen. Robert Elder: "okay boys, the flag's gone up... we're authorized to implement full-scale electronic warfare against China. Begin preparations"
Pvt. Doorman: "Um sir, there's a gentleman here to see you, something about repossessing the command post..."

---- 3 hours later (after the command posts computers have been hauled away for non-payment) ---

Lt. Gen. Robert Elder: "Jones!"
Sgt. Jones: "Yessir!?!"
Lt. Gen. Robert Elder: "Prepare the TinFoil Hats!"
Sgt. Jones: "Yessir!!!"

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

winkydink (650484) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518205)

Crushing the dollar would crush the cash cow that fuels China's economy. The current situation is the financial equivalent of Mutually Assured Destruction.

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

svendsen (1029716) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518259)

I disagree. One if there was a war I don't think China would see us as a cash cow, they would see us as a cow to try to cut up into pieces then sell for more in the short term, and once the war was over their would be reconstruction, trade, etc. so money would still come in.

Two look at the US during our depression what got us out of it. By gearing up the country for war jobs and money were produced. China would do the exact same thing. And since they have a ton of US factories well that wont be a problem.

Three any income loss will not effect the rich it will effect the normal person. Oh out of a job you say well look at the package if you join the army! Oh don't want to join well your coming in anyway either way more numbers to their forces.
Four since the US is already tied up in the middle east and the armed forces are stretched how much could we throw at them vs. what they can throw at us? So the conflict will probably be very quick.

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

winkydink (650484) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518631)

How does China switching from production for export to domestic production fuel it's own economy?

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518365)

They can't offload all of their dollars, because if they did, they couldn't buy oil. Nations across the world keep a stockpile of US dollars on hand just so they can purchase oil from OPEC, which since the 1970s, has only exchanged oil for US currency. The reason we invaded Iraq is because Saddam decided he didn't care what he was paid in, and the same thing will happen with Iran.

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518539)

The Opec countries are developing their own currency... Which would be required to buy oil... Basically you pay em twice for the oil.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2313847.stm [bbc.co.uk]
http://forex.gftforex.com/public/blog/145016 [gftforex.com]

 

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

Shambly (1075137) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518835)

So it's ok to pay the US once and the OPEC countries once? It never made any sense to me why OPEC doesn't accept whatever currency the country use. Right now they are proping up the US economy for no good reason. Why shouldn't they be the sole profiteers of their own endeavors?

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518385)

Dumping the debt would damage the US economy badly, beyond what Bush has already accomplished, it'd cause inflation to increase massively and correspondingly the dollar to drop. They'd be insane to dump the debt though, it'd be the nuclear option, they'd lose billions. It doesn't make sense until the Chinese economy has diversified enough to import/export from/to other countries.

They are selling it off though, which along with the US government borrowing like no tomorrow is why the US is already experiencing increased inflation, higher interest rates and a dropping dollar.

 

Re:China owns a lot of US debt (1)

mikiN (75494) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518787)

P: "One Kung Pow Chicken to go, please."

W: "One Har-Wu-En-Ling [wikipedia.org] coming up, sir..."

Not many bottles of beer left on the wall (1)

Poseiden (575105) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518125)

The US has been to war with so many countries that have posed even the slightest economical threat that who is really surprised that the US is in the beginning stages of building a case of going to war against China. I'm not saying this definitely is CIA misinformation... but there is a CIA propaganda department, I would certainly be releasing all of the negative news about China, real or not. We all know by now how our government can put a twist on wars, going back to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine-American_W ar [wikipedia.org] It makes perfect sense to start out with small bits of propaganda to slowly win the publics opinion, that way we (the public) wont even realize it has happened. I'm also not saying that China is perfect, neither was Iraq. But Iraq was much better off 7 years ago. I feel sorry for Iraq, I don't want to have to feel sorry for China in a few years. Take one down, pass it around, 0 bottles of beer on the wall :/

Re:Not many bottles of beer left on the wall (1)

dragonsomnolent (978815) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518491)

Your post is very interesting, but the fact is that all wars eventually become ground wars (unless we just carpet bomb the whole country), and a very important lesson from history is Never get into a ground war in Asia. There are simply too many Chinese people, who are too proud of their culture who will do anything they have to, to get a foreign aggressor out. In Korea, U.S. machine guns would overheat and jam while the Chinese soldiers just kept coming. It would be very foolish of this country to attempt a war with China. Not saying this country hasn't done foolish things in the past (not just this administration, but several others), but a war with China would be a Bad Thing.

China is nothing without Bill Clinton's help (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518129)

They stole/bought all their technology in the 1990's from the Clinton Administration (remember the Lincoln Bedroom sleepovers?) in trade for campaign contributions to the Democrats. Since sanity has returned to the White House under Bush, they have nothing new. Just keep Hillary out of WH and we will be OK.

