Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Cyber Attacks, Responses, and Publicity
My friend Claire Berlinski — some of you might know her as well — sent me this link to an NBC article purporting to report that the Obama administration “is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia in retaliation for alleged Russian interference in the American presidential election.” She suggested that I post my response. With her kind permission, here it is, with some (very) light editing to fit the thing within the spirit of the CoC. The indented remarks are quotes from the article.
Me: This is crap. But thank you for forwarding it.
The Obama administration is contemplating an unprecedented cyber covert action against Russia …
They taught us in sophomore English writing and speaking, and again in SOS: tell ’em what you’re going to say, say it, then tell ’em what you said. That works in speaking and writing. But it’s a disaster in conflict. That said, it would certainly be unprecedented for this administration to do anything more concrete than to shake their fingers very firmly.
The sources did not elaborate on the exact measures the CIA was considering, but said the agency had already begun opening cyber doors, selecting targets and making other preparations for an operation.
Heads up, guys, we’re a-comin’, and this is where from.
When a similar article appeared in the Wall Street Journal, I asked: How effective do we think we can be with a cyber attack against a nation that’s not as dependent on that technology as we are? An additional dimension would be to ping a couple of Russian attack submarines. How will we respond to the inevitable Russian response — can we even handle it—and how will we respond to the Russian response to our response to their response? Can we handle that? And so on. Can we escalate faster than they can respond?
Vice President Joe Biden told “Meet the Press” moderator Chuck Todd on Friday that “we’re sending a message” to Putin and that “it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact.”
Biden’s remarksare just more Obamatalk: a grayed out, faded pink line in sand. More empty rhetoric. By Biden, yet.
Sean Kanuck, who was until this spring the senior U.S. intelligence official responsible for analyzing Russian cyber capabilities, said not mounting a response would carry a cost.
Kanuck is overly charitable. This administration has no credibility to lose.
Two former CIA officers who worked on Russia told NBC News that there is a long history of the White House asking the CIA to come up with options for covert action against Russia, including cyber options — only to abandon the idea.
“We’ve always hesitated to use a lot of stuff we’ve had, but that’s a political decision,” one former officer said. “If someone has decided, `We’ve had enough of the Russians,’ there is a lot we can do. Step one is to remind them that two can play at this game and we have a lot of stuff. Step two, if you are looking to mess with their networks, we can do that, but then the issue becomes, they can do worse things to us in other places.”
How dumb is this? Escalation is as much a failure now as it was in Vietnam; I’m embarrassed that a CIA officer (if he’s not an NBC Construct, and if he actually said these things) doesn’t know that. Remind them we can do these things by doing these things? He gets at the weakness of this plan in step two. That’s not a reason not to do, but a reason to be better prepared for the response and to have a suitably broad range of counter-responses prepared — and not only in cyber. We need to play to our strengths and destroy their strengths while attacking their weaknesses. We don’t win by protecting our weaknesses — that’s passive, not active. But Obama is no Georges Danton.
When asked if the American public will know a message was sent, the vice president replied, “Hope not.”
But the Russians get to know in advance? And why shouldn’t we get to know? Do these guys actually think wars should be fought with the public’s money and blood without the public knowing?
Retired Admiral James Stavridis told NBC News’ Cynthia McFadden that the U.S. should attack Russia’s ability to censor its internal internet traffic and expose the financial dealings of Putin and his associates.
“It’s well known that there’s great deal of offshore money moved outside of Russia from oligarchs,” he said. “It would be very embarrassing if that was revealed, and that would be a proportional response to what we’ve seen” in Russia’s alleged hacks and leaks targeting U.S. public opinion.
Stavridis wants a useless, Obama-style wrist slap. We should do that, of course, but what press in Russia does this naif think will carry the story? If we want to get their attention, we should shut down their oil and gas pipelines (including the main line through Ukraine to Europe, although only briefly, to show Russia — and Europe — that we can), as well as the electric grid in Kaliningrad, St. Petersburg, and Moscow. Winter is coming. That stuff can be turned back on after our elections, or when we’re satisfied Russia will knock it off –whichever comes later. I’d say we also should isolate Kaliningrad military facilities from the Kaliningrad and central governments, if we have that capability, but that’s a capability we should hold back exposing until we’re in a shooting war, and not until one is imminent. (We’re looking for annihilation, not warning. See Hannibal at Cannae).
