From: iw@all.net
Subject: IW Mailing List iw/960128
---------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 09:07:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Sick Puppy 
Subject: Re: IW Mailing List iw/960127

> Subject: Three views of "information"
> Date: Sat, 27 Jan 96 16:03:28 PST
> >From: David Ronfeldt 
...
> Meanwhile, challenging third view is emerging in which information is
...
> Information, then, is an embedded physical property of all objects that
> exhibit organization and structure.  This applies to dirt clods as well
> as DNA strands.

My experience first as a military cryptographer then as a government
cryptographer led me to this point of view some time ago.  What we see
as disordered or chaotic simply seems that way because we do not know
how to interpret it.  I believe that the Third Law of Thermodynamics,
about gradually increasing entropy, is a fundamental misunderstanding of
the way nature works, formulated by someone who didn't understand chaos
and repeated by those who didn't understand chaos either. 

If an understanding of chaotic systems is applied to apparently random
events or data, it is not unusual for a understandable pattern to
emerge.  I have fiddled about with various models of chaotic systems and
been able to fit some of the models to apparently random data and
discern an underlying information structure - a pattern of order that my
model could plot.  Once a fit between "random" data and model was
established, it was possible to strip away layers of chaos leaving a
clearly defined organizational structure, basic "information" that
determined the structure of the whole set of data. 

Working with multicolored graphic images making this kind of
interpretation easier.  Using the Mandelbrot set as one group of
descriptions of chaos, some subsets of the Mandelbrot set fairly closely
match "randomness" that can be found in nature. 

And what, you probably ask, does this have to do with IW.  Well some
military equipment is designed to produced extremely brief and very high
powered bursts of "random" radio interference which can carry encrypted
data very long distances.  Applying chaotic models to that kind of data
can be a starting point for decrypting the data. 
---------------------------------------------
Moderator's Note:
	Following is the transcription from the second (and final) move
of game 96-01.  The next game will be a .mil only game involving players
from the IW course at NDU and any other .mil personnel interested in the
game.  Please send mail to game@all.net if you would like to participate.
================================================================================
================================================================================
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 96 19:59:04 EST
From: game@all.net (WarGame)

 From game  Thu Jan 11 10:02:39 1996
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:02:39 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA15220 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:02:39 EST
 Message-Id: <9601111502.AA15220@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** DIPCOM *****
 
 Move 2 of the suspended game is tenatively scheduled to start on
 Wednesday, Jan 17, 1996.  Many technical components of the WarGame
 system have been improved thanks to the efforts and suggestions of the
 participants in the first move.  We hope that these improvements will
 largely address the concerns of the players, and we look forward to your
 comments.
 
 If you wish to participate in Move 2, you don't have to do anything.  If
 you do NOT want to participate in Move 2, please send mail to game@all.net
 
 A new game manual should be done by the end of the weekend, and we would
 very much appreciate your comments on it when it comes out.  In move 2,
 the scenario will come out at game time and no other preparation is
 required.
 	
---------------------------
 From tju@akira.corp.sgi.com  Thu Jan 11 10:03:19 1996
 Received: from sgigate.sgi.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA15320 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:03:19 EST
 Received: from palladium.corp.sgi.com by sgigate.sgi.com via ESMTP (950911.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH825/940406.SGI)
 	for <@sgigate.sgi.com:game@all.net> id HAA17506; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 07:03:09 -0800
 Received: from akira.corp.sgi.com by palladium.corp.sgi.com via ESMTP (950511.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH526/911001.SGI)
 	for <@palladium.corp.sgi.com:game@all.net> id HAA07042; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 07:03:08 -0800
 Received: by akira.corp.sgi.com (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO)
 	for game@all.net id HAA04859; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 07:00:29 -0800
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 07:00:29 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601111500.HAA04859@akira.corp.sgi.com>
 From: tju@akira.corp.sgi.com (T. Jason Ucker)
 Subject: Out of the office until 12/11
 Precedence: bulk
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 I will be back at the office on Thursday, January 11th.  If there are any urgent
 issues, please contact Stan (x3-5822).
 
