Asymmetrical warfare, Russian destabilization efforts, and the vaccine

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Interesting discussion about asymmetrical warfare with Dan Carlin and Max Brooks.

I’m only halfway through, but some topics/discussion points:

Brooks thinks Desert Storm was one of the worst ideas from a military perspective because it showed the world we still were focused on winning wars on the field and that we could not be beat there (so other nations started ramping up their asymmetrical tactics).

Brooks says the intelligence community knew for years before Covid and 2016 election that Russian bots had infiltrated internet message boards and were questioning vaccine safety. Said sometimes whole debates would be carried out on both sides by Russian bots.

No doubt Russian bots were also busy in 2016 and 2020, fueling illegitimacy concerns against BOTH candidates w/r/t the election.

Re the Russian bots, as Carlin says, they (no doubt this includes other nations ,too, not just Russia) do this because they know we won’t go to war over it despite its pernicious effects.

So what do we do about it? And why won’t our politicians address this in a bipartisan effort?

Dan Carlin's Hardcore History: Addendum - EP19 Asymmetrical Perspectives

Author, actor and senior fellow at the Modern War Institute Max Brooks joins Dan to discuss asymmetrical warfare and related societal issues. 1. "On War" by Gen. Carl von Clausewitz 2. “The Art of War” by Sun Tsu 3. "War and Anti-War: Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century” by Alvin and Heidi Toffler

podcasts.google.com

 

[DANC]

Interesting discussion about asymmetrical warfare with Dan Carlin and Max Brooks.

I’m only halfway through, but some topics/discussion points:

Brooks thinks Desert Storm was one of the worst ideas from a military perspective because it showed the world we still were focused on winning wars on the field and that we could not be beat there (so other nations started ramping up their asymmetrical tactics).

Brooks says the intelligence community knew for years before Covid and 2016 election that Russian bots had infiltrated internet message boards and were questioning vaccine safety. Said sometimes whole debates would be carried out on both sides by Russian bots.

No doubt Russian bots were also busy in 2016 and 2020, fueling illegitimacy concerns against BOTH candidates w/r/t the election.

Re the Russian bots, as Carlin says, they (no doubt this includes other nations ,too, not just Russia) do this because they know we won’t go to war over it despite its pernicious effects.

So what do we do about it? And why won’t our politicians address this in a bipartisan effort?

Dan Carlin's Hardcore History: Addendum - EP19 Asymmetrical Perspectives

Author, actor and senior fellow at the Modern War Institute Max Brooks joins Dan to discuss asymmetrical warfare and related societal issues. 1. "On War" by Gen. Carl von Clausewitz 2. “The Art of War” by Sun Tsu 3. "War and Anti-War: Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century” by Alvin and Heidi Toffler

podcasts.google.com

Democrats won't participate in an honest discussion because they think they can make political hay by claiming the Russians try to benefit only Republicans. The media laps it up and it becomes accepted fact by them.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

Interesting discussion about asymmetrical warfare with Dan Carlin and Max Brooks.

I’m only halfway through, but some topics/discussion points:

Brooks thinks Desert Storm was one of the worst ideas from a military perspective because it showed the world we still were focused on winning wars on the field and that we could not be beat there (so other nations started ramping up their asymmetrical tactics).

Brooks says the intelligence community knew for years before Covid and 2016 election that Russian bots had infiltrated internet message boards and were questioning vaccine safety. Said sometimes whole debates would be carried out on both sides by Russian bots.

No doubt Russian bots were also busy in 2016 and 2020, fueling illegitimacy concerns against BOTH candidates w/r/t the election.

Re the Russian bots, as Carlin says, they (no doubt this includes other nations ,too, not just Russia) do this because they know we won’t go to war over it despite its pernicious effects.

So what do we do about it? And why won’t our politicians address this in a bipartisan effort?

Dan Carlin's Hardcore History: Addendum - EP19 Asymmetrical Perspectives

Author, actor and senior fellow at the Modern War Institute Max Brooks joins Dan to discuss asymmetrical warfare and related societal issues. 1. "On War" by Gen. Carl von Clausewitz 2. “The Art of War” by Sun Tsu 3. "War and Anti-War: Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century” by Alvin and Heidi Toffler

podcasts.google.com

The Russians have fomented civil unrest and political chaos here for decades. Lot of smoking guns that show they were heavily involved with the anti-fracking efforts.. They are very opportunistic and will take the cause du jour and exploit it. Not much we can do about that.

Chinese too. Their interest with supplying fentanyl chemicals and drug use in general is not just commercial. I wouldn’t be surprised to find Chinese fingerprints on the illegal gun issues plaguing our cities.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Interesting discussion about asymmetrical warfare with Dan Carlin and Max Brooks.

