Are We Underestimating America?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

After reading several posts regarding the United States potential vunerability in regards to national security during a severe Y2K crisis, I wondered if in fact we may not be underestimating the ability of the US to deal with such issues. If we (those who post on this forum)are aware that enemies of the US may take advantage of Y2K disruptions to strike at America then you can bet the farm that the itelligence communities are too and that they have contigency plans.

In fact, It would not surprise me at all if some "preemptive" measures are not taken by the US and its allies to help debilitate our adversaries abilities to carry out attacks on the US and its intrests abroad - now and just prior to rollover. Such actions would/could most likely take the form of covert operations. For example, inserting commandos in certain areas in "rogue" nations to destroy critical command and control facilities and disrupt communications and other key infrastucture elements. Such an event could be timed to occur just after rollever, thus making some of them "appear" as Y2K glitches.

The US also has its own "cyberwarriors" who protect critical computer networks and the like. Would not be surprised if they were not doing a little extra "fiddilin at the keyboard" come Dec 31 - maybe a little preemtive hacking.

Many of the posts on this forum point out that the rest of the world is in bad shape when it comes to Y2K remediation. Thus, it may be that many adversaries of the US will have thier own fires to put out and just may not be in a position to get involved in any conflicts. While a valid point was made that China may try to take Taiwan, as far as I know the US is not "obligated" to defend Taiwan. Although, I am sure the US would express "concern". North Korea attacking South Korea is another issue. But it may be that in the face of widespread disruption the US may have to triage its obligations and possibly just not honor those that do not pose a direct immidiate threat to national security. I can just see Clition now waving his finger at us and paraphrasing LBJ - "I am not going to send American boys xyz miles across the world to do the work of asian boys".

I also think it quite possible that any nation or orginzation that commits an act of aggesion towards the US during this time period "WIIL BE MADE AN EXAMPLE OF". The reasons for this are obvious. Wheather the US is military is actually in a weakend state or not It will retaliate with all its muster just to demonstrate that it is not weak and not to mess with the US. I think this true even of terrorists attacks. Some one will be made to pay (and it may not be the right people).

Bottom line is that I am certain that many things are done around the world everyday that, Joe Q Public would view as horrible, in the name of/and to the ends of protecting Americas freedom. That is just how the world works in this modern era. The goverment has contigency plans for things beyond our wildest dreams. They have to. They would be remiss if they did not. So maybe we are underestimating the abilities of the US.

What do you all think. Have I been reading to many John Grisham novels???

Also, I usually just lurk here and this is my first major post so please BE GENTLE !!

-- Kevlar (squeeze@triggerslowly.-), September 24, 1999

Answers

Kevlar,

BE GENTLE!-------Here? At the Yourdon Boot camp? No way Pal.

Get ready for your first Hazing.

Take it like a man!

P.S. naw never mind!

-- D.B. (dciinc@aol.com), September 24, 1999.


Hmmmm... Let's think about that for a minute....

"Intelligence community".... Bombing of Chinese embassy in Kosovo....

Oooops!

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), September 24, 1999.


I've had to fix y2k problems, so I know what is involved. You speak of contingency planning and we hear a lot of this. Just what kind of contingency planning can you have when a system is loaded with bad dates? I have no contingency planning here where I work. There is no substitute for broken code buried in systems. It must all work or the system can go bonkers (depending on the errors involved. All bugs aren't created equal). In short, I hope you're right, but in my 20 years of IT experience, it's simply overblown optimism. It's not realistic. There is too much code, too many systems and too many interconnections. This isn't even mentioning the possible terrorists attacks (as you mentioned), but serious solar storms in Jan(which can knock out power), the many viruses projected to strike 2000 (if true) and you name it. All of these things on top of y2k. It will be something if we escape this. It's almost like trying to survive with 10 pitbulls running after you in an open field and all you have is a baseball bat. It's that serious.

-- Larry (cobol.programmer@usa.net), September 24, 1999.