 Thanks,
 
 -Jason
---------------------------
 From game  Thu Jan 11 10:17:54 1996
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA15909 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 Message-Id: <9601111517.AA15909@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** TEST *****
 
 Test of the game
---------------------------
 From winn@Infowar.Com  Thu Jan 11 11:05:48 1996
 Received: from mailhost.IntNet.net by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA17347 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 11:05:48 EST
 Received: from 198.252.40.157 by mailhost.IntNet.net (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
 	id LAA07217; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 11:10:31 -0500
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 11:10:31 -0500
 Message-Id: <199601111610.LAA07217@mailhost.IntNet.net>
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 From: winn@Infowar.Com
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 To: 
 In-Reply-To: <9601111502.AA15220@all.net> id AA15220 for /u/game/bin/game;
 	Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:02:39
 	EST
 X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.00.06.17
 
 I am out Wed. 17 Jan and can only participate after 9PM that day. Sorry. Keep me 
 on for the next move, or iof youmove the date tothe 18th or whatever.
 Winn
 
 On Thu Jan 11 10:02:40,  wrote:
 >>From game  Thu Jan 11 10:02:39 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    War Game
 >Role:    Information WarGame Account - Diplomatic Communication
 >Subject: WarGame Communication
 >To:      gamelist
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > 
 > Move 2 of the suspended game is tenatively scheduled to start on
 > Wednesday, Jan 17, 1996.  Many technical components of the WarGame
 > system have been improved thanks to the efforts and suggestions of the
 > participants in the first move.  We hope that these improvements will
 > largely address the concerns of the players, and we look forward to your
 > comments.
 > 
 > If you wish to participate in Move 2, you don't have to do anything.  If
 > you do NOT want to participate in Move 2, please send mail to game@all.net
 > 
 > A new game manual should be done by the end of the weekend, and we would
 > very much appreciate your comments on it when it comes out.  In move 2,
 > the scenario will come out at game time and no other preparation is
 > required.
 > 	
 >===================End Message====================
 >
 >
 Happy New Year!
 Winn
 
 		        Winn Schwartau - Interpact, Inc.
 		        Information Warfare and InfoSec
 		       V: 813.393.6600 / F: 813.393.6361
 			    Winn@InfoWar.Com
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Thu Jan 11 12:40:22 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA22243 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 12:40:22 EST
 Received: from mailgate2.mcimail.com (mailgate2.mcimail.com [166.38.40.100]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id RAA07991; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 17:41:36 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate2.mcimail.com id au21297;
           11 Jan 96 17:40 WET
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 12:38 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 Message-Id: <14960111173841/0005514706DC4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 Let me see how my schedule is during that period, I think I'm far from
 the madding crowd then.  I thought we had called the game, so I haven't
 made any time.
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From mjsus@atlanta.com  Thu Jan 11 19:54:51 1996
 Received: from atlanta.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA18068 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 19:54:51 EST
 Received: from mjsus.atlanta.com (mjsus.atlanta.com [155.229.129.103]) by atlanta.com (8.7.1/8.6.4) with SMTP id TAA08780 for ; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 19:50:09 -0500 (EST)
 Message-Id: <199601120050.TAA08780@atlanta.com>
 X-Sender: mjsus@pop.atlanta.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 19:54:54 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: mjsus@atlanta.com
 Subject: IW Game
 
 
 I would like to be added to the next IW game list.
 
 Regards,
 
 Mark
 
---------------------------
Not exactly one associated name for user mjsus@atlanta.com
---------------------------
 From rjones@wicker.com  Thu Jan 11 20:00:14 1996
 Received: from woven.wicker.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA18438 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 20:00:14 EST
 Message-Id: 
 From: rjones@wicker.com (Ry Jones)
 Subject: Join
 To: game@all.net
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 17:00:05 -0800 (PST)
 Reply-To: rjones@wicker.com
 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
 Content-Type: text
 Content-Length: 121       
 
