Russia: Cyber and Nerve Agent Attacks

[badbadboy]

Anyone else a little nervous about the uptick in Russian aggression towards the UK and USA of late?

Seems to me Putin is becoming more aggressive in his overt ventures towards the West. Basically not acknowledging or denying but more of meh, deal with it sort of attitude.

The nerve agent attack a week ago was not the first time they have assassinated a former Russian operative on British soil. In 2006, Alexander Litvinenko a former FSB agent was assassinated by a nuclear agent known as polonium. It was never 100% proven, however being a former agent for Russia, all fingers pointed in the direction of Moscow.

Also, recall Georgi Markov a Bulgarian dissident was assassinated by KGB in 1978 while walking across a bridge in London.

Seems the Russians feel free to knock off their own in the UK. Former Russian agents seem to feel free to move to the UK and it seems that Russians like to remind them they can be taken out whenever the Russians feel like it. In the UK's case, it's sort of like beat on the smaller sibling and see if the bigger brother will eventually return a few punches IMO.

Since the aggression into the Ukraine, Russia has been flexing it's cyber muscles. Most recently taking control of power grids in the USA. Forensic cyber analysts know they have been infiltrating corporate and operations of power companies in the USA since 2015.

Cyber hacking has been prevalent for a couple of decades with all countries testing to see how countries can disrupt another countries electrical grids or in the case of Iran, their nuclear facilities. US, Israel, Russia and North Korea all have tried out their cyber attack capabilities in past years. The USA has not responded cyberly towards any of the attackers like N Korea or Russia.

Seems to me there has been some poking in the UK and USA's chest by Russia daring them to reciprocate.


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/15/us/politics/russia-cyberattacks.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43415271

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgi_Markov#Later_investigation_and_aftermath

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvinenko

 

[80watts]

Triple B- there was the Iranian software virus to stop the centrifuges in Iran to stop the process of extracting Uranium. This bug originated in the US. All sides are doing it to each other with cyber attacks. Who was that guy that worked for the NSA and became Pariah #1. His computer code was used to spy on other countries, don't think that they didn't use it just for information...

In no way I'm I defending the Russians. There are many different scenarios on why the nerve agent attack went down:

1. Russia wanted an example made of the individual (individual knew something),
2. Mafia was involved and used the nerve agent to blame Russia,
3. UK used sample and blamed Russia (again individual know something degrading towards UK),
4. A business man (or private Russian- have to be rich or connected) used nerve agent on the individual (cause he knew something) and used that particular nerve agent to blame Russia,
5. His daughter did it,
6. The guy testing for the nerve agent, faked the results to blame Russia.

 

[badbadboy]

Triple B- there was the Iranian software virus to stop the centrifuges in Iran to stop the process of extracting Uranium. This bug originated in the US. All sides are doing it to each other with cyber attacks. Who was that guy that worked for the NSA and became Pariah #1. His computer code was used to spy on other countries, don't think that they didn't use it just for information...

In no way I'm I defending the Russians. There are many different scenarios on why the nerve agent attack went down:

1. Russia wanted an example made of the individual (individual knew something),
2. Mafia was involved and used the nerve agent to blame Russia,
3. UK used sample and blamed Russia (again individual know something degrading towards UK),
4. A business man (or private Russian- have to be rich or connected) used nerve agent on the individual (cause he knew something) and used that particular nerve agent to blame Russia,
5. His daughter did it,
6. The guy testing for the nerve agent, faked the results to blame Russia.

Not sure if you read the link from NY Times regarding the Russians breaking in cyberly into US Power Grid. Basically letting the US know that they can get in if they want to. Good article and worth the read.

Like I said in my post, all countries are testing out their cyber attacks on others. US putting malware into the Iranian Nuclear plant via a PLC that made their system shut down. Usually the simplest control system component is the easiest to crack. I saw that documentary on PBS Frontline how the US was able to disable the Iranians development of weapons grade plutonium. This was the strategy to stop the Israeli's from bombing the Iranian's plant which would set off another Middle East War.

Cyber hacking has been prevalent for a couple of decades with all countries testing to see how countries can disrupt another countries electrical grids or in the case of Iran, their nuclear facilities. US, Israel, Russia and North Korea all have tried out their cyber attack capabilities in past years. The USA has not responded cyberly towards any of the attackers like N Korea or Russia.