Interesting post Kevlar!

Just yesterday a panel chaired by two ex-senators (Hart and ?) came out with an assessment regarding the US and it's increased vulnerabilities going into the next millennium. Sorry, I don't have a link I heard about it on the radio.

In a quote of the report Secretary of Defense Cohen had an interesting position. Sorry, don't have the qoute but paraphrased it went something like, "Americans will face the challenge of giving up civil liberties in order to allow for increased domestic intelligence gathering." Or to that effect. Also, that the future would hold much more regular police+military activities...how can this be legal under our constitution?

I've actually been wondering if we haven't been living under a state of non-disclosed martial law since Waco or Oaklahoma City. And, that at that time posse cumatatis [-15 sp] was suspended.

It's ironic that at the same time gun control is becoming the rage American citizens are actually facing heightened threats from abroad?

Interesting times...

Mike

===========================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), September 24, 1999.


Larry:

Are you working on a hopeless project? Or did your work on y2k achieve your objectives? I'm not interested here in how sincerely you worry about the other guy, though if you have any particular reason for such worry, I'd sure like to hear from the other guy. But in YOUR experience, have you abandoned hope for your own company? Can you name any known y2k viruses that current antivirus software cannot diagnose?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 24, 1999.



Americans have been historially resillient in the face of overcoming adversity. That has been true only because God has had a hand in keeping the hedge about us and lifting up our right arm in triumphing over our adversaries.

Unfortunately, America has divorced itself from God. We have re- created Him in our image and likeness, and spit in His face with our own selfish pride and greed. "WE did this" we say, when the reality is "WE" did nothing without Divine benevolence and protection.

The self-boasters and proud will be trampled underfoot.

You cannot have the blessings of properity and protection continue as we spit in our Creator's face and engage in all sorts of wickedness.

We are an evil generation that celebrates evil and denounces good. We have the form of religion but deny the true power of it. We are a disobedient children, each pursuing our own desires and lusts. This is why no one really cares or believes we are in danger from Y2K related problems. Mammon and it's pursuit is our god. Technology will protect us.

America may have been resillient, but God has sent strong delusion to our people to believe a lie, and for our abandoment of Him collectively, we are doomed to destruction.

That is our judgement.

It is soon upon us. And we have only ourselves to blame. We have become fat, happy and complacent, forgetting God.

Now God will forget us in the time of our trial. In fact God will laugh at us when we cry out for deliverance.

He is working out a plan, and a lesson must be learned. Consider what is about to happen as a spanking we brought upon ourselves.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), September 24, 1999.


Larry:

I appreciate your response. That is why I would expect to see some preemptive things done just before rollover. Also, although the modern military is heavily dependent on computer systems, lets consider a few things.

1. The US is a major arms exporter. That means that any countries which have weapons systems providied by us will experience the same failures we do.

2. Russia is a major arms exporter. It is very unlikely that military hardware sold by the Russians is any more Y2K compliant than ours. Nations with hardware from the former USSR will also experience Y2K failures.

The effect of the above two facts is that this will put most of the militaries of the world on equal playing field as far as technology is concerned.

3. You can still fight a war/conflict without "pooters' What computers do on the battlefeild is increase the chances of ones first shot being a kill. I am almost certain that you can fire a tank gun manually if you have to (I have been in some and have seen the manual traversing mechanisms). The very nature of combate requires redundancy and backups. We are accustomed to hearing about a lot of our "smart" bombs and the like. The fact is that most of the ordanace expended over the skies of Iraq during the gulf war were good old "drop-em as best you can and let em blow dumb bombs". We were only "treated" on the evening news to those arcade like images beamed back from the miniority of smart bombs used.

While, I do not doubt that the military will not be hampered in terms of logistics, keeping track of troop movements and the like (especially with GPS problems) these problems MAY be surrmountable.