I hope China doesn't fight Britain (1)

cabalamat3 (1089523) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518131)

Britain's new warships run -- you've guessed it -- Microsoft Windows 2000. So in the event of a war between Britain and China, this could bring a whole new meaning to "blue screen of death".

Re:I hope China doesn't fight Britain (1)

HikingStick (878216) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518499)

Thus, "blue sea of death"?

what a surprise.. (1)

rucs_hack (784150) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518133)

I wonder what imaginary land the US military and political leaders live in that makes them think they could tool up in space and land defense systems and have no-one else respond...

If China had started first, the US would be responding, and it would be 'Right' and 'Good' that they do so.

China is doing exactly the same thing, and it's bad? Hello? Reality calling, this is not a surprise....

easy (2, Funny)

otacon (445694) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518135)

access list 110 deny ip any any

Victory.

Another strange twist in our China relationship (4, Insightful)

ErichTheRed (39327) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518147)

It'll be interesting to see what China (and Asia in general) does in the next 50 years. On one hand, they publicly denounce the US and treat us like an enemy. On the other, we've pretty much lost all of our manufacturing capability to them. No US producer can ignore their vast quantities of cheap labor and hospitable business climate. Now that the Communists have no real power there, what's going to fill in the void?

What will be even more interesting is a conflict that forces us to begin manufacturing domestically again. I wonder how long it'll take to ramp up all the factories that closed up during the last 30 years or so?

Any country on Earth with enough technological resources to protect would be stupid not to start thinking about ways to defend it in a conflict. China's no exception.

Re:Another strange twist in our China relationship (3, Insightful)

svendsen (1029716) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518185)

And if China decides to take all the factories and convert them to war production and drafts a lot of its billion citizens you've got a lot of military power quickly. Sure they won't be well trained or equipped but if anything the last couple of decades has shown better trained and equipped doesn't give you a huge advantage it once did.

I think you are a little confused (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518749)

The last couple decades have shown just the opposite: How devistating a small, but well trained and equipped military can be. Some nations have moved away form conscription because of it (like France). What we are seeing is the inability of a small military to deal with guerrillas, which is an entirely different thing.

The question with China isn't if they could build a lot, but could they do anything with it. The first challenge they'd face is getting all that stuff across the ocean. This would not be a quick voyage, the US would notice immediately, and the ocean is full of US subs. Even supposing they did, they'd face the same problem the US does now in Iraq: A local populace that hates your guts, is armed, and can tell you apart because you look different.

A 10 million man army doesn't get you anything if it gets sunk on the way over, and it would take only a few dozen good hunter-killer subs to do that, which the US has.

Re:I think you are a little confused (1)

svendsen (1029716) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518945)

You are assuming China would want the mainland US. My assumption is they simply take Taiwan, and other surrounding countries. Hell they aren't that far away from the middle east to send some troops over. Send a few hundred thousand into the middle east and see what happens.

Then they dump the US dollar (our economy tanks. maybe china takes a hit but at this point it is a war). Now you have a US with a weak economy, weak military, out of the middle east (wonder how much gas costs after that), etc.

As for the small military comment: If you have a small force that cant hold onto the land it grabs once it controls it what good does that do you? Also the small sized forces are highly trained and equipped which means losses hurt you (can't easily replace someone who has been trained for years) vs. hey with conscription we can take massive losses and still go on.

China doesn't need to control the US lands, it just needs to control the US global presence.

Sure it does... (1)

Vr6dub (813447) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518767)

If your goal is to decimate your enemy then enough well placed bombs would destroy their infrastructure in no time. We could do most of it from our own soil. We have been involved in some rather unconventional wars in the last couple of decades. With the advent of precision weapons and stealth bombers it wouldn't be too hard. That said, I hope it never comes to that.

Re:Sure it does... (1)

Vr6dub (813447) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518805)

Sorry, not yelling. Forgot the "end bold".

No problem, I'll just use this new system to (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518149)

squash this bug and NORAD will be back up in no time. Where's that shelter again?

Black Lotus has trained us well ... (4, Funny)

gentimjs (930934) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518161)

.. there's always a way in ..

Cyber attacks (0, Redundant)

Zarhan (415465) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518221)

Ok, could somebody please explain to me what classifies as a cyber-attack? It seems all these are applicable only to public Internet, not private networks. What's all the fuss?

Targeted, distributed DDos against goverment websites? Ok. I can see that (see what happened in Estonia). Lots of mitigating technologies including but not limited to stuff like BGP blackholing and so on and the most obvious attack vector. However, is there really anything else?

