• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Massive cyber attack on Iran came from U.S., report says

vendur said:
USA no longer has the financial ability to babysit the entire world. Recall the argument for the Iraq war was via threat assessment and protection. How did that work out? Do you seriously think anyone is dumb enough to believe that Iran having nukes is somehow more dangerous than China or Pakistan?
Click to expand...

If there were people dumb enough to think Iraq (one of the weakest countries on the planet at the time) was a threat, there will surely be people dumb enough to believe that Iran is a threat.
 
Grant said:
Why would getting rid of the Iranian leadership be a waste of money?
Click to expand...

In the same way replacing one corrupt government in Iraq with another corrupt government was a waste of money.
 
Catawba said:
In the same way replacing one corrupt government in Iraq with another corrupt government was a waste of money.
Click to expand...

Or one corrupt government in Libya with another corrupt government in Libya. There are probably enough drones in the US arsenal that can keep sending the message to these third world despots until they settle down and it right.
 
Grant said:
Or one corrupt government in Libya with another corrupt government in Libya. There are probably enough drones in the US arsenal that can keep sending the message to these third world despots until they settle down and it right.
Click to expand...


How much money did we spend on the NATO mission in Libya? How much money did we spend in the GOP war in Iraq?

How many lives were lost unnecessarily in Libya? How many lives were lost unnecessarily in Iraq?
 
How much money did we spend on the NATO mission in Libya?
Click to expand...
Very little, and that's what Ive been saying. That's the entire point.
How many lives were lost unnecessarily in Libya? How many lives were lost unnecessarily in Iraq?
Click to expand...
Do you need some remedial reading? I'm talking drone missiles, not full invasions, and that's what I've repeated.
 
Grant said:
Very little, and that's what Ive been saying. That's the entire point.

Do you need some remedial reading? I'm talking drone missiles, not full invasions, and that's what I've repeated.
Click to expand...


When did NATO propose an attack on Iran's government as they did in Libya, and for what reason???
 
DiAnna said:
I'm conflicted about this. On one hand, if we can stop or slow down Iran's obvious race to obtain nuclear weapons without resorting to physical confrontation, I'm okay with that. On the other hand, I'm deeply concerned that these viruses we are introducing can be reverse-engineered and unleashed back on us.

A scary world we live in. :(
Click to expand...

But Iran isn't trying to get nukes. US, EU, and even Israeli intelligence sources all agree on that. (Special Report: Intel shows Iran nuclear threat not imminent | Reuters)
 
vendur said:
It doesn't matter who was attacked in this instance, only that an international precedent is being set, and that the USA will have no moral high ground to protest any such attacks upon them.
Click to expand...

I don't care about moral high ground. What I do care about is the Mad Mullahs possessing nuclear weapons and who they decide to share those weapons with. To hell with the moral high ground.
 
Catawba said:
If Iran had launched a similar virus against the US, we would consider it an act of war.
Click to expand...

No, we wouldn't. They stormed our embassy and held hundreds of our fellow citizens hostage for a year and a half and we didn't consider that an act of war.
 
vendur said:
I would say the majority of technologically advanced countries would side with the USA if they were cyber-attacked, as their countries could just as easily be next. Iran is not out concern. The people in the mid-east should worry about it, not us. As soon as they have the ability to reach USA with a nuclear payload, then we will worry about them. till then, why the **** do we care?
Click to expand...

Is that a serious question? You're asking why we should be concerned if a country that supplies Islamic terrorists with weapons all over the world should suddenly possess nuclear weapons? What planet do you live on?
 
vendur said:
USA no longer has the financial ability to babysit the entire world. Recall the argument for the Iraq war was via threat assessment and protection. How did that work out? Do you seriously think anyone is dumb enough to believe that Iran having nukes is somehow more dangerous than China or Pakistan?
Click to expand...

Far, far more dangerous.
 
Grant said:
What? I never mentioned NATO! Why this goofy question addressed to me?
Click to expand...