As far as aircraft go, while modern fighter jets are loaded with computers, they still may work just as many argue your car will still run on 1/1/00. Time readings may be necessary to adujst things in flight but do they need the date?. Can't you just measure something at 30 second intervails and not need the date??

I guess what I am trying to say is that, yes the US may loose some of its combat edge, but might not be debilitated as badly as many people think.

Can any techno military guys shed some light on this?

-- Kevlar (squeeze@triggerslowly.-), September 24, 1999.


"After reading several posts regarding the United States potential vunerability in regards to national security during a severe Y2K crisis, I wondered if in fact we may not be underestimating the ability of the US to deal with such issues."

Kevlar, being aware of a threat is one thing, being able to do anything about it is another. Terrorists could smuggle small quantities of biological agents in quite easily or bring it in via a diplomatic pouch (as in state sponsored terrorists). Biologicals could be much much easier to bring in than a suitcase nuke. Scares the shit outta me.

DCK

-- Don Kulha (dkulha@vom.com), September 24, 1999.


I agree, we ARE underestimating America. Heck, we demonstrated our ability to destroy wooden dummy tanks in Kosovo. Boy, if the enemy ever comes after us with wooden decoy tanks, they will be toast!!! And we EVEN destroyed a handful of REAL tanks in Kosovo.

And how about those military boys who killed the farmers' cows? Man, if the enemy ever sends in a pre-emptive strike using cows, they're history dude!!

And last but not least, we have the capability to destroy foreign nations' embassies. Just imagine how much greater our military's capability will be if they go to Wal-Mart and buy current maps!

Man, I'm feeling safer already!

-- killer bunny (KillerBunny@henhouse.com), September 24, 1999.


Kevlar,

I mean no disrespect to you personally, but your attitude is like that of most Americans...that we are invincable. That our stock market is invincible. Bill Clinton thinks he is invincible. You are all wrong. Yes we have nuclear missiles and whiz bang technology. All of it can be brought down in a heartbeat by motley crew of camel- breath lackeys who have been promised a harem of 13 virgins in heaven.

-- Don Wegner (donfmwyo@earthlink.net), September 24, 1999.



Sorry for the delay. I'm just now getting back online.

Kevlar--I'm not an expert in the area of military technology, so I can't talking very intelligent on that particular subject. What I can say for certain is that business computer failures in general is possible. When you have a nation that is experiencing any kind of internal disruption, that can lead to other problems. Besides, what's to stop a terrorist from doing something real serious? I think it's only a matter of time before this does happen, y2k or no y2k. Jan 2000 just seems to me the right time for something like this. Again, I hope not.

Flint-- First, I'll touch on our software vendor. We didn't get the compliant fixes until late 1998. They did come through. They added 500000 to all the dates. Then they used a subroutine to add 500000 again upon display and write time. This way the databases, files whatever didn't have to be expanded. We plan on phasing this system out over 10 years, so we shouldn't have to worry about fixing this again (in 50 years we'll also be retired, but this thinking is what got us in this mess).

Now, my stuff. My y2k projects were finished late Jan 1999. This is because I had to wait for our software vendor. It then took time for me to fix my remaining programs because I look at some of their databases. In 1994, our contract programmers left for various reasons. They started writing code in 1984. The code was not compliant. When I found out, I knew it had to be fixed. I'm one person here that knows COBOL. I had to make system enhancements along with solving y2k. It was daunting, but I got the job done. Here are the reasons why I finished:

So, to sum things up, I wasn't going to feel helpless, because I was very aggressive with this from the get go. While I was doing all of these fixes, I was also being pooh-poohed (about the reality of y2k). I had plenty of interruptions during my fixes. Top management wanted me to make system changes while y2k fixes were going on (and get them up now). They didn't care. So I wound up having multiple copies of various phases of code (versions) and it made my job harder. So, I understand the reality of all of this. Personally, due to what I've experienced, the ridicule, and the fact that they didn't care about what's involved in fixing y2k, it will come as no surprise to me if programmers sneak "logic bombs" in their code. There has got to be some really pissed off programmers out there. What an opportunity to wipe smiles off the faces of all those pollies. Do I think it will happen? I'll say YES.