Breaking into systems? Ok, but do you really have anything critical on a public webservers and other Internet-facing systems? This isn't the 80's when things like Cuckoo's Egg [wikipedia.org] happened easily and some systems didn't even have passwords. Of course admins in several organizations are incompetent, but it's not like you could play Wargames [wikipedia.org] (ie. launch nukes or similar), since those systems are not connected to Internet.

Mostly I'm thinking what exactly is the impact of all this? A temporarily blocked access to public websites? What else is there? "Cyber-attack" just seems a buzzword. What do they mean?

Or do they really have attacks going against private, supposedly secure networks (perhaps intercepting satellite communications or undersea fibers?)

Re:Cyber attacks (1)

kalirion (728907) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518387)

Of course admins in several organizations are incompetent, but it's not like you could play Wargames [wikipedia.org] (ie. launch nukes or similar), since those systems are not connected to Internet.

No, but you could start a nuclear crisis with our powerplants, forcing the president up into the air, then shoot down Air Force One, recover the "football", steal a nuclear missile, and then launch it.

Re:Cyber attacks (2, Insightful)

djupedal (584558) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518591)

"Ok, could somebody please explain to me what classifies as a cyber-attack? It seems all these are applicable only to public Internet, not private networks. What's all the fuss?"

Day 1.) You, the lazy and over confident American, are preparing to release a new technology and enjoy all that profit that is bound to rain down for years, if not decades. You've been confirming patents, training vendors, stockpiling components and lining up sales channels. Some of that data has traveled public networks, but so far, most has circulated on your private network. And someone has been watching both.

Day 2.) All of the details of your plan have been harvested, mined and translated out of English into not one, but at least 1/2 dozen foreign languages.

Day 3.) Investments in all of the related technologies are planned and set to take place at the appropriate times to (a) profit (b) control the resources at their roots (c) position what appear to be innocuous bond traders so that when the time is right, the trigger is pulled and your firm is put in a less than favorable global market light.

Day 4.) Copies, clones and variants of your new technology are made available in vast markets where you have no reach.

Day 5.) You release your technology into the market place, like a new born calf, and wait for it to take those first precious steps all on its' own.

Day 100...) Instead of finding yourself the captain of industry all of those domestic pundits said you'd be, you have this feeling that maybe you've wasted your time, somehow.

Day 500.) The sadness you feel, seeing others profit from your firm's hard work and yankee ingenuity can hardly be put into words. Your staff put in the time - your investors put in the money - you put in years of your life. Is it possible there are others like you? Is it possible you and other domestic companies gifted the futures of concerns outside your country? How could something like this happen?

How could the good old USA be leap-frogged by developing nations dominated by dirt farmers and polluted countrysides? How?

Outsourcing (3, Insightful)

rlp (11898) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518315)

A lot of US companies are outsourcing software development to China. Hardware vendors are moving the bulk of their manufacturing to China. At the same time, the US military is relying more and more on off the shelf software and hardware. Seems to me that there's ample opportunity for mischief (hidden trojans, etc.). Curious, that no one seems to be concerned about this.

Defensive? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518321)

If so, they have the right.

Cyber Arms Race (1)

jhutchens (1115547) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518335)

"Cyber Arms Race"
I read cyber arms race and thought of USA vs CHINA with two whole teams of campers with AWPs.

yea... (5, Informative)

dingDaShan (818817) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518345)

I am an american studying in China, and can say that I have not seen a single legal copy of xp, music cds, dvds, software, or in fact, any electronic media. Even Chinese movies are nearly completely ripped off even though they cost about $1.5 USD. My friend bought a laptop here and it came with complimentary copies of photoshop, xp, office, and more. The environment here is nothing like you would picture communism to be. In fact, it isn't communism at all. Chinese communism means something entirely different than Soviet communism meant, just as democracy means something different to every country. The people here don't dislike the US. They are not brainwashed to do so. Most people simply do not care about big issues. There are definitely important international issues though. The Taiwan situation is a significant example. Taiwan is a hot issue here, but most people just want to make enough money to be able to buy more. True capitalists. Furthermore, the laws are completely different than the actual situation. Enforcement is selective, and many laws are not enforced at all. As to provide insight into the actual story: every major country has information security and warfare as a priority. Why would China not want to? Also, as far as China is concerned, Taiwan is a rogue state... why should security not be important in that context as well? China and the US are MAJOR trading partners. The US and the Soviet Union were not so much. The list goes on...

Contest: Who can be the most crazy? (1, Troll)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518389)

This is a race to see who can be the most expensive, adversarial, angry, destructive, and lacking in social sophistication. I've had Chinese friends and acquaintances in 5 countries, and I'm betting on the U.S. government being more mentally ill than the Chinese government.