 

[westwoody]

Putin did it and could not care less what anyone outside Russia thinks.
Russia has been acting like an ass in Crimea, Chechnya, now Syria, and might move into Iraq.
Added bonus for Putin: foreign criticism feeds his supporters xenophobia. Russia has been feeling sorry for itself for at least 300-400 years.
Russian media is full of cartoons and crap about massive conspiracies against Russia.
Putin tutored Trump in "wa wa they're picking on us".

 

[felixthecat]

2. Mafia was involved and used the nerve agent to blame Russia,
3. UK used sample and blamed Russia (again individual know something degrading towards UK),
4. A business man (or private Russian- have to be rich or connected) used nerve agent on the individual (cause he knew something) and used that particular nerve agent to blame Russia,
5. His daughter did it,
6. The guy testing for the nerve agent, faked the results to blame Russia.

None of these have even 1% probability, in my opinion. Most of those people won't have access to the specific kind of the nerve agent. It's a big stretch to imagine UK government could risk lives of their citizens including policemen for something as meaningless as discrediting Russians. Russia is doing a perfect job at that by themselves.

On the other hand, Russia has a history of assassinations abroad, a history of denials, blaming others and avoiding cooperation. It is very irrational to give much benefit of the doubt to a repeat offender like that, as per BBB's list. I'd also mention Russia's invasion to Georgia in 2008, the weak reaction to which from the West gave Russians confidence they could pull the same trick with Ukraine. There were also large-scale cyberattacks against Georgia shortly before that war, wikipedia link.

 

[Oldfart]

Not sure if you read the link from NY Times regarding the Russians breaking in cyberly into US Power Grid. Basically letting the US know that they can get in if they want to. Good article and worth the read.

I was just listening to an interview on CBC radio this morning with the authors of the new book "Russian Roulette" on how Putin hacked the 2016 US election and got Don the Con elected. Evidently the NSA discussed retaliation against Russia with Obama and his staff, but the idea was rejected because of fears Russia could shut down so many power grids.

 

[badbadboy]

I was just listening to an interview on CBC radio this morning with the authors of the new book "Russian Roulette" on how Putin hacked the 2016 US election and got Don the Con elected. Evidently the NSA discussed retaliation against Russia with Obama and his staff, but the idea was rejected because of fears Russia could shut down so many power grids.

Also with 2016 being the election year, Obama is on record of saying he did not want to tilt US Public opinion in favour of Hillary Clinton because of his actions.

Seems to me if a country is attacked physically or cyberly, it demands an appropriate response. Whether its bouncing 25 Russians from DC or planting Malware in the Russian system somewhere.

I liked Obama and he did a lot of positive things. On this issue he played "fair" too much and should have responded more forcefully. Now the Russians are still playing with the Power Grid and could create havoc with the flick of the switch. #45 would only blame Crooked Hillary if the lights went out in the White House and not deal with the Russians as needed.

 

[felixthecat]

Anyone else a little nervous about the uptick in Russian aggression towards the UK and USA of late?

Seems to me Putin is becoming more aggressive in his overt ventures towards the West. Basically not acknowledging or denying but more of meh, deal with it sort of attitude

It's hard to know his motives for sure. I subscribe to the theory it's not aggression, but a dream of making Russia a superpower again. Somebody who the US would treat as equals and be willing to split the world with.

That dream aligns well with what Russian people want to hear. After a while, the memory of losing the Cold War and subsequent economic struggles make them look for a return of the old glory (as if). Kind of similar to what German people felt after losing World War I, paying retributions, hyperinflation in 1920s etc. They'd support anything to be a great country again: excel at economics, science and art, 1936 Olympics in Germany, annexation of Sudetenland in 1938 "to protect ethnic Germans", and so on. It's not a perfect analogy I hope, as human rights standards are much better everywhere now, and starting an actual war in the modern global world does not realistically achieve anything.

Putin cannot achieve much with the economics. The necessary reforms would jeopardize his personal power, which was always his priority number one to maintain, and would hurt his cronies' pockets.
He tried sports, as we know.
The imperialistic idea is one of few things left, and it worked really well internally. The problem is, the propaganda inside Russia did go too far painting the West (especially the US) as enemies for years. As people believe it, they'd support those crazy escalations. Putin must believe the paranoid ideas himself at least partially, due to his ex-KGB upbringing and his belief the US made a promise in 1990s to not extend NATO to Eastern Eroupe, and that the promise was broken.

