Is North Korea responsible?

It was not to along ago that the American company Sony Pictures Entertainment was cyber attacked by North Korea. Or so it seems. While the Obama Administration’s official stance and the stance of government cyber security experts is that North Korea was behind the cyber attack, independent cyber security experts have doubts and believe there is a possibility that the attack came from a third party hacking organization.

However for good or for ill the die has been cast, President Barack Obama this week announced that in light of the recent cyber attacks North Korea will face new United States sanctions.

In light of the discrepancies about who was behind the attack and North Korea’s subsequent actions I believe I was to hasty in deeming North Korea guilty in the Sony hack. While North Korea is certainly a rogue and tyrannical state its actions after news of the attack broke were not the actions of a guilty nation.

For one North Korea offered to help the US government find out whom was behind the hack and threatened the US if the US refused North Korea’s offer. I, and no doubt the US government, considered North Korea’s offer bizarre and ridiculous as I was certain they were behind the attack.

However in retrospect this offer makes sense especially if North Korea is not behind the attack after all. There is a political component of course, the Chinese government, which supports North Korea, does not approve when North Korea causes unnecessary trouble with the US. In fact the US asked China to help with preventing future attacks that come from North Korea.

The above factors combined with cyber security experts disagreeing on where the attack came from leads me to believe that North Korea was not behind the attack but was setups. This is a theory that cyber security experts have formulated as they believe that traces of North Korea’s code was planted to frame North Korea.

The Obama Administration immediately had a response by shutting down North Korea’s internet, which I believe was a correct move regardless if North Korea was behind the attacks as it disproportionally effects the North Korea elites and punishes them for their people suffering.

But now there are sanctions coming, which regardless of North Korea is guilty or not guilt of the cyber attacks, is the wrong move. Sanctions against North Korea will not effect Kim Jung-un or his inner circle, the sanctions will probably include North Koreas ability to export and prevent food aid from going into the country which will only effect the people of North Korea whom have no say in their government’s actions. Economic sanctions against North Korea will not work as their leaders stay fabulously wealthy by selling illegal arms to country’s such as Iran for hard currency. North Korean elites have little to no liquid assets that the US can freeze unlike sanctions passed against countries such as Russia.

In the end whether guilty or not sanctions, as they have been in the past, will be ineffective in harming Kim Jong-un’s regime. The United States sanctions will disproportionally harm the people of North Korea without harming its leadership. North Korea will become more hostile to aid organizations and it will become risky for aid organizations to bring food into the country. Sanctions that do little to weaken North Korea’ regime and harm its people should not be passed just so the US can appear to be retaliating against North Korea’s leadership.

A Weary Public and a Mission Creeping

The United States is, unofficially of course, waging war against ISIS ( Islamic state of Iraq and Syria). While I don’t like jumping into conflict, wars cannot be fought with drones and US forces posing as military “advisors”. Yet the US, particularly after what many considers failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, is war weary. Politicians, such as but not limited to President Barack Obama, are on the lookout for mission creep and the accompanying American investment (such as money, lives and prestige) that follows.

Mission creep. A term used to describe a foreign policy excursion that eventually becomes a long-term military occupation. We saw it in Vietnam, now we are seeing it in Syria and Iraq. I am referring to the US’ conduct against opposition to ISIS and how our role as military “advisors” can quickly transition to war fighting combatants.

Politicians and the public now prefer wars to be fought on the cheap with drones that strike strategic targets and high-level enemy personnel. Why send in tens of thousands of troops when you can send in a few hundred Special Operations Operators to fight America’s wars? While I am all for avoiding bloodshed, fighting wars cheaply and not showing massive force in the beginning of a conflict is why Iraq and even Afghanistan is considered the foreign policy failure that it is today.

While I understand Americans are frustrated with perpetual warfare, wars cannot be halfway affairs; they must be conducted with massive and overwhelming force to ensure a quick victory. The Powell doctrine must be invoked; if politics and public opinion cannot guarantee a quick American victory along with a massive show of force then the United States should take no overt action in that conflict.

