[iwar] I2G or G2G


From:
To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
From: DrewSchaefer@ftnetwork.com
To: iwar@yahoogroups.com

Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:58:41 -0800


fc  Wed Jan 31 04:05:08 2001
Received: from 207.222.214.225
	by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0)
	for fc@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 31 Jan 2001 04:05:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: by multi33.netcomi.com for fc
 (with Netcom Interactive pop3d (v1.21.1 1998/05/07) Wed Jan 31 12:05:08 2001)
X-From_: DrewSchaefer@ftnetwork.com  Wed Jan 31 06:04:09 2001
Received: from hk.egroups.com (hk.egroups.com [208.50.99.220])
	by multi33.netcomi.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id GAA16500
	for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 06:04:08 -0600
X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-902-980942630-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.56] by hk.egroups.com with NNFMP; 31 Jan 2001 12:04:05 -0000
X-Sender: drewschaefer@ftnetwork.com
X-Apparently-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_0_2_1); 31 Jan 2001 12:03:49 -0000
Received: (qmail 8483 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2001 12:02:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26) by l10.egroups.com with QMQP; 31 Jan 2001 12:02:50 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO email002) (216.35.122.207) by mta1 with SMTP; 31 Jan 2001 12:02:50 -0000
Received: from AspEmail - 216.35.122.202 by email002  with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1774.114.11); Wed, 31 Jan 2001 04:22:52 -0800
To: "iwar@yahoogroups.com" 
Message-ID: <0befb5222121f11EMAIL002@email002>
From: 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: 
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:58:41 -0800
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [iwar] I2G or G2G
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Dan,

There is one inherent difference, in your point below:  G2G IW would be 'bound' by the Rules of War, were an agreement in place that this constitutes an act of war between consenting States/Gov'ts.  (To extrapolate:  Changing the enemy's medical history files of soldiers, to augment chances of misdelivery of vital medicines, may be a heinous "crime against humanity" ... not a valid act of war ... etc)

Further, the G2G or I2G difference may parallel the Rules of War, which sought to differentiate between the 'combatants' and 'non-combatants.' Taking that a step further, non-combatants can lose their status by committing open acts of aggression.

That is what I am researching, unchanged since the last time I was voicing anything substantive.

Regards,
drew

_____________________________________________________

Message: 1
   Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:25:14 -0800 (PST)
   From: Dan Ellis 
Subject: G2G % I2G

	As the level connectivity between people rises, our ability to
influence each other increases significantly.  Currently there are two
somewhat disjoint ways of thinking about IW based on who initiates the
conflict.  If a small group or individual instigates the conflict it is
called terrorism (I2G).  If a government or large group instigates the
conflict it is called warfare.  Throughout history the types of conflicts
that could be initiated within these two sets have differed greatly.  
Although a terrorist could attack with conventional weapons to hurt tens
to hundreds of people (McVeigh), or with the proliferation of WMDs hurt
thousands to hundreds of thousands (more?), it is unlikely that an
individual to sustain a war, or a continuous threat.  With cyber attack
tools, is the influence that an individual can have equivalent to what an
entire government could wield (in the scope of millions?)?  That is, does
the line between terrorist activity and warfare blur in the arena of
information warfare?  I understand that governments will be the first to
acquire cyber attack tools that are comprehensive enough to sustain such
damage (simply because of their sizeable budgets and man-power).  
However, once such technology exists and is known in broader circles (an
inevitable process), is there anything in G2G IW that is inherently
different than I2G IW?



------------------------------
Dan Ellis, PhD student, UCSB
http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/~ellisd
Home: (805) 971-6183
Work: (805) 893-4394
Fax:  (805) 893-8553




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Drew Schaefer, JD  FPLC 1997

9, ruelle des Galeries
1248 Hermance, Suisse (Switz.)
41 76 549 1907 (DiAx Mobile #)

*****************************************************
The opinions or uncited facts contained in this Email
constitute opinions, conjecture or humor representing
the author's own viewpoint, and are not to be
attributed in any way, nor connected to any
professional Organization to which the author may be
associated.  Should you receive this Email by error,
you are requested to DELETE and EMPTY the 'Trash' or
'Recycling' file to which it may be moved.
******************************************************


___________________________________________________________________________________________________
Get your free e-mail account with *unlimited* storage at  http://www.ftnetwork.com

Visit the web site of the Financial Times at  http://www.ft.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-~>
eGroups is now Yahoo! Groups
Click here for more details
http://click.egroups.com/1/11231/1/_/595019/_/980942645/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

------------------
http://all.net/