61–70 of 142 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US doesn't need reasons to invade Yemen. In fact, the weak media coverage makes me suspect that they don't want to escalate by not making a big deal out of it.
Who said Yemen? The prize for the neocons is Iran.
It would benefit a budding satellite ISP to suddenly have a critical “land line“ in an active war zone severed and their long term sustainability questioned.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is "they"? Cite your sources and show your work.
From the article, "they" obviously implies the Houthis
What did they hope to accomplish by making the world slightly worse?
What did they hope to accomplish by making the world slightly worse?
In neal stephensons 1996 classic wired article Mother Earth Mother Board theres a bit in there about why cables are not attacked. "There is also the obvious threat of sabotage by a hostile government, but, surprisingly, this almost never happens. When cypherpunk Doug Barnes was researching his Caribbean project, he spent some time looking into this, because it was exactly the kind of threat he was worried about in th…
There are a couple of differences: 1. the sheer number of cables today makes an individual - or even several - cuts far less dramatic. 2. there's likely still a perceived difference between a nation-state being seen to openly take responsibility for cutting cables, and terrorist groups doing so. It's still an interesting chang (and everyone should read Mother Earth Mother Board), and you're probably still right it wi…
I think the bombing of the Nord Stream pipeline has shown that even when a blatant act of sabotage occurs under the sea, as long as nobody claims responsibility, the debate will rage on for years about who it might have been. I'm not sure if we can really differentiate between state actors and terrorists any more when it comes to this kind of operation. Perhaps it's more a question of did anyone take responsibility, or did no one?
[0] https://apnews.com/article/matsu-taiwan-internet-cables-cut-...
In neal stephensons 1996 classic wired article Mother Earth Mother Board theres a bit in there about why cables are not attacked. "There is also the obvious threat of sabotage by a hostile government, but, surprisingly, this almost never happens. When cypherpunk Doug Barnes was researching his Caribbean project, he spent some time looking into this, because it was exactly the kind of threat he was worried about in th…
It’s not like a nuclear war because it’s easy to blame it on a dragging ship Anker or whatever.
In neal stephensons 1996 classic wired article Mother Earth Mother Board theres a bit in there about why cables are not attacked. "There is also the obvious threat of sabotage by a hostile government, but, surprisingly, this almost never happens. When cypherpunk Doug Barnes was researching his Caribbean project, he spent some time looking into this, because it was exactly the kind of threat he was worried about in th…
Wouldn’t it be almost impossible to assign blame? The ocean is big and submarines are not easy to find. Maybe if you had other evidence like SIGINT?
Perhaps not quite enough for a conviction in a court of law, but definitely a balance of probabilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article, "they" obviously implies the Houthis
If you want to understand why something happened, you'll need to look a lot deeper than that. Asking why the Houthis would cut a cable is accepting the assumption that they did.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US doesn't need reasons to invade Yemen. In fact, the weak media coverage makes me suspect that they don't want to escalate by not making a big deal out of it.
Who said Yemen? The prize for the neocons is Iran.