A promise of change, A potential for progress

November 4th is no more, with November 5th comes promise not of progress but of change. The Republicans easily keep control of the United States House of Representatives and took control of the United States Senate. Regardless of what Democratic leaders said publicly we all expected it; from the historical lack of seats for a Presidents party six years into his term to Obama’s particular problems regarding executive leadership, the Democrats were due for a loss.

The count for the next Congress is this: Republican will have at least 246 house seats, and 52 seats in the Senate( Two races are undeclared in Louisiana and Alaska but easily lean Republican.)

I do not see the next year being productive for Washington with a Democrat executive and republican congress its quite unlikely to pass legislation

But Hope does remain.

If Obama embraces a centrist philosophy, such as Bill Clinton did throughout his presidency (but particularly in 1998), and Republicans attempt to compromise, our national leaders have a chance to rebuild America from Washington. With that said egos and political difficulties on both sides will make such a scenario improbable.

My fellow Americans do not fret about the integrity of our newly elected officials, after all we get the government we vote (of don’t vote for).

Smart Men Copy

Forwarding the ideals of others, I believe, is the simplest way to innovate.

Such a way of thinking has lead to technological innovations since the birth of civilization. There are countless examples of such forwarding throughout time from antiquity to the present.

For example the Romans are famous for their use of the arch to create grand structures such as the Coliseum (they borrowed it from the Egyptians, Babylonians, and Greeks). Where their genius lied however was combining the arch with another invention (that of course wasn’t theirs) concrete. By forwarding the technology of other civilizations, in this case the arch and concrete, and combining them in a novel way the Roman were able to create structures the world had never seen.

Flash-forward, a few years give or take a thousand years, American innovation in the field of space exploration has grounded to a slow march. Space X, founded by Elon Musk, is currently developing innovative space technologies by forwarding the ideas of previous NASA programs most notably the Space Shuttle Program. The Space Shuttle Program was suppose to be a ferry for American astronaut and a renewable spacecraft. It was reusable alright, it just took thousands of people and months to retool the Space Shuttle for its next mission. Forwarding that ideal Space X will make a rapidly reusable rocket that estimates predict will cut the cost of a space craft launch to one hundred dollars a pound in order to enter orbit.

While the cases above seem far removed from each other they are alike in the respect that they involving forwarding the ideals of others to create innovative technologies. Ideas must be forwarded and built on consistently for innovation to remain constant. It seems those who create revolutionary technologies are not first instead they can use an existing idea (or ideas and forward those ideas to make them better.

Henry Ford didn’t event the automobile nor did Steve Jobs invent the mp3 player. They simply looked at amazing but less than perfect concepts and applied their rigorous minds to them. No need to be first in the world of innovation, just come in second and reiterate vigorously.

Immigration, Obama, and the Children

President Obama must confront an immigration crisis, one that touches the very fabric of America’s national character. Children from Latin American countries, countries often with high rates of crime and poverty, are encouraged by their parents to make a dangerous hundred miles long journey to the United States. These parents do care and love their children, they believe that the only way for their children to live a life free from poverty and crime is through immigration to the US, whether that be legal or otherwise.

President Obama along with Congress must respond to the children coming over our borders and into the Unites States. President Obama is being criticized by Republicans for not going to the border and confronting the issue personally. While I do believe President Obama should go down to the border to show that he is taking an active interest in the well being of these children I also believe that such a gesture would be largely symbolic.

President Obama is on the right path (or should I say the left path, pun intended) asking Congress to appropriate him $3.7 billion to deal with the influx of youth immigrants from Latin America. Yet Republicans seem to be addressing political brinksmanship then attempting to solve the problem of the illegal minor immigrants. Instead they blame Obama for the current problem for not providing the US-Mexico border with enough security throughout his tenure as President of the United States.
I do not agree with the GOP on this issue. There is more border security personnel patrolling the border under President Obama then under President Bush yet Republicans still blame President Obama for the current immigration crisis.

If the Republican Caucus of Congress wishes to solve this crisis, instead of shifting blame upon President Obama, they should agree to his $3.7 billion appropriation measure.