 I would like to join
 -- 
 Finest handcrafted code since 1987.
 Ry's Pathetic Homepage
---------------------------
Not exactly one associated name for user rjones@wicker.com
---------------------------
 From game  Thu Jan 11 20:15:22 1996
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 20:15:22 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA19148 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 20:15:22 EST
 Message-Id: <9601120115.AA19148@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** ICOM *****
 
 I-Force welcomes 2 new players to their team (and the game):
 
 mjsus@atlanta.com	Mark J. Saarelainen
 rjones@wicker.com	Ry Jones
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Thu Jan 11 23:39:24 1996
 Received: from ix4.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA29008 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 23:39:24 EST
 Received: from  by ix4.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id UAA11206; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 20:39:11 -0800
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 20:39:11 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601120439.UAA11206@ix4.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: War game move 2
 To: game@all.net
 
 I would be interested in participating,
 
 Michael
 -- 
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
Not exactly one associated name for user mthayer@ix.netcom.com
---------------------------
 From game  Fri Jan 12 06:21:22 1996
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 96 06:21:22 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA18291 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 06:21:22 EST
 Message-Id: <9601121121.AA18291@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GCOM *****
 
 G-Force welcomes a new player to their team (and the game):
 
 mthayer@ix.netcom.com	Michael Thayer
 
---------------------------
 From lem@true.net  Fri Jan 12 07:40:42 1996
 Received: from True.Net by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA22272 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 07:40:42 EST
 Received: from ws3.true.net (ws3.true.net [200.11.134.12]) by True.Net (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA19425; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 09:10:52 +0400 (GMT-4)
 Sender: lem@true.NET
 Message-Id: <30F5ED5B.320C388A@true.net>
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 09:10:51 +0400
 From: "Luis E. Munoz" 
 Organization: TRUEnet Red Internacional de Informacion
 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (X11; I; BSD/OS 2.0 i386)
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: I want to join
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 
 Hi:
 
 I would like to join the game. BTW, I have certain exp in 
 role playing games. 
 
 Best regards and thanks in advance.
 
 -- 
  --------------------------------------------------------------
 Luis E. Mu#oz R.                         Tel/Phone: +582 2392544
 Network Manager                                Fax: +582 2375048
 TRUEnet Red Internacional de Informacion     Email: lem@true.net
---------------------------
Not exactly one associated name for user lem@true.net
---------------------------
 From game  Fri Jan 12 07:49:54 1996
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 96 07:49:54 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA23221 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 07:49:54 EST
 Message-Id: <9601121249.AA23221@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** ICOM *****
 
 I-Force welcomes a new player to their team (and the game):
 
 Luis E. Munoz - lem@true.net
---------------------------
 From gregk@lfs.loral.com  Fri Jan 12 07:54:55 1996
 Received: from inetgw.fsc.ibm.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA23547 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 07:54:55 EST
 Received: by inetgw.fsc.ibm.com (AIX 3.2/UCB 5.64/4.03)
           id AA34246; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 07:54:48 -0500
 Message-Id: <9601121254.AA34246@inetgw.fsc.ibm.com>
 Received: from wmavm1.gburg.ibm.com(9.130.139.106) by inetgw.fsc.ibm.com via smap (V1.3)
 	id sma056772; Fri Jan 12 07:54:25 1996
 Received: from MANVM2.VNET by WMAVM1.GBURG.IBM.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
    with BSMTP id 6901; Fri, 12 Jan 96 07:54:08 EST
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 96 07:54:07 EST
 From: gregk@lfs.loral.com
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: NO SUBJECT
 
 From   : the virtual desk of Greg Knussmann
                              ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ making waves ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Subject:
 LIST FULL
 
 
 
 
 ---------         Like a ping-pong ball in a dryer,   ---------
 bouncing from one artificially created emergency to the next.
    Greg Knussmann            SONAR Software Engineering
    703-367-6613              email : gregk@lfs.loral.com
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Fri Jan 12 08:10:27 1996
 Received: from ix.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA24410 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 08:10:27 EST
 Received: from  by ix.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id FAA16447; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 05:10:13 -0800
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 05:10:13 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601121310.FAA16447@ix.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: Fwd: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 255
 To: game@all.net
 Cc: iw@all.net
 
 This message was bounced back to me:
 What is the correct address??
 