I’m only halfway through, but some topics/discussion points:

Brooks thinks Desert Storm was one of the worst ideas from a military perspective because it showed the world we still were focused on winning wars on the field and that we could not be beat there (so other nations started ramping up their asymmetrical tactics).

Brooks says the intelligence community knew for years before Covid and 2016 election that Russian bots had infiltrated internet message boards and were questioning vaccine safety. Said sometimes whole debates would be carried out on both sides by Russian bots.

No doubt Russian bots were also busy in 2016 and 2020, fueling illegitimacy concerns against BOTH candidates w/r/t the election.

Re the Russian bots, as Carlin says, they (no doubt this includes other nations ,too, not just Russia) do this because they know we won’t go to war over it despite its pernicious effects.

So what do we do about it? And why won’t our politicians address this in a bipartisan effort?

Dan Carlin's Hardcore History: Addendum - EP19 Asymmetrical Perspectives

Author, actor and senior fellow at the Modern War Institute Max Brooks joins Dan to discuss asymmetrical warfare and related societal issues. 1. "On War" by Gen. Carl von Clausewitz 2. “The Art of War” by Sun Tsu 3. "War and Anti-War: Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century” by Alvin and Heidi Toffler

podcasts.google.com

I would like to think our corporations could find technology to find bots and remove them. But of course they haven't and don't show much inclination.

Somewhere there was an article about how the social media attacks work, they start off pretty safe, one was a story about some former NFL player doing charity work. They pay to get the story pushed out, nice heartwarming story, people like the account it originates from. Then it grows slowly more radical.

I assume we do similar attacks against Russia, maybe not as many or not as well. But I'd be sure to put a full-fledged social media attack on Russia on the table.

The Russians are on both sides, they engaged each other during the Ferguson situation.

I am not sure why we can't get the US government to respond. Attacking Russia back is one good way. Finding reasons to seize Russian oligarch property in the US is another. But in the end, a lot of this is on us. We the people need to stop believing every social media article that appears.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Chinese too. Their interest with supplying fentanyl chemicals and drug use in general is not just commercial. I wouldn’t be surprised to find Chinese fingerprints on the illegal gun issues plaguing our cities.

That is an interesting concept, A quick search and I didn't see a lot on it. Except that Americans didn't buy assault rifles until China started dumping them in the US. That brought the price down to a point that everyone wanted one. I would think someone would be on the lookout for China supplying guns to gangs, but maybe they've kept it well hidden?

Made in China: America’s Appetite for Assault Weapons

For a while, gun hobbyists saw military-style weapons as inefficient and too expensive. An influx of foreign knock-offs changed their minds.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I would like to think our corporations could find technology to find bots and remove them. But of course they haven't and don't show much inclination.

Somewhere there was an article about how the social media attacks work, they start off pretty safe, one was a story about some former NFL player doing charity work. They pay to get the story pushed out, nice heartwarming story, people like the account it originates from. Then it grows slowly more radical.

I assume we do similar attacks against Russia, maybe not as many or not as well. But I'd be sure to put a full-fledged social media attack on Russia on the table.

The Russians are on both sides, they engaged each other during the Ferguson situation.

I am not sure why we can't get the US government to respond. Attacking Russia back is one good way. Finding reasons to seize Russian oligarch property in the US is another. But in the end, a lot of this is on us. We the people need to stop believing every social media article that appears.

its not about the bots. Rusdia has been doing this since before anybody knew what a bot was. We really can’t retaliate in kind because Russia doesn’t allow dissent as we do. But we can control our response. Censoring or even criminalizing “misinformation“ is part of Russia‘s playbook.

 

[DANC]

its not about the bots. Rusdia has been doing this since before anybody knew what a bot was. We really can’t retaliate in kind because Russia doesn’t allow dissent as we do. But we can control our response. Censoring or even criminalizing “misinformation“ is part of Russia‘s playbook.

How is taking a little bit of truth and putting it in a bot to cause unrest any different than what CNN and MSNBC do on a daily basis?

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

I would like to think our corporations could find technology to find bots and remove them. But of course they haven't and don't show much inclination.

Somewhere there was an article about how the social media attacks work, they start off pretty safe, one was a story about some former NFL player doing charity work. They pay to get the story pushed out, nice heartwarming story, people like the account it originates from. Then it grows slowly more radical.

I assume we do similar attacks against Russia, maybe not as many or not as well. But I'd be sure to put a full-fledged social media attack on Russia on the table.

The Russians are on both sides, they engaged each other during the Ferguson situation.

