The Pentagon's new cyber attack plan: 'Blunt force trauma'

I read this on my phone a couple of days ago, and I was shocked to see no one here had picked up on it.

Politico

“How do you make an enemy air defense system go completely blank in the first minute of the conflict?” Welsh asked reporters last week. “How do you make a [surface to air missile] radar show a thousand false targets that all look real so you don’t know where the real package is in the middle of that? How do you keep enemy surface to surface missiles from ever launching — or [fly] halfway to their target and then turn around and go home?”

Air Force Chief of Staff General Mark Welsh is extremely high-up the ladder when it comes to the U.S. Military, so for him to say this really means something.

Further, the Pentagon is already working on a similar plan:

It’s building a “Cyber Mission Force” that will include 133 teams made up of about 6,200 troops and Defense Department civilians, which it wants ready for action by fiscal 2018. That cadre would defend military networks, defend the U.S. against attacks of “significant consequence” and conduct “full-spectrum operations” for “contingency plans and military operations,”

What Gen. Welsh outlined is where I see the future of warfare heading. Can you imagine it?

As multiple warheads head towards their target, enemy radars are overwhelmed with hundreds of identical radar signatures.
Attempts to launch counter-strikes fail, as enemy missiles are redirected to their own bases where they are detonated.

This is more than saber-rattling. This is reminding the entire world that the U.S. is prepared to lay the hurt down in unprecedented ways.

I have no doubts, though, that Russia, China, or other players may already have similar cyber weapons armed and ready.

Is this a new era of Mutually Assured Destruction?

a reply to: gatorboi117

New? Nope not at all..
The difference is its being talked about openly now and the media is reporting on it.

Even before I was born in 1954, the USA has been in a constant state of war, military escalation, and increased and widespread military engagement. Having been trained in our most prestigious military institution and being a prodigious student of military history, it is my understanding that just about everything we Americans have done as a culture, are doing as a nation, or will do in the future is based on the advancement of military technologies and capabilities. All of our modern technologies have been offshoots of military endeavors and the concept that has evolved of moving physical warfare from nuclear devastation to technological warfare and cyber assault is really nothing more than warfare on all fronts, not less. We live on a planet whose history is told in terms of what war we are currently engage in. This can only lead to destruction on a large scale as the theaters on which the warfare is waged grow without end. Perhaps I have grown too old to live, but I cannot for the life of me understand how we can all be made "safer" by increasing the destructive capacities of the weapons we do have, and endlessly searching for new, bigger, badder ways to destroy our fellow Earth dwellers in every increasing numbers and fronts.

a reply to: BennyHavensOh

I think the reverse psychology principle applies.. If a nation has such overwhelming military superiority, and broadcasts that fact, then the mindset is, hopefully, the other side wont risk a confrontation.

Personally - They are playing blackjack in Vegas at a high stakes table with only 1 deck of cards.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Indeed they are. Personally, I was always one of those that saw the biggest, baddest tough guy as a personal challenge to topple for the sport and accomplishment, but I do not believe that world politics works like that. However, once the big, bad boy on the block overreaches his ability to defend at the same time that he pisses off the entire block, well what happens when they all gang up on him and move together against him (BRICS). Well I do believe we will find out shortly...

a reply to: gatorboi117

“How do you make an enemy air defense system go completely blank in the first minute of the conflict?” Welsh asked reporters last week. “How do you make a [surface to air missile] radar show a thousand false targets that all look real so you don’t know where the real package is in the middle of that? How do you keep enemy surface to surface missiles from ever launching — or [fly] halfway to their target and then turn around and go home?”

SAMs go blank........Israel has already done that way back in 2007 where a portion of Syrian network showed total normal events.

Thousand targets on radar screen.............these are MALDs. Who has answers for these? don't know.

Reversing missile's destination........similar to what Iran did to capture the US drone. Highjack the data link and replace it with one controlled by the home team.

Best defense would be to go after the data links i.e. satellites. Such capabilities will work mostly against the puny nations not the major or even regional players.

Also seems, before the shooting starts the real war will be played out in cyber world first.

a reply to: Xcathdra

If a nation has such overwhelming military superiority, and broadcasts that fact, then the mindset is, hopefully, the other side wont risk a confrontation.

advertise this "overwhelming" capability to a country like Burkina Faso and similar types. major players already have post-graduated from these technologies.

a reply to: gatorboi117

We also have this.

a reply to: gatorboi117

I met this guy once that was REALLY good with computers. He, um, wasnt allowed to own one except for a work one issued to him. He said he was in a cyber warfare division of the US army.

