91–100 of 253 posts
Maybe I'm old fashioned but I take any hacking blame from gov to gov as likely propaganda.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what has the US been doing for the last 50 years exactly ? If not dropping missiles and bombs on civilian populations abroad under the pretence of "spreading democracy" and "stopping terrorism"
Your comment is just nonsense on so many levels. 1) The US does not actively target civilians. That's a war crime. There are incidental deaths absolutely but if the US was intentionally trying to cause mass deaths they would simply drop a nuclear bomb a few more times. 2) What does this have to do with spreading propaganda, cyberattacks or North Korea ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes
But I agree that (in general) the modern U.S. military tries its best not to kill civilians in an excessive way. But if we really cared about civilian deaths, we would send in SEAL teams 100% of the time and sacrifice an order of magnitude more soldiers.
We do still choose to kill civilians instead of risking own, when possible. We consider it common sense, but there is another ethical line we could take, which is a hard rule not to kill civilians at almost any cost. That is not our rule.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point may simply be to move the attention away from the NSA, who are perhaps the real authors of WannaCry.
So the logic conclusion for you is not that North Korea did this who has no foreign currency and minimal income. But rather it was the NSA who is bankrolled by the US government and who will be receiving additional funds in the upcoming budget process. Makes complete sense.
The NSA has lost all credibility, as far as I am concerned.
> The NSA is not credible. - Somewhat technical internet user
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did people think highly of Saddam in 2003?
There was lots of skepticism but in the end because of lack of good humint a lot of weight was placed on his behavior (his continued pretense/bluffing for the purpose of not disclosing weakness to Iran), the international community with the US at the lead reached a faulty conclusion. With regard to DPRK S Korea has great humint and we have multiple defectors corroborating each other (whereas Iraq there was basically…
This is drifting rather far off-topic, but that is an exceptionally anodyne description of how that particular chain of events came to pass.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So it's not North Korea testing ballistic missiles capable of destroying Tokyo, Seoul, Hawaii etc. Or the fact that they are actively developing nuclear weapons capable of hitting anywhere in the US. No it's not billions of lives that are the impetus to use force. Rather it's the huge sum of a few million dollars worth of Bitcoins i.e the cost of one of their more expensive bombs.
US, Russia, and China have ballistic missiles capable of destroying all the cities you mentioned and some more. And what are you going to do about them? All this talk of "North Korea may have missiles that can hit us!" is getting tiresome and, frankly, worrisome. The only reason people talk about North Korea and, say, not Russia is that the US can preemptively attack North Korea and they can do nothing about it. Ever…
Did you skim over that detail? How many other people did too? How many other articles are there like this?
"...that point with “moderate confidence” to North Korea’s spy agency, the Reconnaissance General Bureau, according to an individual familiar with the report."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what has the US been doing for the last 50 years exactly ? If not dropping missiles and bombs on civilian populations abroad under the pretence of "spreading democracy" and "stopping terrorism"
Your comment is just nonsense on so many levels. 1) The US does not actively target civilians. That's a war crime. There are incidental deaths absolutely but if the US was intentionally trying to cause mass deaths they would simply drop a nuclear bomb a few more times. 2) What does this have to do with spreading propaganda, cyberattacks or North Korea ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So the logic conclusion for you is not that North Korea did this who has no foreign currency and minimal income. But rather it was the NSA who is bankrolled by the US government and who will be receiving additional funds in the upcoming budget process. Makes complete sense.
I don't know who did it. I'm just saying it's not a stretch to accuse the NSA given their history with hacking tools becoming public and the Snowden leaks. To use the revenue generating argument from the OP article as a good indicator of the author is weak at best.