A second former officer, who helped run intelligence operations against Russia, said he was asked several times in recent years to work on covert action plans, but “none of the options were particularly good, nor did we think that any of them would be particularly effective,” he said.
Putin is almost beyond embarrassing, he said, and anything the U.S. can do against, for example, Russian bank accounts, the Russian can do in response.
“Do you want to have Barack Obama bouncing checks?” he [a second former CIA officer] asked.
The irony drips. And not just in cyber.
Former CIA deputy director Michael Morell expressed skepticism that the U.S. would go so far as to attack Russian networks.
“Physical attacks on networks is not something the U.S. wants to do because we don’t want to set a precedent for other countries to do it as well, including against us,” he said. “My own view is that our response shouldn’t be covert — it should overt, for everybody to see.”
Other countries have already attacked us and continue to do so. Where’s this guy been since he retired?
The Obama administration is debating just that question, officials say — whether to respond to Russia via cyber means, or with traditional measures such as sanctions.
Dither, dither, dither. They’ve had eight years to figure out that decision, and the keys that would trigger it.
The CIA’s cyber operation is being prepared by a team within the CIA’s Center for Cyber Intelligence, documents indicate.
Really? They’re not doing it in Timbuktu? Outback, Idaho? Podunk Center, Iowa?
“I would quote a Russian proverb,” said Adm. Stavridis, “which is, ‘Probe with bayonets. When you hit mush, proceed. When you hit steel withdraw.’ I think unless we stand up to this kind of cyber attack from Russia, we’ll only see more and more of it in the future.”
Probe with bayonets, certainly. But when you hit steel, get the drills and hacksaws. Never withdraw. De l’audace, encore de l’audace, toujours de l’audace … Or: Go through him like crap through a goose. Don’t hold onto anything; let the Russians do that. Hold him by the nose and kick him in the onager.
And the more fundamental question of honor and integrity. (Assume these carefully unnamed sources aren’t a set of manufactured, fictitious “sources” — they actually exist.) How can we trust them? They’ve already violated their honor and integrity by breaking their oaths to protect secrets and speaking out of turn, against their employers’ wishes. That’s why they’re speaking anonymously. Or, if their boss authorized the “leaks,” their boss is dishonest: How can we trust an authorized leak? Of course, that’s the conundrum legitimate whistleblowers face, too, but these folks — if they exist — aren’t whistle blowing; they’re speaking for the benefit of their own ego or for the Russians.
Or they’re Russian misdirection plants.
Published in Politics
The sleight of hand is to distract from the Dem organized vote fraud and to prepare the cultural battlespace for violence in the event of a Trump victory in the event that the vote fraud fails.
A Trump victory will be blamed on the Russians. The streets will be on fire. I’m sure Hillary and Obama have a number of contingency plans in mind for that eventuality.
For Putin it’s a win-win, and the Russians don’t have to lift another finger to make a main adversary’s government looks illegitimate to its own
citizenssubjects.Fixed that for him.
you always attack the Sun, but the Moon is just as bad. Why can’t everyone see that?
Its the “Information SuperHighWay” anonymous
Not much difference from what I described. The kids who do it do it mainly to get adults to step in and keep anything from happening. Obama is the same kind of phony. In either case, nothing is going to happen, just like the red line he allegedly drew.
When I was going to Illinois, we had a Cyber 174 and a Cyber 175.
I blame CDC.
I way more effective tactics is to hand over a few of our nukes to the Ukraine and Baltic states or even better push to kick them off the U.N. Security Council. Actually hurting them as a apposed to talking smack.
Excellent.
August?!!! Someone tell Eric it is October.
Satellite problems, Martin? Again?
Obama is about as menacing as a box of kittens. I’m sure Putin is quaking in his boots.
The Russian translates roughly as We have different values and allies. Rogozin may be the Rogozin who’s Deputy Prime Minister of Russia.
Eric Hines
Thank you @erichines! I tried to google it but failed.