5 ms·

If US citizens die due to this, I am 100% down with bringing the full might of our military down on the state/group that did this. No mercy.

fnord77 6y ago
what if the state actor who did this has nuclear weapons?
- ardit33 6y ago
  treat them as terrorist, and eliminate some of the leaders until they get the message
  - irjustin 6y ago
    I mean that sounds simple and all.. But historically that hasn't worked well for us long term.
    - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
      It's true. Attacking random countries that follow the same religions as a particular bad guy is not a recipe for long term prosperity.
- ponker 6y ago
  Who? I don’t think Russia is killing off senior citizens. North Korea? Nuke the shit out of them.
  - Razengan 6y ago
    Crying for mass destruction is despicable.
door99 6y ago
Horrifying mindset that led to the disastrous war on terror in the aftermath of 9/11. Our foreign policy should not be based on an animalistic thirst for blood.
supertrope 6y ago
Attribution for cyberattacks is hard.
nobrains 6y ago
The problem with this is that other bad players within US can "hack" this attempt to blame a state/group that had nothing to do with this. Has happened in the past.
- meowface 6y ago
  Of course; it happens all the time. False flags (in the form of routed connections and much more) are extremely common in cyberwar and among cybercriminals, naturally. But can you name a time US law enforcement or military fucked up and fell for a "cyber false flag" [1], and mistakenly took action against the framed party? It may have happened, and I wouldn't be shocked, but I haven't actually seen a publicized case of it. From having some knowledge of some investigations like these (though not on behalf of any government), the investigators and forensics experts are constantly asking themselves "is this a false flag? is this piece of evidence deliberately planted, or an actual mistake?" Investigators obviously want to get the right people and not get the wrong people. And in the case of nation-states, they also have classified information they can use (like from NSA global spying, etc.). [1] (I shudder at the term "cyber" as much as anyone else reading this, but that pretty much is the official term the government uses.)
  - tpolm 6y ago
    > But can you name a time US law enforcement or military fucked up and fell for a "cyber false flag" [1], and mistakenly took action against the framed party? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
    - meowface 6y ago
      Of course. It absolutely may have happened, and if or when it has, I want those instances known. But if someone were to have been arrested wrongly, or some government blamed wrongly, this would be a huge deal, and I'd expect there to be a lot of public controversy and discussion about it. Everyone should be subject to due process. If some organized crime ring in Ukraine is blamed for some particular ransomware attack and they get tricked into traveling somewhere that lets them be extradited and tried in a US court, the prosecution still needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that they're the responsible party. Things get more complicated when an entire nation-state government is accused of launching ransomware attacks, but so far I think only North Korea has faced that (someone please correct me if I'm wrong), and they're kind of an outlier among all the other countries. We should always be skeptical any time any government accuses any entity of a crime, of course. There should always be a presumption of innocence. But that's what the legal system and due process are for. The onus is on the government to prove their case.
tpolm 6y ago
And how are you going to identify the state/group that did this? Believing "experts"? Oh, that worked just fine previously https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_and_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Counci...
- mikelyons 6y ago
  Whatever makes us feel better, right? Reality is essentially unverifiable at this point, so ... nuke Russia? It's not that that's what I want, I just can't find a way to know what's real.
  - chairmanwow1 6y ago
    This is honestly the scariest part of living in 2020
- rapnie 6y ago
  According to the media hackers are either Russian, Chinese, Iranian or North Korean, so that limits the group of possible culprits somewhat. /s
FpUser 6y ago
I would advise taking a deep breath first. How the f..k will you bring "full might of military" on some group located everywhere? Invade few countries? I sincerely hope that by now people in congress have little bit more of that gray matter. And what exactly does that "no mercy" mean?
crispyporkbites 6y ago
You’ll kill thousands, maybe millions of innocent lives by going down this path. Are their lives worth less than US citizens? Why?
wheresmycraisin 6y ago
And how many innocent civilians will die in the process, assuming they can even identify the group responsible?
conanbatt 6y ago
What if the responsible is the government?
marvin 6y ago
I was about to say that this is practically an act of war. You could make a good case that military intervention is justified.
1_player 6y ago
Ah the usual American response: for every US citizen that dies, kill 5 foreign soldiers and 15 civilians. Then you wonder why everyone is burning US flags.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
Dahoon 6y ago
So war against the US government who is to blame for the 1990's IT infrastructure of the whole health system?

