Sony Pictures Cyber Attack Over The Interview

[FlyingOnFumes]

Could VAQ play a role to help bitchslap Kim Jung-Un, the DPRK, and Bureau 121 and put them back in their place?

Any other thoughts in general?

 

[Recovering LSO]

Could VAQ play a role to help bitchslap Kim Jung-Un, the DPRK, and Bureau 121 and put them back in their place?

Any other thoughts in general?

 

[Brett327]

Could VAQ play a role to help bitchslap Kim Jung-Un, the DPRK, and Bureau 121 and put them back in their place?

Any other thoughts in general?

OK, I'll bite... sort of. With an understanding that no meaningful discussion of capabilities can be had here, what did you have in mind, exactly, for this thread?

 

[xj220]

I'll say this, as cliche as it sounds, the Communists won.

 

[insanebikerboy]

I'll say this, as cliche as it sounds, the Communists won.

North Koreans were well known to roll hand grenades down aisles of South Korean movie theatres post Korean War. That went on for years after the ceasefire went into existence.

With how crazy the Kim family is, who knows if that would've happened if this movie would've went to show.

Does it mean I think the movie should've been pulled? Not exactly, but I can understand why they did.

 

[robav8r]

Any other thoughts in general?

Yes. Red Dawn has begun. We need to find Patrick Swayze and muster the Wolverines soonest !

 

[FlyingOnFumes]

OK, I'll bite... sort of. With an understanding that no meaningful discussion of capabilities can be had here, what did you have in mind, exactly, for this thread?

If nothing else, something along the lines of: “Rest easy folks, we got it covered.”

Or perhaps: “Yes, we can kick their ass: we have capabilities that they can’t even dream of [us having].”

It was more of a “rah! rah! rah!” and “are we going to take this sitting down?”, type question.

On a personal level: it would be amusing to hear that we have shut down their entire RF spectrum, Internet access (depriving Kim of his access to Internet porn) , and comm capability with 24/7 round the clock jamming from outside their airspace similar to how our B-52s always maintained a holding track over the Med during the cold war fully armed with nukes on airborne nuclear alert patrol just outside of Soviet airspace ready to push if the Doomaday scenario became real and order was ever given. I wouldn't expect that to be discussed on here: but it would serve them right and make me chuckle.

 

[Recovering LSO]

If nothing else, something along the lines of: “Rest easy folks, we got it covered.”

what's that got to do with this:

Could VAQ play a role to help bitchslap Kim Jung-Un, the DPRK, and Bureau 121?

North Koreans were well known to roll hand grenades down aisles of South Korean movie theatres post Korean War. That went on for years after the ceasefire went into existence.

With how crazy the Kim family is, who knows if that would've happened if this movie would've went to show.

And Al-Qaeda cuts people's heads off, but that didn't stop someone from making Zero Dark Thirty - or stop any of the tens of millions of people who went to see it.

 

[FlyingOnFumes]

what's that got to do with this:


And Al-Qaeda cuts people's heads off, but that didn't stop someone from making Zero Dark Thirty - or stop any of the tens of millions of people who went to see it.

To be fully truthful: I was actually grasping at straws to connect the cyber attack story to Naval Aviation in order to discuss it on here, and VAQ seemed to be the closest link given their transformation from just electronic warfare to information warfare (which is kind of Cyberwarfary? Kinda, sorta?). That was actually my true motivation.

Had this been a USAF forum such as BaseOps or eDoDo, I probably would have referenced EC-130 Compass Calls (since they don’t have EF-111 Ravens anymore and even if they still did, I assume they would be strictly EW and not IW capable).

Although the idea of a “tron” instead of nuke equivalent of Operation Chrome Dome with the “BUFFs” during the Cold War seemed like an interesting hypothetical that would likely never happen in real life given how much it would probably cost to do so.

I think the closest Al Qaeda analogy would be if they made a theatrical movie making fun of the prophet just like that YouTube video. That would probably get shut down and terrorist threats as well just like those who draw cartoons of the guy and now have to go into hiding.

Sad state of our 1st Amendment when foreign thugs determine what our freedom of expression is in our own nation.

 

[Brett327]

I don't recall anyone from the USG jailing or preventing anyone from expressing themselves = 1st amendment firmly intact. People (movie theater owners) have self-censored. While we may not agree with their decision, that's not a freedom of speech issue.

 

[nittany03]

While we may not agree with their decision, that's not a freedom of speech issue.

Technically true. But that's kind of like saying that my hypothetically putting a gun to your head and robbing you didn't limit your ability to exercise your right to acquire and possess property.

 

[SynixMan]

Super sad that Sony went this far in response to a terror threat. There's probably some insurance/liability things here at play we might not fully grasp (and might not be fully public), but the internet and cybersecurity (or lack thereof) has leveled the playing field in some respects. While US public policy may be to not negotiate with terrorists, the same cannot be said for companies. As an aside, sure, Sony is a Japanese conglomerate, but Sony Pictures Entertainment is effectively a US based company owned by some folks in Japan.

The scary thing is some folks effectively leveled a multi-billion dollar company and changed an entire industry laregly based in the US. This will continue to happen until people get more serious about cyber threats.

 

[Brett327]

Technically true. But that's kind of like saying that my hypothetically putting a gun to your head and robbing you didn't limit your ability to exercise your right to acquire and possess property.

The 1st Amendment protects individuals from being prosecuted by the government for expression and speech. It does not protect individuals from the consequences of that speech, nor does it guarantee that the speech is heard, disseminated, etc. In this case, theater owners and ultimately Sony Pictures made a business decision. This has nothing to do with free speech or the 1st amendment. Lots of people seem to be confused by what the 1st amendment is and what freedom of speech means.

Now, to your point, one could argue that the USG has a duty to protect citizens, corporations, etc from these kinds of attacks/threats of reprisals... but it's not a free speech issue.

 

[insanebikerboy]

And Al-Qaeda cuts people's heads off, but that didn't stop someone from making Zero Dark Thirty - or stop any of the tens of millions of people who went to see it.

You really can't see parallels to a movie being released and how North Koreans used to specifically target movie theaters? When was the last time Al Qaeda attacked a movie theatre?

Anyways, I don't think it was the right decision to pull the movie. It is, however, sheer ignorance to disregard the history of how much of a basket case nut job North Korea is.

 

[insanebikerboy]

Technically true. But that's kind of like saying that my hypothetically putting a gun to your head and robbing you didn't limit your ability to exercise your right to acquire and possess property.

That still is a poor analogy because in your example the right to acquire and possess property wasn't infringed upon by the government.