On positive side, self-excluding Russia from the world economy would be incredibly stupid, as would any large-scale war. So there should be a limit to what Russia tries to do. It's mostly from last century's playbook by Soviet Union: try to cause tensions between Europeans and try make them doubt the USA, bribe and use some individuals abroad to spread propaganda, and such. Basically as much as they could get away with. And since the Russian powers can get away with anything in their own country, they have this distorted expectation they can do a lot worldwide as long as they deny their involvement.

 

[rlock]

Hate to say this, being on this side of the fence, but the Russians have been warning NATO countries about "payback" for NATO's aggression since the late 1990's.
The leaders of NATO countries never took it seriously, figuring that after the Cold War ended Russia was too fucked up to ever recover, and just kept crossing those red lines and steamrolling towards them. The Clinton era, the Bush era, and even the Obama era, saw basically the same policy - a long series of moves designed to isolate Russia, surround it, and internally destabilize it.

In my opinion, the Maidan uprising / coup in Ukraine was the last straw - the act which definitively put Russia and NATO on an imminent war footing against each other.

Russians consider Ukranians their closest kin, along with Belarus, and NATO installing an anti-Russian government (with neo-nazi soldiers!) was beyond that they could tolerate. The combat actions in Crimea and Donbass were the reaction against what NATO did there.Want to know at what point Russia would say "fuck diplomacy" and choose to fight a real war? Well, there you have it.

Believe me, if the government of China engineered a scenario to turn the government of Mexico violently anti-American, the US national security establishment would go apeshit, and send in the tanks. And they are not even as closely related as the Russians and Ukranians are.

The Russian people are not naive suckers. They know what kind of hard-hearted modern day Tsar Putin is, and even what kind of corruption his underlings engage in - but they believe that Russia is threatened with destruction at Washington's hands, so they support him in the nasty things he does.

I mean basically, it's the difference between fucking with the Russian government and fucking with the Russian nation. It's become about the nation now. They are not going to back down or go away. They feel pinned into a corner and justified in fighting back by any means necessary. That's what makes this situation so dangerous.

What makes it worse is the fact that NATO leaders just act like they've done nothing to provoke it, as if the Russians just woke up one day in a bad mood and started being aggressive. The Russians react exactly the way they said they would if provoked, and we're suppose to be shocked and outraged. The mainstream media doesn't bother to question that narrative either.

The Russians are certainly not communists anymore, so if there's a new cold war (or hot one, basically WW3), what is it really being fought over anyway?

 

[felixthecat]

Russians consider Ukranians their closest kin

Brilliant. Ukrainians are our brothers, let's kill them, because we are afraid of the US and we cannot attack the US.
That's exactly the logic.

The way I see it, NATO had committed atrocities in their hisory, the US did too, that does not make it the norm.
The elected Western goverments are usually held responsible for their mistakes.
NATO didn't break any written agreements with Russia, afaik.
Russia did violate 1994 Budapest memorandum and 1997 Russian-Ukrainian Friendship treaty, both of which promised Russia would recognize the inviolability of existing Ukrainian borders. The aggressor is always wrong, that's how I was tought.

Sorry, you gave us a sample of crappy Russian propaganda which does not pass a single fact check. Pick one of your points that you think is strongest, and try to prove it. NATO aggression? The US installing a government in Ukraine? Pleeease.

 

[PuntMeister]

Let’s not over-complicate things. All we have to do is pour gravy over Moscow. Once Putin becomes Poutine, we just slurp up the mess. We don’t need spies, we need fries. We don’t need Kurds, we need curds. Cheese Please. Let’s ger back to whole grains and sane brains. #Fuktards Ruin The World.

-Punt.

 

[westwoody]

Putin is doing exactly what Hitler did.
Hitler occupied the Sudeten to protect ethnic Germans, Putin occupied Crimea to protect ethnic Russians.
Russia calls the anti Ukrainian fighters "freedom fighters". They insisted that there were no Russians involved, but that is a crock of bullshit that nobody believes.

Very scary: Russia is trying to stir up the same scenario in the Baltic States. Many Russians were forced to move there after WW2, during the Soviet era. It was Stalin's strategy of assimilation. Now there is friction between ethnic Lats, Estonians and Lithuanians versus their unwanted and unwelcome Russian minorities.
Putin would love to move in and "protect" those Russians.