fnord77 6y ago

what if the state actor who did this has nuclear weapons?

ardit33 6y ago
treat them as terrorist, and eliminate some of the leaders until they get the message
- irjustin 6y ago
  I mean that sounds simple and all.. But historically that hasn't worked well for us long term.
  - asdfasgasdgasdg 6y ago
    It's true. Attacking random countries that follow the same religions as a particular bad guy is not a recipe for long term prosperity.
ponker 6y ago
Who? I don’t think Russia is killing off senior citizens. North Korea? Nuke the shit out of them.
- Razengan 6y ago
  Crying for mass destruction is despicable.

door99 6y ago

Horrifying mindset that led to the disastrous war on terror in the aftermath of 9/11. Our foreign policy should not be based on an animalistic thirst for blood.

supertrope 6y ago

Attribution for cyberattacks is hard.

nobrains 6y ago

The problem with this is that other bad players within US can "hack" this attempt to blame a state/group that had nothing to do with this. Has happened in the past.

meowface 6y ago
Of course; it happens all the time. False flags (in the form of routed connections and much more) are extremely common in cyberwar and among cybercriminals, naturally. But can you name a time US law enforcement or military fucked up and fell for a "cyber false flag" [1], and mistakenly took action against the framed party? It may have happened, and I wouldn't be shocked, but I haven't actually seen a publicized case of it. From having some knowledge of some investigations like these (though not on behalf of any government), the investigators and forensics experts are constantly asking themselves "is this a false flag? is this piece of evidence deliberately planted, or an actual mistake?" Investigators obviously want to get the right people and not get the wrong people. And in the case of nation-states, they also have classified information they can use (like from NSA global spying, etc.). [1] (I shudder at the term "cyber" as much as anyone else reading this, but that pretty much is the official term the government uses.)
- tpolm 6y ago
  > But can you name a time US law enforcement or military fucked up and fell for a "cyber false flag" [1], and mistakenly took action against the framed party? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
  - meowface 6y ago
    Of course. It absolutely may have happened, and if or when it has, I want those instances known. But if someone were to have been arrested wrongly, or some government blamed wrongly, this would be a huge deal, and I'd expect there to be a lot of public controversy and discussion about it. Everyone should be subject to due process. If some organized crime ring in Ukraine is blamed for some particular ransomware attack and they get tricked into traveling somewhere that lets them be extradited and tried in a US court, the prosecution still needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt at trial that they're the responsible party. Things get more complicated when an entire nation-state government is accused of launching ransomware attacks, but so far I think only North Korea has faced that (someone please correct me if I'm wrong), and they're kind of an outlier among all the other countries. We should always be skeptical any time any government accuses any entity of a crime, of course. There should always be a presumption of innocence. But that's what the legal system and due process are for. The onus is on the government to prove their case.

tpolm 6y ago

And how are you going to identify the state/group that did this? Believing "experts"? Oh, that worked just fine previously https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_and_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Counci...

mikelyons 6y ago
Whatever makes us feel better, right? Reality is essentially unverifiable at this point, so ... nuke Russia? It's not that that's what I want, I just can't find a way to know what's real.
- chairmanwow1 6y ago
  This is honestly the scariest part of living in 2020
rapnie 6y ago
According to the media hackers are either Russian, Chinese, Iranian or North Korean, so that limits the group of possible culprits somewhat. /s

FpUser 6y ago

I would advise taking a deep breath first. How the f..k will you bring "full might of military" on some group located everywhere? Invade few countries? I sincerely hope that by now people in congress have little bit more of that gray matter. And what exactly does that "no mercy" mean?

crispyporkbites 6y ago

You’ll kill thousands, maybe millions of innocent lives by going down this path. Are their lives worth less than US citizens? Why?

wheresmycraisin 6y ago

And how many innocent civilians will die in the process, assuming they can even identify the group responsible?

conanbatt 6y ago

What if the responsible is the government?

marvin 6y ago

I was about to say that this is practically an act of war. You could make a good case that military intervention is justified.

1_player 6y ago

Ah the usual American response: for every US citizen that dies, kill 5 foreign soldiers and 15 civilians. Then you wonder why everyone is burning US flags.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

Dahoon 6y ago

So war against the US government who is to blame for the 1990's IT infrastructure of the whole health system?