I wrote a piece on Monday about an article in the spring 2009 issue of the IANewsletter, published by the Defense Information Assurance Technology Analysis Center. The article made some compelling arguments for the establishment of a fourth service to conduct cyberwarfare.
The authors point out that the talents of cyber warriors are wasted performing tasks beneath their station and skills, such as work on the United States' ultimate weapon of war - PowerPoint slides.
Based on observation and experience, this is not a new phenomenon. Wander around the Pentagon and you'll find junior aviators who used to answer to the call sign "Killer" tasked to organize the NCAA basketball March Madness pool and some light colonel snake eaters pushing a hand truck. (Really. I have seen this with my own, aging eyes.)
If a Cyber Command is formed, sooner or later one of its units will deploy to some unpleasant part of the planet, which means some high-powered talent will end up filling sandbags, because no matter how high tech war becomes, sandbags will always be around to deflect old fashioned kinetic weapons like hand grenades.
I thought filling sandbags definitely wasted my range of skills as a PFC radio operator in a Marine infantry battalion. But Sgt. Herbierto Gonzalez told me it was a character building opportunity.
COMMENTS
A very well-developed, well-planned architecture (if you will) for our whole U.S. cyber network (including non-military) would be of the greatest value to our country, to international well-being, and (dare I say it) to mankind at this point in history. It would save disastrous losses, save valuable time, and could be an extremely lucrative enterprise. Let's get to the drawing board (or the flow chart) and get to work!!
gary snodgrass 04/01/09 01:49 pm ET
It seems to me, as far as dedicating resources, that cyber-defense, cyber-security, & cyber-peacekeeping are more worthy pursuits than cyber-warfare.
Weakening/attacking other systems can be seen as a weaker strategy then developing, building, & strengthening our own systems.
I'm sure there are exceptions when it comes to confronting those who have been discovered as having attacked our systems. Debilitating their capabilities to prevent future attacks is obviously of value.
But specifically how much to dedicate in resources to these causes would be up for discussion.
http://twitter.com/earthintelnet
(Earth Intelligence Network, 501c3 non-profit)
JZ 03/25/09 04:18 pm ET