Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:32 PM
Nuclear Unicorn (19,497 posts)
If the internet outage in North Korea was a cyber attack by the US
do you support President Obama's decision to authorize the response?
A) Yes. Without reservation. B) Yes. So long as there are no serious repercussions against the US, its citizens, allies and/or interests C) Nyha-nyah-nyah! What cyber attack? I CAN'T HEAR YOU! D) Maybe. If the response was properly vetted through the international community E) No. The risk of escalation with a regime as unpredictable as NK is too high F) No. Retaliation is never the answer G) No. America has no business attacking other nations, even if only electronically H) No. The evidence is too flimsy I) Other (please explain)
|
31 replies, 2041 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Nuclear Unicorn | Dec 2014 | OP |
tradewinds | Dec 2014 | #1 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #25 | |
tradewinds | Dec 2014 | #27 | |
TexasTowelie | Dec 2014 | #2 | |
Nuclear Unicorn | Dec 2014 | #4 | |
nichomachus | Dec 2014 | #3 | |
tradewinds | Dec 2014 | #5 | |
Nuclear Unicorn | Dec 2014 | #6 | |
helpmetohelpyou | Dec 2014 | #23 | |
PSPS | Dec 2014 | #7 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #9 | |
helpmetohelpyou | Dec 2014 | #13 | |
helpmetohelpyou | Dec 2014 | #11 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #15 | |
helpmetohelpyou | Dec 2014 | #17 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #20 | |
helpmetohelpyou | Dec 2014 | #26 | |
WorseBeforeBetter | Dec 2014 | #30 | |
dissentient | Dec 2014 | #8 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #10 | |
dissentient | Dec 2014 | #14 | |
yuiyoshida | Dec 2014 | #12 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #16 | |
True Blue Door | Dec 2014 | #18 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #21 | |
True Blue Door | Dec 2014 | #22 | |
Fred Sanders | Dec 2014 | #24 | |
DemocratSinceBirth | Dec 2014 | #19 | |
seveneyes | Dec 2014 | #28 | |
bigwillq | Dec 2014 | #29 | |
0rganism | Dec 2014 | #31 |
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:35 PM
tradewinds (260 posts)
1. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
|
Response to tradewinds (Reply #1)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:11 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
25. Get your ass off the keyboard please.
Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #25)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:14 PM
tradewinds (260 posts)
27. Sorryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy I've been eeeeeeeeeeeating ccccarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrmallllllllll cooo
rrrrrn at myyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ddddddddddddddessk......................
|
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:35 PM
TexasTowelie (98,261 posts)
2. I think that you need to edit your OP to turn it into a poll. nt
Response to TexasTowelie (Reply #2)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:37 PM
Nuclear Unicorn (19,497 posts)
4. That would require a paid account.
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:35 PM
nichomachus (12,754 posts)
3. It would be an act of war.
Just the same as if China or Russia crippled the Internet in the US.
|
Response to nichomachus (Reply #3)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:38 PM
tradewinds (260 posts)
5. Even so........AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Response to nichomachus (Reply #3)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:39 PM
Nuclear Unicorn (19,497 posts)
6. Probably, but then again some may consider threats of violence by a foreign government
in order to suppress a film to be an act of war.
So, assuming the outage was deliberate on the part of the US, do you support PBO's decision? |
Response to nichomachus (Reply #3)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:09 PM
helpmetohelpyou (589 posts)
23. I don't know why posters here don't get that
Imagine if Putin ordered a cyber attack on the U.S
|
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:40 PM
PSPS (12,821 posts)
7. It's a moot point now that we know it was all a publicity stunt.
Response to PSPS (Reply #7)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:47 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
9. Looking more and more like it was a publicity stunt. Sony and Regal Theaters are hiding something.
Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #9)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:54 PM
helpmetohelpyou (589 posts)
13. That' a hell of an accusation
Response to PSPS (Reply #7)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:51 PM
helpmetohelpyou (589 posts)
11. What?
Is there proof NK wasn't involved ?
Or is there proof Sony and NK was in cahoots? |
Response to helpmetohelpyou (Reply #11)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:56 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
15. Proving a negative, you know what they say about folks demanding to prove a negative?
Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #15)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:59 PM
helpmetohelpyou (589 posts)
17. Yeah , it's called talking out your a###
Response to helpmetohelpyou (Reply #17)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:05 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
20. Sorry you suffer from such a painful affliction. Try using your mouth, attach it to some neurons.
Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #20)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:11 PM
helpmetohelpyou (589 posts)
26. As I thought
Response to PSPS (Reply #7)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:51 PM
WorseBeforeBetter (11,441 posts)
30. 'IT WAS A DISGRUNTLED SONY INSIDER, OUT FOR REVENGE'
What If North Korea Didn’t Hack Sony?: 4 Alternate Theories
Just watched Marc Rogers of CloudFlare interviewed on the PBS News Hour. Granted, I haven't followed this story as closely as others, but disgruntled Sony insider wouldn't surprise me. Nor would publicity stunt. |
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:46 PM
dissentient (861 posts)
8. Cyber attack? Bah. I say we nuke the bastards!
That will learn 'em not to mess with our movies!
God bless America! And Merry Christmas! ![]() ![]() |
Response to dissentient (Reply #8)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:48 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
10. Merry Christmas and nuking a country are kind of contradictory, sarcastic or not.
Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #10)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:56 PM
dissentient (861 posts)
14. You don't say.
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:51 PM
yuiyoshida (40,090 posts)
12. As I understand it...
Only a select few have access to the internet in Pyongyang. The rest of North Korea barely has electricity. In North Korea, a potato would be prized more, than a computer. If I remember from the video I saw once on North Korea, there were only like three offices that had limited access to the internet. From what they showed, there had to be about 40 people who had access...and all were authorized by Kim Jong Il. All were monitored, and their internet destinations were monitored.
|
Response to yuiyoshida (Reply #12)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 05:58 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
16. That makes sense. How many could afford it or access, and those that can might as well be in a glass bubble,
If the so taking down their internet is a fraction of the impact in America of such a thing.
It is a dictatorship I heard after all. An actual one. |
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:00 PM
True Blue Door (2,969 posts)
18. I doubt it was us.
It was probably just an opportunistic move by independents who disliked Kim Jong Un's attitude.
I would like to think a move by this administration would be a lot cooler. You know, like replacing all North Korean internet pages with trailers for The Interview. Just a run-of-the-mill DDOS seems a bit bland. |
Response to True Blue Door (Reply #18)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:07 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
21. I doubt it was us. It was hackers around the world having fun with the Korean internet system.
Hackers from South .Korea, remember them, might have more interest than the government of America stepping in to defend a movie company.
|
Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #21)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:09 PM
True Blue Door (2,969 posts)
22. Yes, probably.
And taking out the North Korean internet is actually not remotely "proportional" to the scale of what they did - it's pretty lame. I don't see it being us.
|
Response to True Blue Door (Reply #22)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:09 PM
Fred Sanders (23,946 posts)
24. And who is more proportional and measured than Obama? Nope, not us.
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:03 PM
DemocratSinceBirth (98,653 posts)
19. AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:15 PM
seveneyes (4,631 posts)
28. Fire, I bid you to burn
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:38 PM
bigwillq (72,790 posts)
29. No (nt)
Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Original post)
Tue Dec 23, 2014, 06:56 PM
0rganism (23,595 posts)
31. F. i do believe the answer is F.
"F) No. Retaliation is never the answer"
not so much because retaliation is never an answer, but it is seldom if ever the answer. in this day and age, taking down internet for an entire nation as a retaliatory response reeks of collective punishment and is categorically wrong. |