I am not sure why we can't get the US government to respond. Attacking Russia back is one good way. Finding reasons to seize Russian oligarch property in the US is another. But in the end, a lot of this is on us. We the people need to stop believing every social media article that appears.

I hope we are NOT fomenting civilian doubt about life-saving medical products. I find that beyond the pale--it should be added to the Geneva Convention or something. If we don't have US laws criminalizing that conduct among US citizens, we should. Direct attacks against civilians is a type of terrorism (oh boy, that's a definitional discussion!) that I don't want the US involved in.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

its not about the bots. Rusdia has been doing this since before anybody knew what a bot was. We really can’t retaliate in kind because Russia doesn’t allow dissent as we do. But we can control our response. Censoring or even criminalizing “misinformation“ is part of Russia‘s playbook.

There are ways of getting information through, we've done it (see Wall, Berlin). And I am sure we have a program that does just this, it just isn't funded or tasked as we need to be an effective deterrent.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

How is taking a little bit of truth and putting it in a bot to cause unrest any different than what CNN and MSNBC do on a daily basis?

Interesting question. I'll answer by trying to take any partisanship out (so let's assume a news org is portraying one-sided news and it could be for either "side").

I mean, the initial answer is that the first shows a motive to harm the US. The second is by a lot of well-meaning people, who think ends justify means, and some people who don't care about the harm as much as the money (although they doubtfully want to see the fall of the US becase that would not enrich them). From a consequentialist viewpoint, though, there is a lot of similiarity.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

I hope we are NOT fomenting civilian doubt about life-saving medical products. I find that beyond the pale--it should be added to the Geneva Convention or something. If we don't have US laws criminalizing that conduct among US citizens, we should. Direct attacks against civilians is a type of terrorism (oh boy, that's a definitional discussion!) that I don't want the US involved in.

I am talking more about fomenting civil unrest against THEIR government and THEIR oligarchs. Russia has a tremendous number of vastly wealthy oligarchs that seemingly would have little in common with the masses. I would think that is a rupture that could be exploited especially among people who were steeped in communism?

 

[kurt cloverdales]

Democrats won't participate in an honest discussion because they think they can make political hay by claiming the Russians try to benefit only Republicans. The media laps it up and it becomes accepted fact by them.

would you consider yourself a happy person?

 

[DANC]

Interesting question. I'll answer by trying to take any partisanship out (so let's assume a news org is portraying one-sided news and it could be for either "side").

I mean, the initial answer is that the first shows a motive to harm the US. The second is by a lot of well-meaning people, who think ends justify means, and some people who don't care about the harm as much as the money (although they doubtfully want to see the fall of the US becase that would not enrich them). From a consequentialist viewpoint, though, there is a lot of similiarity.

You can get any information you want from the internet today. I don't think bots are the influence many seem to think they are.

We are a society that prides itself on seeing both sides and being objective. This is a foreign concept to many other societies. So, they have no problems with the ends justifying the means. This is kind of a ju-jitsu because they are using our objectivity against us by posting things that cause doubt and that may actually be true or have a kernel of truth.

We, as Americans, have a duty to sift through this information - what some people call 'research'. I think that's being done much more today, due to so much false or misleading information being spread through the media. And that upsets the media, which, in turn, causes accusations from them that 'Democracy is in danger'. Which is ridiculous. So, the media's solution is to actually put Democracy in danger by shaming corporations into censoring speech and denying employment to the unwoke.

I'm not really following the trucker protests that much, but it looks very much like a grass roots effort to finally put a stop to a lot of this.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Interesting discussion about asymmetrical warfare with Dan Carlin and Max Brooks.

I’m only halfway through, but some topics/discussion points:

Brooks thinks Desert Storm was one of the worst ideas from a military perspective because it showed the world we still were focused on winning wars on the field and that we could not be beat there (so other nations started ramping up their asymmetrical tactics).

Brooks says the intelligence community knew for years before Covid and 2016 election that Russian bots had infiltrated internet message boards and were questioning vaccine safety. Said sometimes whole debates would be carried out on both sides by Russian bots.

No doubt Russian bots were also busy in 2016 and 2020, fueling illegitimacy concerns against BOTH candidates w/r/t the election.

Re the Russian bots, as Carlin says, they (no doubt this includes other nations ,too, not just Russia) do this because they know we won’t go to war over it despite its pernicious effects.

So what do we do about it? And why won’t our politicians address this in a bipartisan effort?