-- Larry (cobol.programmer@usa.net), September 24, 1999.


Oh yeah...I forgot to mention...covert activities are illegal. The CIA has been expressly forbidden to involve itself in covert activities, and the Congress refuses to fund said activities. That's why the CIA involves itself in selling drugs to your kids and selling guns to our enemies.

-- Don Wegner (donfmwyo@earthlink.net), September 24, 1999.

Right on. "Covert activities are illegal."

That's why they're covert!

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), September 25, 1999.


INVAR, SOUNDS LIKE YOU SEE THE BIG-PICTURE,[PRIDE GOES BEFORE THE FALL]<
-- BIG PICTURE-SEE IT? (dogs@zianet.com), September 25, 1999.

LOL killerbunny!

Kevlar, I used to think more like you. Now I am more pessimistic, not because I doubt our 'ability' to fight, but because I wonder whether or not we will even attempt to do so. How many in the military would actually mutiny if their prez capitulated in surrender to another nation? Remember how many in the German military were against Hitler? Remember the piano wire? Or how about the great Desert Fox taking poison? Also, how many of the younger generation of Americans even know enough of history and understand the concept and value of Freedom enough to sacrifice and fight for it...versus how many can be easily persuaded and motivated to be part of a military 'gang'? Sacrifice seems to be an antiquated word to the Me Generation.

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), September 25, 1999.



Sorry, dogs, you got it wrong. Pride goes before *destruction*, and a *haughty spirit* before a fall.

A common enough error, and one that tends to demonstrate your, shall we say, apparant lack of "divine inspiration".

PS: If you want to argue the point, I'd suggest you take a short stop by Proverbs 16:18 before engaging your typing gland.

PPS: Stop being a such a dink, and pay better attention to your petard.

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), September 25, 1999.


Dennis,

You think the bombing was a mistake? Haw Haw!

Mumsie,

Like everyone else who has a few years on them, self included, you think you own the world. Well... guess what? Move over, it happens every generation, we are on the way out and they are on the way in. And from reading your posts, I'd say it was about time.

-- sigmund (around@thebend.com), September 25, 1999.


sigmund...

Don't disgrace your dysfunctional but bright namesake.

Regarding bombing...think oxymoron and tongue-in-cheek. Then you will understand what Dennis wrote.

What is the age cut-off for living in your brave new world? Is 35 too old to count? Should we 'not-with-it' oldsters now bow to the collective wisdom of the teens? It's not nice to be so intolerant of 'old' people sigmund. Perhaps you are struggling with an Oedipus complex and my name offends you.

Why not try addressing specific issues sometime?

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), September 25, 1999.


Greetings, Kevlar.

Likely we're both underestimating and greatly overestimating America, et. al.

We'll find out... real soon now.

And lest you feel too cocky, might want to read this recent thread...

OT?: William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense: Preparing For A Grave New World (USIA)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 0018ov

;-(

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), September 25, 1999.


Mumsie,

Your reply is what I have come to expect of you, i.e."my opinons are the way of the world". Well maybe so, you sound so full of yourself you MUST be right. How do you suffer us mere mortals? I know you have all the answers, if only someone would let you lead. I really enjoy your sermons on how great and diverse our country is, only to later show a childish intolerance for anyone who disagrees with your "way of the world". It must be a great burden living with such a great wisdom and wit. And these mean old MEN, how dare they question you? I think I shall waste no more thought on you.

p.s. please, before i go, remind us all again how witty you are. please!

-- sigmund (cigarisjust@acigar.xcom), September 26, 1999.


Dear sigmund,

I'm sorry if I have come across in such a way that caused you to have this opinion of me. No 'back at you', just an apology. I do have very strong feelings about certain issues (don't we all?). I don't apologize for that, but for seeming to not care about other people's. It seems that you feel that I was smug or cavalier regarding my views versus other people's opinions. This was not my intention.