Now, the guy was a sorry sap. Really over weight and a weird kleptomaniac. He tried to steal a pocket knife I had out the first week I knew him, so bear that in mind. He may have been full of it. I dont know what to think.

Anyways, he said that basically what the OP is about is common. That he was focussed on disabling civilian infrastructure if an attack was to be launched but the big boys were dedicated to enemy military systems.

They basically just shut everything down or cause chaos so repairing the system is nearly impossible or very time consuming.

The main objective is disabling the power grid of a target country or area and then /or /and disabling the communications of the target area or country. Anything else just plays off that or is geared to that end.

This was back before 9/11. Who knows what else they can do now, or cant do.

Food for thought anyways. I am pretty certain this is common knowledge now.

originally posted by: BennyHavensOh
a reply to: Xcathdra

Indeed they are. Personally, I was always one of those that saw the biggest, baddest tough guy as a personal challenge to topple for the sport and accomplishment, but I do not believe that world politics works like that. However, once the big, bad boy on the block overreaches his ability to defend at the same time that he pisses off the entire block, well what happens when they all gang up on him and move together against him (BRICS). Well I do believe we will find out shortly...

I love how whenever people bring up Brics they act like we would be fighting by ourselves.

a reply to: Greathouse

I realize that on paper we still do have "allies" but even the Limeys have been cozying up to the Chinese lately. After all, they DO go back a lot longer with them than they have been friends with us. I understand that the Japanese are ramping up their military these days and the South Koreans are there (though their Tiger Marines prefer torturing prisoners to campaigning you know). Frankly I am unaware of any decent allies, but I am always willing to be corrected, so oblige me, please...

a reply to: Greathouse

OOh BRICS. lol. You can compare them to the ISraelis beating off the Arab countries in the 7 day war.

And we all know who would play the part of the Israelis dont we?

a reply to: yuppa


Yep it would be like a elephant stepping on a piss ant.

originally posted by: Greathouse

originally posted by: BennyHavensOh
a reply to: Xcathdra

Indeed they are. Personally, I was always one of those that saw the biggest, baddest tough guy as a personal challenge to topple for the sport and accomplishment, but I do not believe that world politics works like that. However, once the big, bad boy on the block overreaches his ability to defend at the same time that he pisses off the entire block, well what happens when they all gang up on him and move together against him (BRICS). Well I do believe we will find out shortly...

I love how whenever people bring up Brics they act like we would be fighting by ourselves.

Or that any of the brics nations have even close to the same level of military technology as the west.

a reply to: BennyHavensOh

First off I seriously doubt China will lift a finger against the US. Why attacked their largest market?

But if they do India, Israel, Canada, England, France, Taiwan hell most of NATO then we have Australia Plus every nation in the south China see gearing up for China's expansion move in the future. You can listen to all the opinions you want. But the fact of the matter is the governments will side with the US, the people may not but the governments will.



I almost forgot Free Tibet!!!!!!

a reply to: johnwick

I agree that helps immensely. But logistics when's a war.

a reply to: johnwick

In my experience in both the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns I am just not seeing the overwhelming victory of which you speak. I must be missing something, can you enlighten me please?

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: BennyHavensOh

First off I seriously doubt China will lift a finger against the US. Why attacked their largest market?

But if they do India, Israel, Canada, England, France, Taiwan hell most of NATO then we have Australia Plus every nation in the south China see gearing up for China's expansion move in the future. You can listen to all the opinions you want. But the fact of the matter is the governments will side with the US, the people may not but the governments will.



I almost forgot Free Tibet!!!!!!

Russia is by far the only real military threat unless you are in Asia.

India and China have a lot of people but no way to move them.

Hell india can't even beat Pakistan in their perpetual land war over casmir.

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: johnwick

I agree that helps immensely. But logistics when's a war.

And the west has that in spades.

Russia is the only brics nation with mobility to move forces of significant number around.

America alone can move more troops in 2 weeks anywhere on the earth, than all of brics combined in 2 months.

a reply to: johnwick

If you consider all we have posted here the first thing that jumps out at you is that it is all a big damn mess, is it not? My concern with China was always that after our "government" granted them the right of Eminent Domain" over their holdings here in the US, they could and would start shipping back food, resources and whatever else they cared to off of their properties here to China to take care of their own at the expense of the American people. Frankly, I am thankful that I never made it to a level where I would have to be responsible for dealing with problems of this magnitude because I cannot even begin to comprehend of workable solutions for the strategic resolution of the global clusterflock that has evolved. We will need all the luck we can muster to keep it going for another 50 years IMHO.