… from Sputnik News, Moscow
The shadow of 9-11 his hanging over us on this. Those who did it got away, and that horrible precedent set with the no testimony under oath, and on and on.
The cyber attack straw dog is a perfect example. Deep State actors could arrange their own cyber attack on the US infrastructure while leaving a bread crumb trail to Russia, Iran or N. Korea, whatever the threat flavor of the day is.
Their industries would get the huge rebuilding contracts and overseas competitors eliminated in a two for one shot. If the patsy could retaliate after being stuck, the their would be more rebuilding contracts, all done under emergency rules
Pay attention how little outcry there is at the insider demands for the big nuclear expansions, proposals being done by people who will be looking for jobs with these defense companies once favorable legislation is passed.
There are no rules that prohibit this. The threats are a con to keep generating more defense spending. The brilliance of the defense industries of years ago, spreading out their manufacturing networks into as many states was possible, has paid off more than in the higher cost per product delivered over these inefficient networks.
It also created long term Congressional support for almost any defense project imaginable as long as their state got a piece of the action. Watch carefully to see if any major domestic powers step forward to oppose this, and keep your crying towel at the ready …Jim W. Dean ]
– First published … January 17, 2018 –
The US Defense Department and the White House are contemplating whether to solidify a new policy in the coming weeks that would authorize the use of nuclear weapons in response to crippling cyberattacks.
Cyberattacks threatening to or actually wreaking physical havoc on the US mainland could be met with nuclear retaliation, the New York Times reports. The use of nuclear weapons has in the past been restricted to responding to horrors like, for example, a biological weapon attack.
Last year, US President Donald Trump commissioned the production of a new nuclear posture review. Draft versions of the document call for a massive increase in nuclear weapon stockpiles, the development of low-yield nuclear warheads and nuke-armed cruise missiles for use by US Navy submarines.
The use of nuclear weapons has been reserved for only the most extreme scenarios under typical US policy. The draft proposal of the nuclear posture review widens the definition of extreme circumstances to “include attempts to destroy wide-reaching infrastructure, like a country’s power grid or communications, that would be most vulnerable to cyberweapons,” the Times notes.
The new policy “realigns our nuclear policy with a realistic assessment of the threats we face today and the uncertainties regarding the future security environment,” the draft states.
“In no way does this approach ‘lower the nuclear threshold,'” though, according to a leaked version of the strategy, which has yet to be officially approved by the president. The Pentagon stated that the strategy, first published by the Huffington Post, was “pre-decisional,” the Hill reported Wednesday.
Former US government officials expressed skepticism that the document won’t make nuclear war more likely.
“Almost everything about this radical new policy will blur the line between nuclear and conventional,” Andrew Weber, a former assistant secretary at the Pentagon, told the Times. If Trump approves the strategy as-is, the policy “will make nuclear war a lot more likely,” Weber said.