Subject: IW Mailing List iw/960109
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 1996 20:01:53 -0700 (MST)
From: Istvan von Keszi 
Subject: Re: IW Mailing List iw/960107

On Sun, 7 Jan 1996 wrote:

> >From:
> Date: Sun, 07 Jan 96 12:07:38 +0600
> Subject: Re: IW Mailing List iw/960106

> So if there is any comments, I am more than happy to receive them.  I
> will respond to all notes.  IW theory, as a social and military strategy
> needs a broad public debate. 

I'd agree with this.  And without opening up a whole can of worms, I'd 
hope that IW theory would be approached as a super-set of strategy, 
rather than as a sub-set.

I think that the latter -- the view of IW as sub-set -- tends to limit 
the conceptual framework.  This view tends not to differentiate between 
"data" and "information".  While the super-set model however might look at 
IW as something much broader than "data".  

In this sense, mutually assured destruction would be an act of IW as would
the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 

However, within this paradigm, the consequences of any act within the
information space may be much broader or narrower than under the subset

As an example, rather than a simple "action / reaction" pair, we might
have to broaden our view to look at "action / reaction / reaction /

As we manipulate the information space, we might discover that things are
either simpler than we think, or alternatively far more complicated, or 
even in some circumstances, complex and chaotic.
From: Pendergrass Steven TSgt WPC/OL 
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 96 15:20:00 PST

IW is nothing new.  Warriors have used IW at the very beginning war,
when I warrior looked over the battlefield and saw his opponent.  What
is new about IW is the way it is being used.  Radars have changed IW,
weapons have changed IW, deceptive tactics have changed IW,
communications have changed IW, and computers have changed IW.  IW has
put on a whole new dimension to the battlefield-- Cyberspace. 
Cyberspace is only another part of IW.  It is getting a lot of press
right now, because it sells a lot of books and newspapers.  I am guilty,
too.  Remember though bullets and bombs can kill, space can not. 
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 96 10:12:33 EST
From: ml (Mailing List Reception)

[Moderator's Note: Is this IW?  Information technology was the weapon!]

8 Jan 1996
Jerusalem (AP) -- The booby-trapped cellular phone that killed an
Islamic militant was delivered by a longtime informer for Israel who was
paid $1 million for helping, media reports said Monday. 

A fugitive for three years, Ayyash was hiding in the home of Osama
Hamad, his friend from college days.  Hamad said he warned Ayyash in the
summer that his uncle, Kamal Hamad, may be an informer for Israel. 

Hamad said his uncle gave him a cellular phone so he could be found

A day before Ayyash was killed, his uncle asked for the cellular phone,
took it and returned it later, requesting that it be kept on at all
times, Hamad said. 

Israel's security services apparently deceived Kamal Hamad, telling him
they had planted a bug in the phone, rather than explosives, the radio

Media reports said that the explosion was set off by remote control when
Ayyash answered a call to him.  It is not known how the identity of
Ayyash was ascertained. 
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 1996 10:15 CST
Subject: Re: IW Mailing List iw/960108

Just a thought on your moderator's note - there isn't a line between 
economic and information warfare - nor should we attempt to draw one.  

Information has become a resource commensurate with money, people,
energy, facilites, and materiel.  Our government has to try to maintain
leadership in a world economy where leadership in information technology
is critical to success.  Short-term profits have to take a back seat to
long-term strategic planning.

This is going to be a continual area of conflict between the private and
public sectors.