NATO Vs Anonymous

[Kalyyn]

Why would someone who appears to be working for the common man, go and attack the common man, and in turn killing their own justification for their work? I'm seeing a lack of motivation to do so.

Because fanatics usually start to have bad reasoning skills the more fanatical they get?

---------- Post added 2011-06-14 at 11:17 AM ----------

What happened to the guy that hacked the Pentagon database, last time I heard he wasn't employed by NATO or any of that kind of organizations. And really( i might be a bit ignorant) what does NATO need hackers for ? i can understand why CIA would need them or any other intelligence agency but military groups ? don't think so

Because modern military forces are completely computerized and networked. If you can bring that network down, you've almost won the battle already.

[Kelesti]

I'm missing your point here at all. Some things are kept secret for good reason, some things are not kept secret for good reason, and some things are very gray. Noones saying that it is this way, or that way entirely, it's a mix of all of them.

Tell me, what things can be kept from the public that are done so for our "best interests"? How high the friendly fire and civilian casualty ratings of "targets neutralized" happen in Iraq/Afghanistan? How about backroom deals between lobbyists and members of the House of Representatives or Senators? That Guantanamo was built in Cuba to keep Human Rights activists out to prevent any worries of torture on American soil, and the subsequent revoking of your Fourth Amendment?

All of the above are embarassing, all of the above can be used to say "it's necessary to keep these from the people"

Why? Necessary for the people? Or necessary to not have yourself found in contempt, and possibly charged?

[xile]

The Taliban was a far greater foe than Anonymous could ever dream to be.
And of course everyone knows that NATO is supporting dictators so we can buy cheap shit. So many of you are quick to condemn them for it, thats for sure...
"NATO is making deals with dictators so you can live comfortably."
"/RAGE! They totally aren't looking out for our interests!"
See the flaw in that argument? I spotted it from 50 miles away (its pretty big as far as flaws go)
Say all the righteous bullshit you want, are you really willing to pay $10 for a gallon of gas just so Saudi's can overthrow their government? All of you just said yes, but I'd bet everything I own that if it actually happened, you'd be bitching about gas prices and demanding that your government do something. Also, if gas prices go up, everything prices go up even more.

But no, this isn't about those "secrets" that everybody already knows. Total transparency? TOTAL transparency? So you want to know the exact movements of all NATO troops in every operation ever? You want to know their call-signs, their encryption codes, and their spy-plane routes?
What could you possibly do with that information? The only people I can possibly think of who would find any use for that information is that side that is trying to kill you.

Nato does 100s of horrible things each day, as does every country in this world. The problem with the world, especially in America, is that it's perfectly okay for people we don't know about to go without healthcare, or be threatened by death, or be opressed and made to live in dam near slavery so long as we have cheap products and our lives are okay. Because we live in some piss poor ideal system that's based on individual achievement which in itself is a laughable joke because not one person in the world especially in America has ever "made it all on his own". There is no flaw in the argument i made. The point is we allow, and knowingly aid those dictators in places where we can get cheap goods to keep our prices low. We put I imagine billions of lives at risks so you can save a couple thousand dollars each year, most of which can be equalized by learning how to cut bills and god forbid abstaining from some of the luxury items that are utterly pointless.

[Notalent]

Apparently you're an idiot and miss the point. If you say you're from anonymous, you're not anonymous anymore now are you? These people aren't doing it for the fame, they're doing it because of what's right, and that apparently pisses you off.

Har har I take a popular point of view and therefore what I claim is right must be right regardless of the potential risk to lives/waste of time and assets.

Sometimes things should stay secret, sometimes we are better of not knowing, and sometimes knowing costs people they're lives. Secret government documents are secret for a reason, and the very act of snooping for them puts lives in danger.

Sometimes the Idealistic point of view isn't the right one, just the one that makes you feel better about yourself.

[Deleted]

Nato does 100s of horrible things each day, as does every country in this world. The problem with the world, especially in America, is that it's perfectly okay for people we don't know about to go without healthcare, or be threatened by death, or be opressed and made to live in dam near slavery so long as we have cheap products and our lives are okay. Because we live in some piss poor ideal system that's based on individual achievement which in itself is a laughable joke because not one person in the world especially in America has ever "made it all on his own". There is no flaw in the argument i made. The point is we allow, and knowingly aid those dictators in places where we can get cheap goods to keep our prices low. We put I imagine billions of lives at risks so you can save a couple thousand dollars each year, most of which can be equalized by learning how to cut bills and god forbid abstaining from some of the luxury items that are utterly pointless.

well,yes thats why our economy is practically slavery

[Kelesti]

Actually, Anonymous can't be brought down, as it is an idea, and so long as people have this idea there will always be Anonymous. As far as I can tell, nobody has the ability to control peoples ideology except for the person/people in question themselves.