Dan Carlin's Hardcore History: Addendum - EP19 Asymmetrical Perspectives

Author, actor and senior fellow at the Modern War Institute Max Brooks joins Dan to discuss asymmetrical warfare and related societal issues. 1. "On War" by Gen. Carl von Clausewitz 2. “The Art of War” by Sun Tsu 3. "War and Anti-War: Survival at the Dawn of the 21st Century” by Alvin and Heidi Toffler

podcasts.google.com

I'm more concerned about the asymmetrical warfare being practiced by our government on our citizens. Another example:

Capitol Police examines backgrounds, social media feeds of some who meet with lawmakers

The little-known new practice by the department’s intelligence analysts, instituted since the Jan. 6 attack, is highly controversial given the civil liberties concerns it raises.

www.politico.com

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

You can get any information you want from the internet today. I don't think bots are the influence many seem to think they are.

We are a society that prides itself on seeing both sides and being objective. This is a foreign concept to many other societies. So, they have no problems with the ends justifying the means. This is kind of a ju-jitsu because they are using our objectivity against us by posting things that cause doubt and that may actually be true or have a kernel of truth.

We, as Americans, have a duty to sift through this information - what some people call 'research'. I think that's being done much more today, due to so much false or misleading information being spread through the media. And that upsets the media, which, in turn, causes accusations from them that 'Democracy is in danger'. Which is ridiculous. So, the media's solution is to actually put Democracy in danger by shaming corporations into censoring speech and denying employment to the unwoke.

I'm not really following the trucker protests that much, but it looks very much like a grass roots effort to finally put a stop to a lot of this.

While I think you are probably downplaying the extent of mischief being carried out by foreign powers, I think your solution and diagnosis of some bad things the media has done contains a lot of force. Brooks agrees with you about our responsibility as citizens to sift through the information.

He also thinks that we will (hopefully) become inoculated to such tactics or bad arguments the longer we have to do this, making us actually much more stable, and that the more closed regimes will be much more in danger because they don't know how to deal with internal arguments/debates as well.

 

[DANC]

While I think you are probably downplaying the extent of mischief being carried out by foreign powers, I think your solution and diagnosis of some bad things the media has done contains a lot of force. Brooks agrees with you about our responsibility as citizens to sift through the information.

He also thinks that we will (hopefully) become inoculated to such tactics or bad arguments the longer we have to do this, making us actually much more stable, and that the more closed regimes will be much more in danger because they don't know how to deal with internal arguments/debates as well.

I agree with the extent. Just not the effectiveness.

 

[TomEric4756]

I think China’s travel policy from Wuhan to the rest of the world was essentially asymmetric warfare.
How many countries got further behind on their Chinese debt?

Sales of pharmaceutical precursors for illegal fentanyl manufacturing clearly isn’t a moral policy for any government … and qualifies as asymmetric warfare too. [Tolerance of cartel money laundering in China provides evidence of Chinese government complicity, in my opinion].
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-laundering-mexican-drug-money-idUSKBN28D1M4

These are both long game tactics.

 

[DANC]

I think China’s travel policy from Wuhan to the rest of the world was essentially asymmetric warfare.
How many countries got further behind on their Chinese debt?

Sales of pharmaceutical precursors for illegal fentanyl manufacturing clearly isn’t a moral policy for any government … and qualifies as asymmetric warfare too. [Tolerance of cartel money laundering in China provides evidence of Chinese government complicity, in my opinion].
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-laundering-mexican-drug-money-idUSKBN28D1M4

These are both long game tactics.

Odd how the virus came out about the time the US election cycle was heating up, with Trump in a comfortable lead.

If one were a conspiracy theorist, one might conclude China released the virus in retaliation for Trump's embargo on Chinese goods.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Odd how the virus came out about the time the US election cycle was heating up, with Trump in a comfortable lead.

If one were a conspiracy theorist, one might conclude China released the virus in retaliation for Trump's embargo on Chinese goods.

If one were a conspiracy theorist, one might conclude aliens devised the virus to test the human race for its ultimate invasion . . .

 

[DANC]

If one were a conspiracy theorist, one might conclude aliens devised the virus to test the human race for its ultimate invasion . . .

That would be a nutty conspiracy theorist.

Not all are nutty.

 

[TomEric4756]

Odd how the virus came out about the time the US election cycle was heating up, with Trump in a comfortable lead.

If one were a conspiracy theorist, one might conclude China released the virus in retaliation for Trump's embargo on Chinese goods.

The World Wide military games were also reported as potential attack. I wouldn’t claim the timing was intentional. Too much advantage to lose if the disease beats one to the punch.

Capture of PPE production, and buying up supplies, can be seen as part of the strategy, as can selling defective N95 masks for an airborne pathogen, at inflated prices.

https://nationalpost.com/news/polit...l-sports-event-have-seeded-covid-19-in-canada
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ng-speaks-Wuhan-theory-relating-Covid-19.html