I grew up the youngest of seven, who all had very strong and diverse opinons. Debate and argument took place frequently, with a common rule, 'If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.'

I don't feel that I have great wisdom sigmund, and my wit pales in comparison with those who have a natural gift for it. I know this. I am a regular wife and mother, much loved by my own family, but would not leave a ripple in the pool of life should I go, other than the contribution of my beautiful children. I believe God is the source of wisdom, and I continue to seek it.

Regarding my feelings about the gender issue, I am not a feminist in the modern sense. I do not support abortion rights above the basic right of the human individual to live. I do not think lesbianism is natural or that witchcraft is good. I am a feminist in the traditional suffragette sense of the word, in that I feel that the sexes are of equal worth, different inherent strengths or weaknesses notwithstanding. I would fight for any woman to have the same pay for the same amount of work, and the same opportunities. On the other hand, I feel it unwise and unfair to lower the physical standards for the military, law enforcement and firefighting etc. So even though I don't belong to NOW, I probably do have that fighting chip on my shoulder when it comes to the heart of the matter. Considering centuries of historical oppression and the still prevalent attitude of many men to hold women in condescending disdain, can you blame me?

As far as my feelings about America, they are what they are. I am more than willing to argue point for point. Naturally this includes listening to and weighing your viewpoint. This is healthy and good. Thank God we still have this right to disagree.

Many anonymous posters feel that they can insult, name call, and behave in the most rude of cyber ways since they are 'protected' by their anonymity. To me, this smacks of the bully on the playground who behaves in such a way simply because he is bigger/stronger. He hides behind that advantage. I do react to this. (Yes, I chose the word react over the word respond. BigDog usually responds.)

There were smarta** thoughts that came to mind after reading your last post, but I thought I'd attempt civil communication instead. There are those on this forum that seem incapable of this, and that seem to take pride in being as offensive and crude as possible, but I am guessing you are not of that ilk.

Opinionated? Yes. As far as the mean old men, my opinion is the reverse. The men are usually the ones whose pride cannot suffer being questioned or criticized by a woman. They generally resort to namecalling in the most junior high fashion. If you don't believe me, ask the opinion of women in general on this forum... but anonymous responses should not count, since they will probably be posted by men.

I prefer debate to name calling, but I'm as human as the rest.

So sigmund, or whatever other names you post by, there it is. I am a human being rather than a cyber personality, and in that vein, extend the hand of apology, of truce, and an invitation for discussion.

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), September 26, 1999.


I do not think the question is one of underestimating America. Rather, is there underestimation of 1) the severity/longevity of the effects (direct and indirect) of Y2K, 2) the ignorance/immorality/short-sightedness of our leaders (corporate and societal, as well as governmental), and the debilitating effects of Y2K on our (actual/potential) enemies? As far as this forum goes, I would say: 1) not much, if you ignore the pollys; 2) some, definitely, although less than in the American society as a whole; 3) some, but is a "hard to pin-down" situation.

www.y2ksafeminnesota.com

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), September 26, 1999.


Good response MNSmith. I'm a Minnesota girl myself. Idaho is beautiul, but Minnesota has always had my heart. I miss everything but the state bird (mosquitoes). Best wishes to you!

-- Mumsie (Shezdremn@aol.com), September 26, 1999.

A rational explanation for making Y2K preparations http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001R UO

Sincerely,
Stan Faryna

Got 14 days of preps? If not, get started now. Click here.

Click here and check out the TB2000 preparation forum.



-- Stan Faryna (faryna@groupmail.com), October 01, 1999.

if there is a weak point in u s, it is that as a nation (we care) it makes us the target. using we againe, or in this case me first, does not help, our nation! it aids our enem. being we donot stick it to them first. ( speak softly but carry a big stick)

-- Louis Lesky (tom4107842@aol.com), April 14, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