I am more than a man, I am an idea....
/swoon

Civilians are ALWAYS the target. Terrorism isn't used as a means to defeat a military force, its used as a way of scaring a nations populous into fearing for they're own lives/children's lives.

Also your forgetting the very real possibility of Domestic Terrorism.

I'm not forgetting anything. Anonymous isn't a terrorist movement. That would be the American Government working against its people to strike fear into them, and effectively unite the population against a single enemy.

Anonymous isn't against the people, it's for the people. Striking out at civilians goes against everything it stands for. Domestic Terrorism would be framing it to turn the people against Anon, nothing more, nothing less.

[Deleted]

Maybe Anon has the top shit hackers of the world. I simply don't know.
What I DO know is that the NATO has the top shit resources to pull shit.
Skill can only get you so far, but once you reach your resource limits your screwed.

So... yeah... seems obvious.

[Torian101]

The Taliban was a far greater foe than Anonymous could ever dream to be.
And of course everyone knows that NATO is supporting dictators so we can buy cheap shit. So many of you are quick to condemn them for it, thats for sure...
"NATO is making deals with dictators so you can live comfortably."
"/RAGE! They totally aren't looking out for our interests!"
See the flaw in that argument? I spotted it from 50 miles away (its pretty big as far as flaws go)
Say all the righteous bullshit you want, are you really willing to pay $10 for a gallon of gas just so Saudi's can overthrow their government? All of you just said yes, but I'd bet everything I own that if it actually happened, you'd be bitching about gas prices and demanding that your government do something. Also, if gas prices go up, everything prices go up even more.

But no, this isn't about those "secrets" that everybody already knows. Total transparency? TOTAL transparency? So you want to know the exact movements of all NATO troops in every operation ever? You want to know their call-signs, their encryption codes, and their spy-plane routes?
What could you possibly do with that information? The only people I can possibly think of who would find any use for that information is that side that is trying to kill you.

As has happened a few times before with your posts, you misunderstand or misinterpret the motivations of people who have an opposing viewpoint. Nobody (who's sane and realistic) believes the NATO isn't looking out for our interests. When NATO supports morally ambiguous organisations or dictators, we know they don't do that because they actually want to "destroy the West" or "kill democracy" or whatever. The problem we have with such policies is that the reason we get these cheap prices, is because we are supporting a corrupt entity. This kinda makes it feel like we are paying for our gas and other product with blood money. Not questioning this method of keeping prices low is just plain ignorant and naive. If we stop caring about WHERE our money and resources come from, we stop caring about the people that suffer to provide them to us. This is a direct violation of basic human rights. Khamenei and his puppet Ahmedinejad don't care about basic human rights, so we should. Otherwise we'd be no different than them.

Lastly, the military is not the super awesome construct you always seem to be thinking it is. It's pitifully bad at reacting properly to new methods of warfare. Just look at the Vietnam war. The US military got absolutely raped because they couldn't get it through their skulls that the Vietcong won by executing surgical strikes and then went back to hiding in the tangle of the forests. Guerilla warfare is more precise than the massive scale warfare waged by the US and NATO and also costs less human lives.

[xile]

Because fanatics usually start to have bad reasoning skills the more fanatical they get?

---------- Post added 2011-06-14 at 11:17 AM ----------



Because modern military forces are completely computerized and networked. If you can bring that network down, you've almost won the battle already.

Troop plans, assuming they are ethical, if released are ridiculously detrimental to the safety of people that are fighting for this country, some with troop positioning, our nuclear missile codes, i can go on and on about things that do exists for good reason to maintain this country. You're operating under some idea that without regulation by the people, which mind you is largely uneducated in even the most developed countries (i consider a high school education hardly educated in the least), that the government will go hugely astray. But theres so many issues with that, the first of which that the people who alot of people should have a say, aren't singularized in one ideal, a good 90% of which aren't informed and even in an entirely transparent government still wouldn't be informed about the topics well enough to make good decisions, and aren't even educated to make critical thinking issues on such topics.

As for one particular thing, guantanamo which is a rather very controversial topic creates several issues. I remember going through a case one day in class a couple years back where a man was being held in prison and had been for years (because of the patriot act) because he had been suspected of working with terrorists, the evidence was weak but it existed.

The question became what do you do, you can either release a possible innocent man (who let's be serious will probably become a terrorists now that he's been opressed by this government for the past half decade) or you can either release a possible terrorist who will undoubtedly result in american deaths. The argument becomes how far is a country willing to go to protects itself and its people even if that means stretching it's own ideals. Now the human rights activist in me would love to say that we should have let him go, maybe he was innocent, but what about the next guy, how many people do we have to go through before we hit a real terrorist and fighting for our ideals, becomes a fight to save american lives. If human rights activists were there to constantly look over their shoulder how many more americans might have died. If you think that's as black and white then i'm not sure why were still talking, because you have directly conflicting values, One the value to protect American people, the other to maintain the values the country was based upon.

