Saturday, September 08, 2007

China Plans Cyberwarfare Against US

As I mentioned in an earlier post, our various military systems could be vulnerable to attack, and that would spell disaster against a serious foe. A recent Pentagon report outlines how China is preparing for cyberwarfare against the United States.

Some quotes:

Chinese military hackers have prepared a detailed plan to disable America’s aircraft battle carrier fleet with a devastating cyber attack, according to a Pentagon report obtained by The Times.

The blueprint for such an assault, drawn up by two hackers working for the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), is part of an aggressive push by Beijing to achieve “electronic dominance” over each of its global rivals by 2050, particularly the US, Britain, Russia and South Korea.

Yes, that's what it says: a "detailed plan to disable America's aircraft battle carrier fleet." Again, that would be devastating if successful. Given our recent reliance on networked system for command and control, particularly in the Navy, any successful effort to interfere with those systems could significantly reduce the effectiveness of such a fleet.

Even more unnerving:

Larry M. Wortzel, the author of the US Army War College report, said: “The thing that should give us pause is that in many Chinese military manuals they identify the US as the country they are most likely to go to war with. They are moving very rapidly to master this new form of warfare.” The two PLA hackers produced a “virtual guidebook for electronic warfare and jamming” after studying dozens of US and Nato manuals on military tactics, according to the document.

Read the entire story. It's a bit frightening. Of course, I don't doubt for a moment that the NSA has similar programs underway, but no country's military is as reliant upon networked systems as is the US's. If we don't fix vulnerabilities, it could be our downfall.

Ahmadinejad Wants Iran To Create World Government

More from Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is), this time on his political aspirations:

"They know quite well that the Islamic Revolution wants to prepare the ground for materialization of the promised `big event' (reappearance of the Imam of Age); that's why they try to take precedence in campaign against us. We are against rule of the non-righteous individuals. Clashes today are only a pretext and they confront us because the revolutionary Iran aims a global government and a genuine Islamic culture so as to gain a loftier position worldwide..."

Thanks for stating things so clearly, Mr. Imajihadi.

Ahmadinejad Calls for Interest-Free Banking

Iranian President Imajihadi (or whatever his name is) keeps astounding with his wackiness. This time, he's calling for reforming the Iranian banking system to the Islamic principle of interest-free banking. I hope he succeeds; that alone could bring his country to the point of begging the West to remove him from power.

I mean, it's funny, actually:

“No economic activity is possible without assistance from banks,” he said and “any problem in the banking system will have a negative impact on all economic sectors and the people's lifestyle."

However, if the banking system adopts a proper monetary policy, all other sectors of the economy will grow, he observed.

I could go into the function of interest in an economy, but I won't. Hopefully everyone who reads this will understand the utter insanity of his plan.

Digg Report

Digg Report: Today's #1 Digg, at a light 2870 Diggs, is a link to a picture of a little girl holding sign of all the things she's "learned from Bush."

It's been awhile since Digg showed its Leftist side, and this ranks right up there with the best of its many Leftist stories.

Has This Blog Lost Value?

As I started the Daily Topic a few months ago, my readership was on a steady rise. Then, suddenly, about a month ago, the number of folks visiting the site plummeted.

I ask those of you who are still visiting: has the blog lost value? Are my posts less interesting? Am I too redundant, or to unfocused?

I would appreciate any comments, because of course I'd rather see my readership increase, not decrease.

National Healthcare Means Higher Rate of Cancer Deaths

Unfortunately, this Principles in Practice post doesn't link to it, but a recent study of cancer survival rates shows why socialized medicine (think "national healthcare" or whatever you want to call it) is deadly. The money quote:

The study finds that Britain (whose much-touted "universal health care" system is held up by the left as a model for America) has among the lowest cancer survival rates in the West—drastically lower than the United States, which has the world's highest survival rate.

It's simple, really:

Researchers attribute Britain's dismal numbers primarily to late diagnoses and lengthy waiting lists for treatment. But long lines and waiting lists are necessarily endemic under socialized medicine.

The solution is less government and more individual responsibility in healthcare. That is, unless we less of a chance to live.

National Service - Slippery Slope to Slavery

I wouldn't even know where to begin in extolling the vile nature of this article on "national service." It's a very thinly veiled call for altruistic self-sacrifice in the name of "society." The writer calls for "voluntary," not mandatory nor compulsory, service, but why do we need government programs for volunteers? And, how can a program be "voluntary" if $5000 in taxes per newborn is to be spent on a "National Service Baby Bond"? It certainly wouldn't be voluntary for today's taxpayers.

Again I have little time for blogging, and so rather than attacking this topic myself I refer you to the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI), where the "national service" ideology is described as what it really is. Read the Times story, and then the ARI editorial, and see where you stand.