 
 ---- Begin Forwarded Message
 Return-Path: 
 Received: from all.net by ix9.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id UAA23976; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 20:39:27 -0800
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 23:39:24 EST
 From: MAILER-DAEMON@all.net (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA29019 for mthayer@ix.netcom.com; Thu, 11 Jan 96 23:39:24 
 EST
 Subject: Returned mail: unknown mailer error 255
 Message-Id: <9601120439.AA29019@all.net>
 To: 
 
    ----- Transcript of session follows -----
 <<< RCPT To:
 <<< DATA
 <<< QUIT
 Not exactly one associated name for user mthayer@ix.netcom.com
 554 "|/u/game/bin/game"... unknown mailer error 255
 
    ----- Unsent message follows -----
 Received: from ix4.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management 
 Analytics);
         id AA29008 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 23:39:24 EST
 Received: from  by ix4.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id UAA11206; Thu, 11 Jan 1996 20:39:11 -0800
 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 1996 20:39:11 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601120439.UAA11206@ix4.ix.netcom.com>
 >From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: War game move 2
 To: game@all.net
 
 I would be interested in participating,
 
 Michael
 -- 
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
 
 
 -- 
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From boneill@mail.alliance.net  Fri Jan 12 09:15:27 1996
 Received: from allinux1.alliance.net by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA27474 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 09:15:27 EST
 Received: from [198.110.233.64] by allinux1.alliance.net with smtp
 	(Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0takGE-000pUhC; Fri, 12 Jan 96 09:15 EST
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 09:15:08 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: boneill@mail.alliance.net
 Subject: war game 2
 
 Hello,
 
  Don't know if my earlier request to be included in the next war game was
 processed, as I sent that msg to iw@all.net...
 
 thanks,
 
 --Brad
 
 
---------------------------
The address you posted from (boneill@mail.alliance.net) is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From game  Fri Jan 12 09:24:24 1996
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 96 09:24:24 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA27914 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 09:24:24 EST
 Message-Id: <9601121424.AA27914@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** ICOM *****
 
 I-Force welcomes a new player to their team (and the game):
 
 boneill@mail.alliance.net	Bradley O'Neill
 
---------------------------
 From game  Fri Jan 12 09:29:22 1996
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 96 09:29:22 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA28168 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 09:29:22 EST
 Message-Id: <9601121429.AA28168@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GCOM *****
 
 G-Force welcomes a new player to their team (and the game):
 
 dolphin@interramp.com	Bob McKisson
 
---------------------------
 From BDavies@domus.com  Fri Jan 12 11:52:14 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.domus.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA05572 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 11:52:14 EST
 Received: (from smap@localhost) by gatekeeper.domus.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id LAA16649 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:58:23 -0500
 Received: from wpgate.domus.com(198.166.59.10) by gatekeeper0.domus.com via smap (V1.3)
 	id sma016647; Fri Jan 12 11:57:59 1996
 Received: from DOMUS-Message_Server by wpgate.domus.com
 	with Novell_GroupWise; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:53:34 -0500
 Message-Id: 
 X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 11:51:19 -0500
 From: Bob Davies 
 To: game@all.net
 Subject:  IW Wargame
 
 I am interested in getting information about the game...
 For some reason, I missed the whatever prior information was sent out.
 I would like to join, if it's possible..
 aTdHvAaNnKcSe
 Bob Davies
 bdavies@domus.com
 
 
---------------------------
The address you posted from (bdavies@domus.com) is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From game  Fri Jan 12 12:09:34 1996
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 96 12:09:34 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA06190 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 12:09:34 EST
 Message-Id: <9601121709.AA06190@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** ICOM *****
 
 I-Force welcomes a new player to their team (and the game):
 
 bdavies@domus.com	Bob Davies
 
---------------------------
 From BDavies@domus.com  Fri Jan 12 13:19:05 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.domus.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA11743 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 13:19:05 EST
 Received: (from smap@localhost) by gatekeeper.domus.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id NAA16791 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:25:24 -0500
 Received: from wpgate.domus.com(198.166.59.10) by gatekeeper0.domus.com via smap (V1.3)
 	id sma016786; Fri Jan 12 13:24:51 1996
 Received: from DOMUS-Message_Server by wpgate.domus.com
 	with Novell_GroupWise; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:20:29 -0500
 Message-Id: 
 X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:17:57 -0500
 From: Bob Davies 
 To: game@all.net
 Subject:  HELP
 