[Velin]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13762626

Anonymous members arrested in Turkey
Turkish police have arrested 32 people believed to be members of hacker collective Anonymous

Not sure they can get away with hacking NATO /shrug

[Kelesti]

Maybe Anon has the top shit hackers of the world. I simply don't know.
What I DO know is that the NATO has the top shit resources to pull shit.
Skill can only get you so far, but once you reach your resource limits your screwed.

So... yeah... seems obvious.

Hacker A is Anonymous. Hacker N works for NATO. Hacker N is about 85% as effective as Hacker A, notable enough because N was caught.

Throwing money at N will not make him better. Throwing money at N's equipment will not help him find holes or trace faster. Resources mean nothing in this day and age, when it all comes down to skill and time.

[Deleted]

We elect our government officials in a republican manner. We have the right to know every thing they do. If you pick someone to represent you, wouldn't you want someone who doesn't do something behind your back? Everything Anon said is true. If a government or corporation is doing something illegal, or thinks they are above the law. Then they SHOULD by all means be brought to light an shown what the truly are. There will be no progress of the human species until we unite and try to achieve a common goal. Shady governments and corporations are the antithesis to our species progress.

unite , common goal - they kill people in america for talking like that

[tomathy]

all these "hacking" stories are just a false flag operation to bring in the elites plan for a completely controlled internet

[Deleted]

Hacker A is Anonymous. Hacker N works for NATO. Hacker N is about 85% as effective as Hacker A, notable enough because N was caught.

Throwing money at N will not make him better. Throwing money at N's equipment will not help him find holes or trace faster. Resources mean nothing in this day and age, when it all comes down to skill and time.

Actually resources can mean a lot. If we are talking large scale things. Just try sniffing a giant network like the NATO servers.
Besides, so far Anon hasn't shown a hell lot of skilled hacking. Sony was a laugh. That voting crack? Not really hacking, just manpower.
Almost forgot: a few DoS attacks.

[Kelesti]

all these "hacking" stories are just a false flag operation to bring in the elites plan for a completely controlled internet

And thus yet another nation (Turkey) falls.

---------- Post added 2011-06-14 at 05:30 AM ----------

Actually resources can mean a lot. If we are talking large scale things. Just try sniffing a giant network like the NATO servers.
Besides, so far Anon hasn't shown a hell lot of skilled hacking. Sony was a laugh. That voting crack? Not really hacking, just manpower.
Almost forgot: a few DoS attacks.

Sony wasn't Anonymous though, that's the funny part. Anon called off the attack, because it was going to affect users more than the company, and that's just not cool. The guys that did the hack tried to blackmail sony with the info, and then sell it elsewhere. When Anonymous does something, they make it known and are damn proud of it.

Again though, Anonymous does NOT want to go to war against NATO.

[Deleted]

The PSN wasn't Anon.
Not sure about the others. (what are we at now? 3-4?)

Never said they did want to go to war. Just fiddling with my mind.

[Notalent]

Nato does 100s of horrible things each day, as does every country in this world. The problem with the world, especially in America, is that it's perfectly okay for people we don't know about to go without healthcare, or be threatened by death, or be opressed and made to live in dam near slavery so long as we have cheap products and our lives are okay. Because we live in some piss poor ideal system that's based on individual achievement which in itself is a laughable joke because not one person in the world especially in America has ever "made it all on his own". There is no flaw in the argument i made. The point is we allow, and knowingly aid those dictators in places where we can get cheap goods to keep our prices low. We put I imagine billions of lives at risks so you can save a couple thousand dollars each year, most of which can be equalized by learning how to cut bills and god forbid abstaining from some of the luxury items that are utterly pointless.

There are so many holes in the argument your making its honestly kind of sad. The problem is your speaking from the heart...which is nice, and obviously stupid.

We could give free health care to everyone, that is absolutely true. However then the basic standard of health care would go down for those who can afford it. Further something would have to be cut, most likely military spending, which again seems fine...until you consider the ramifications of weakening our international power base. There is also the secondary financial and economic ramifications, if you cut military spending you end thousands of factory jobs which are still currently in the United States and shift money that spending to pharmaceutical companies which are now mostly based outside of the United States (easier testing guidelines, less taxes, cheaper staff). So your actually helping to tank the economy now.