I love the quote function:

Grant said:
Or one corrupt government in Libya with another corrupt government in Libya. There are probably enough drones in the US arsenal that can keep sending the message to these third world despots until they settle down and it right.
Click to expand...

Libya was a NATO mission don't ya know?
 
Wiggen said:
No, we wouldn't. They stormed our embassy and held hundreds of our fellow citizens hostage for a year and a half and we didn't consider that an act of war.
Click to expand...

More recently, check out why we went to war with Iraq.
 
Catawba said:
Like the bang up job we did with Iraq?
Click to expand...

vendur said:
USA no longer has the financial ability to babysit the entire world. Recall the argument for the Iraq war was via threat assessment and protection. How did that work out? Do you seriously think anyone is dumb enough to believe that Iran having nukes is somehow more dangerous than China or Pakistan?
Click to expand...

This thread is about a computer virus which did in fact delay the nuclear missile program of a country that has threatened the US. This has proven to be successful and much more economical than conventional warfare.
 
Last edited:
Wiggen said:
Is that a serious question? You're asking why we should be concerned if a country that supplies Islamic terrorists with weapons all over the world should suddenly possess nuclear weapons? What planet do you live on?
Click to expand...

We supply more weapons to more people around the world.
 
Wiggen said:
No, we wouldn't. They stormed our embassy and held hundreds of our fellow citizens hostage for a year and a half and we didn't consider that an act of war.
Click to expand...

Actually, we would

The Pentagon's first formal cyber strategy, unclassified portions of which are expected to become public next month, represents an early attempt to grapple with a changing world in which a hacker could pose as significant a threat to U.S. nuclear reactors, subways or pipelines as a hostile country's military.

In part, the Pentagon intends its plan as a warning to potential adversaries of the consequences of attacking the U.S. in this way. "If you shut down our power grid, maybe we will put a missile down one of your smokestacks," said a military official.
Click to expand...

(Pentagon: Online Cyber Attacks Can Count as Acts of War - WSJ.com)
 
Connery said:
This thread is about a computer virus which did in fact delay the nuclear missile program of a country that has threatened the US. This has proven to be successful and much more economical than conventional warfare.
Click to expand...

Then you consider this a legitimate tactic for countries to use against one another?
 
Catawba said:
Then you consider this a legitimate tactic for countries to use against one another?
Click to expand...

This has been used on the US and the US apparently has used this on a foreign country. So by the conduct of all parties, by default, I must accept that cyberwar tactics are custom as much as spying on one another is custom, for example.

Recent attacks on the Pentagon's own systems—as well as the sabotaging of Iran's nuclear program via the Stuxnet computer worm—have given new urgency to U.S. efforts to develop a more formalized approach to cyber attacks. A key moment occurred in 2008, when at least one U.S. military computer system was penetrated. This weekend Lockheed Martin, a major military contractor, acknowledged that it had been the victim of an infiltration, while playing down its impact.
Click to expand...

Pentagon: Online Cyber Attacks Can Count as Acts of War
 
Last edited:
Connery said:
This has been used on the US and the US apparently has used this on a foreign country. So by the conduct of all parties, by default, I must accept that cyberwar tactics are custom as much as spying on one another is custom, for example.



Pentagon: Online Cyber Attacks Can Count as Acts of War
Click to expand...



So what you are saying is this just another instance of the US policy, do as I say, not as I do? Nothing hypocritical about that eh?
 
Catawba said:
I love the quote function:Libya was a NATO mission don't ya know?
Click to expand...

Of course I do.

Do you think everything has to be a NATO exercise or approved by them?

Really. Is that what you were led to believe?
 
Grant said:
Of course I do.

Do you think everything has to be a NATO exercise or approved by them?

Really. Is that what you were led to believe?
Click to expand...

It does for the leaders I consider voting for. I've had enough of the US unilaterally committing our troops and financial resources for simultaneous optional decade long wars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom