Ready, Fire, Aim
This
is why the United States is having so much negative reaction to strikes in
everywhere from Libya to Afghanistan when civilians get killed while American
pilots are bombing anti-aircraft sites or killing terrorist leaders.
This
is what Cartwright has failed to recognize. The concept of "Ready, Fire, Aim"
works no better in cyberspace than it does with real bullets. That's especially
a problem in cyber-warfare; it's frequently impossible to know right away who
is actually responsible for an attack. Unless the attacker makes a mistake or
takes public credit for the attack, you almost never have any actual proof.
Even
the attacks suspected to be the work of
the Chinese military against U.S. interests haven't been proven, despite
the fact that U.S. intelligence agencies are reasonably certain that's where
they originate from. But even in a case where the source of attacks is clear,
is Cartwright ready to have the military attack China? If so, how would he
propose to do this? Would he drop a cruise missile on a Chinese military
academy building on the off chance it was the source of an attack? Would he
launch an all-out cyber-attack against China's army? And what would he do if
China openly retaliates? This sounds like the start of a real war, not a cyber-war.
And
worse yet, what if we're wrong? It's no secret that it's possible to have the
evidence from a cyber-attack point to somewhere else. Suppose we analyze the
cyber-attack that's hitting our critical infrastructure, determine that it's
coming from, for example, China, when in reality it's not. It's simply that
someone has made it seem that way. Are we willing to attack another nation's
digital infrastructure based on that sort of evidence?
When
I mentioned my service in the Navy in a recent column about the final flight of
the
space shuttle Atlantis, I made it clear that I've served in the military.
In fact, I'm a retired Navy officer, and I recognize it's the duty of the
military to protect the United States and its citizens against all enemies. But
that doesn't mean that we should go off attacking people, organizations or
nations (rogue or otherwise) on a whim, on the basis of assumptions or on
guesses.
While
Cartwright is correct in saying that people who attack the United States should
suffer consequences, that only works when you can know with certainty who they
are, and where they are. Otherwise, the only thing you're shooting is yourself-in
the foot.








