Obama's comments on the Sony hack were pretty weak and insubstantial and incoherent and misguided, no? And this from a guy who manages to be all those things just about every time he steps in front of a microphone, so to stand out in this regard seems to be of significance.
What on earth was he talking about when he said Sony should have come to him before deciding to pull the film when in fact the National security apparatus should've been on top of this thing from the very beginning? And why the hell did he feel it right to accuse Sony of having made a mistake by pulling the film when clearly they didn't appear to have any options? Was he trying to scapegoat them, trying to make excuses for his own lack of action?
As I've said cyber attacks by one nation upon another are fascinating because there are no set guidelines and no history to define what an appropriate response should be - and this confusion is further complicated when dealing with a leader like Obama, a man who clearly disdains the use of American power and is much more comfortable in the role of American apologist and our great giver of progressively fluffy speeches.
Update: reports today of North Korean internet going down - ahh... that sounds more like the first line of a joke than a serious response by us - I suppose this could be the U.S. sending a cyber shell across the bow of NK but I doubt it - at least I hope not since it would be a wholly insufficient response and misguided I think. I'm not at all sure that a cyber response from us would be a good idea at all - us trying to set a deterrence precedent here I think is full of all kinds of problems - and I'm not sure it's a good idea for us to reveal what our capabilities are - and finally what amounts to a proportional response when you're talking about a bankrupt country like North Korea? There may be some value to a cyber warning shot but I think the punishment should be of a more traditional nature.
Update: reports today of North Korean internet going down - ahh... that sounds more like the first line of a joke than a serious response by us - I suppose this could be the U.S. sending a cyber shell across the bow of NK but I doubt it - at least I hope not since it would be a wholly insufficient response and misguided I think. I'm not at all sure that a cyber response from us would be a good idea at all - us trying to set a deterrence precedent here I think is full of all kinds of problems - and I'm not sure it's a good idea for us to reveal what our capabilities are - and finally what amounts to a proportional response when you're talking about a bankrupt country like North Korea? There may be some value to a cyber warning shot but I think the punishment should be of a more traditional nature.