Frankly, that's what it is, a kind of socially contagious mental illness.

I work for the day when the U.S. government is able to live in the world without killing other people. The mental illness of the U.S. government encourages unstable government leaders everywhere to be more unstable.

The U.S. government's killing is motivated by the desire of a few rich people to make more money. For example, see: Coups Arranged or Backed by the USA [krysstal.com] .

I love the United States. Do you? If you do, show it by resisting the craziness [futurepower.org] .

We got 'em beat (3, Funny)

Maury Markowitz (452832) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518469)

Forget the Chinese, we Canucks already have all your contractors pegged with our Supr-Dupr Spy Coins! All your base are belong to us!

Why does anyone believe anything that comes out of the Pentagon any more?

Im in ur SuprmPplsAssm, pwning ur Gr8 Ldr kekeke (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518517)

Virtually all potential U.S. foes also were scanning U.S. networks for trade and defense secrets, he added.

"Everyone but North Korea," he said. "We've concluded that there must be only one laptop in all of North Korea -- and that guy's not allowed to scan overseas networks," Elder said.

Does the US NOT do this??? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518519)

It was my understanding that the US government has basically decided they also want to do this so that they could do the same thing in similar circumstances.

Why on Earth would they be surprised that someone else would do this?

I mean, the US continues to build up its missile defense and loads of other things and saying other countries shouldn't worry about it. But, it's not really realistic to assume that everyone else will just sit by while the US ramps up their capabilities.

I don't imagine any of the super-powers (or budding ones) want to fall behind on such things.

Cheers

a load of cyber BS .. (1)

rs232 (849320) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518617)

"has established information warfare units to develop viruses to attack enemy computer systems and networks"

Why don't they make a 'computer system' that don't get viruses. And anyone who uses a computer on a military network that is suseptable to 'viruses' needs their collective heads examined. Besides which the real US military network is isolated from the Internet. Besides which winSEC was diluted so that the security services could monitor the real enemy, their own people.

FUD, or stealthed IQ test? (1)

BobMcD (601576) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518639)

I can't decide what this is, but it can't be taken at face value. Consider:

"Everyone but North Korea," he said. "We've concluded that there must be only one laptop in all of North Korea -- and that guy's not allowed to scan overseas networks," Elder said.
So, that's likely a joke, right? But the whole thing reads as a joke to me. The 'cyberwar battleground' will be the internet, true, but is this even remotely military? No one will die. No land will change hands. Nothing WHATSOEVER will happen that couldn't be resolved by traditional military action. Imagine they take over, say, Bank of America and start writing checks like mad. BoA's IT pulls the plug, and the cleanup begins. Now say that China has that money, and won't give it back. We'd roll over there with the whole 'shock and awe' schtick, and despite who would win, nobody wants that. China AND the US have far more at stake than, say, BoA can provide. Could they disrupt the civilian infrastructure for a few days? Probably. Would that prevent military retaliation of the traditional sort? Not a chance. So, back to the beginning, what's the real deal here? Is it FUD? A front for some other, real spending? Or is more of our defensive capability at risk than I realize?

Correction (1)

Odin The Ravager (980765) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518697)

Gen. Elder isn't just "some guy" starting a 'cyber command' in Louisiana (The secretary of the Air Force, along with some other military personel are in the process of creating it, and it should be ready this Summer); he is going to be the head of the Air Force Cyberspace Command [wikipedia.org] , the new MAJCOM (major division of the Air Force, now there are 10), which is headquarted in Louisiana. This MAJCOM was specifically set up for this kind of thing, fulfilling the last line of the mission of the Air Force:

...to fly and fight in air, space, and cyberspace
Also, Barksdale AFB [wikipedia.org] was the first place the president was flown after 9/11, so as you can tell it's a major base.

Shame on both countries (1)

gentlemen_loser (817960) | more than 7 years ago | (#19518731)

The US's critical defense systems are completely isolated from the internet. I fully expect the same of our Chinese counterparts. That leaves only civilian targets. The only goals that either side could have in mind involve the total crippling of the opposing countries economy and infrastructure. Imagine not a nuclear wasteland, but rather an economic one. No food shipments, no way to buy food with no income, etc. Imagine the chaos that would ensue as everyone tried to get by and the country's own government would be forced to intercede by way of martial law (with still no food for the general population). Thousands to millions of civilians would die.

On one hand, from a military perspective - great idea. On the other hand, from a war crimes perspective, these people fucking suck and should be tried as war criminals should they ever give the order to execute these plans.

Bloody military (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19518989)

General: I need a new laptop for my shiny presentations!!!
Lieutenant: Let's scare the hell out everybody saying that the China is going to pwnz0r our a$$e$.
General: lolz! sweet man!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>