But hey how about helping the impoverished of the world. The weak, the meek, the enslaved. We could surely do that right? No. It doesn't work. People have to help themselves for the most part. If they don't try and overthrow they're own dictators and establish they're own democracies then its utterly useless. Egypt is a fantastic example of a people working to help themselves, and now they appear to be on the right track. On the other hand there is Somalia. You know how the Battle of Mogadishu originated? Food. UN Forces were sent in to protect food shipments meant for the people of Somalia, because the Warlords took the food and captured the Warehouses were it was stored and used that food to recruit soldiers. When our soldiers tried to intervene the Warlords would destroy the food supplies or simply prevent it from being delivered. As a result UN peacekeepers begun to be viewed as the villains, after all it was there fault the people weren't getting they're food now.

The world isn't something sparkly place where good intentions make things better, its a harsh reality where one wrong misstep sends thousands of people to they're graves. Sometimes the hard decision is the correct decision.

[Kelesti]

The sad part is, the best response to the whole Wikileaks "embarassment," would have just been what some folks have said in this thread; "Yeah, it's corrupt, but that's how the world is run. If you play fair, you fall behind. If you fall behind, the citizens suffer." Boom. Done. Moving on. Instead, everybody's official response to Wikileaks has been, "OMG LALALALA THERE'S NEVER ANY TROUBLE HERE IN BUBBLELAND lol they so silly, imeanrlyguys, we wuddent do stuffs like that. Just ignore the hard evidence that confirms what everyone suspected all along, and go back to making fun of the theorists with their tinfoil hatz, k?"

It's kind of funny, because that's all that Anonymous wanted, in support of WikiLeaks. To stop denying that it happens; admit it, make it public, and move on.

That's really all that they're calling for now, when NATO wants to label them as a threat to national security.

[Notalent]

I am more than a man, I am an idea....
/swoon
I'm not forgetting anything. Anonymous isn't a terrorist movement. That would be the American Government working against its people to strike fear into them, and effectively unite the population against a single enemy.

Anonymous isn't against the people, it's for the people. Striking out at civilians goes against everything it stands for. Domestic Terrorism would be framing it to turn the people against Anon, nothing more, nothing less.

I don't think you understand the scenario. I just said what happens if the Government is wasting resources hunting Anonymous that could have...and normally would have been spend hunting for the terrorist who just killed several hundred people. That blood IS now on Anon's hands.

[xile]

There are so many holes in the argument your making its honestly kind of sad. The problem is your speaking from the heart...which is nice, and obviously stupid.

We could give free health care to everyone, that is absolutely true. However then the basic standard of health care would go down for those who can afford it. Further something would have to be cut, most likely military spending, which again seems fine...until you consider the ramifications of weakening our international power base. There is also the secondary financial and economic ramifications, if you cut military spending you end thousands of factory jobs which are still currently in the United States and shift money that spending to pharmaceutical companies which are now mostly based outside of the United States (easier testing guidelines, less taxes, cheaper staff). So your actually helping to tank the economy now.

But hey how about helping the impoverished of the world. The weak, the meek, the enslaved. We could surely do that right? No. It doesn't work. People have to help themselves for the most part. If they don't try and overthrow they're own dictators and establish they're own democracies then its utterly useless. Egypt is a fantastic example of a people working to help themselves, and now they appear to be on the right track. On the other hand there is Somalia. You know how the Battle of Mogadishu originated? Food. UN Forces were sent in to protect food shipments meant for the people of Somalia, because the Warlords took the food and captured the Warehouses were it was stored and used that food to recruit soldiers. When our soldiers tried to intervene the Warlords would destroy the food supplies or simply prevent it from being delivered. As a result UN peacekeepers begun to be viewed as the villains, after all it was there fault the people weren't getting they're food now.

The world isn't something sparkly place where good intentions make things better, its a harsh reality where one wrong misstep sends thousands of people to they're graves. Sometimes the hard decision is the correct decision.

The united states, i might add unnecessarily, has hands down the worlds most technologically advanced arsenal bar none. We have more airplanes, battle cruisers, nukes, etc etc, than something like the next 10 or so nations combined. While you can say that this would take jobs away there are certainly ways to allow jobs to prop up in other places, and as one of the biggest consumers, if not the largest, of goods per capita in the world i'd expect one of these days washington to actually realize that if they want to bring jobs back to America all they need to do is offer incentives for doing so instead of just getting paid off to not do shit while corporations furthermore divy up the world resources. As for the people have to help themselves for the most part, i'd put money down that the CIA had it's hands all up in egypt long before anyone here heard about it. Very few things go on in this world that every major country doesn't know about simply because of counter intelligence alone. I'm not sure what particularly i might add that the egypt has to do with the argument though. The fact still remains that the U.S. along with just about every other leading world power, has it in it's power to pick and choose who runs almost every underdeveloped country and do so by providing whoever they want with the weaponry and support, i mean the world's biggest arms dealer is guess who (America).