 HELP
 
---------------------------
 From BDavies@domus.com  Fri Jan 12 13:33:13 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.domus.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14693 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 13:33:13 EST
 Received: (from smap@localhost) by gatekeeper.domus.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id NAA16826 for ; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:39:24 -0500
 Received: from wpgate.domus.com(198.166.59.10) by gatekeeper0.domus.com via smap (V1.3)
 	id sma016824; Fri Jan 12 13:38:58 1996
 Received: from DOMUS-Message_Server by wpgate.domus.com
 	with Novell_GroupWise; Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:34:37 -0500
 Message-Id: 
 X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
 Date: Fri, 12 Jan 1996 13:32:19 -0500
 From: Bob Davies 
 To: game@all.net
 Subject:  Game Guidelines
 
 Hi...I just joined the game by accident..I was actually looking for
 information on the game prior to joining...Does anyone have a set of
 guidelines, rules of engagement, things like that that they can send me?  I
 am not exactly sure what the intent is or what the aims are.  Anything
 anyone can send me would be greatly appreciated...                                 
 Thanks in advance.    Bob Davies, bdavies@domus.com or
 bdavies@magi.com
 
---------------------------
 From rajiv@cs.uwa.edu.au  Fri Jan 12 13:59:47 1996
 Received: from mardo.cs.uwa.oz.au by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA16472 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 12 Jan 96 13:59:47 EST
 Received: (rajiv@localhost) by mardo.cs.uwa.oz.au (8.6.8/8.5) id DAA15902; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 03:00:19 +0800
 From: Rajiv Ellepola 
 Message-Id: <199601121900.DAA15902@mardo.cs.uwa.oz.au>
 Subject: 
 To: game@all.net
 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1996 03:00:19 +0800 (WST)
 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 Content-Length: 17        
 
 unsubscribe game
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sat Jan 13 02:03:45 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14487 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 13 Jan 96 02:03:45 EST
 Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by gatekeeper.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id HAA22667; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 07:01:15 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id ab00216;
           13 Jan 96 7:03 WET
 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 96 02:03 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 Message-Id: <02960113070320/0005514706DC6EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 While we are still out of game time, just a few issues:
 1) Straw poll, post review and time to think, is everybody happy with
 me as G-force leader?
 2) Do we want to discuss any skill divisions?
 3) Any game related comments to make or pass along?  I received a total
 of zero comments on what we did, which really makes me wonder.
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From game  Sat Jan 13 09:22:54 1996
 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 96 09:22:54 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA26458 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 13 Jan 96 09:22:54 EST
 Message-Id: <9601131422.AA26458@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GAME *****
 
 Participants:
 	The following represents a first draft of the rules of engagement for
 move 2 of game 96-01.  It would be very helpful if you would discuss these
 rules with each other (via the game system) to help debug them.
 
 Rules of Engagement:
 
 1 - All participants must remain within the game:
 
 	You must only participate in the game by sending email from
 	your normal email address to game@all.net, and not by any other
 	means. (no phone calls, conversations, email forgery, etc.)
 
 2 - All communications from the game (as opposed to communications from
 your teammates and other sources) are to be treated at face value:
 
 	If a communication tells you that your analysts reports a
 	yellow dress hanging from the flagpole of the Pentagon, you are
 	to treat this assertion (that one of your analysis reports it)
 	as factually accurate.
 
 	Game communications in this game are labelled as coming from:
 		Fred Cohen or War Game or Information Warfare Mailing List
 
 3 - A WarGame Posting looks like this (comments preceeded with #):
 
 	From game@all.net Thu Jan 11 10:17:56 1996
 		# All messages shoud come from game@all.net
 	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         	id AA15919 for fc; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:55 EST
 	Date: Thu Jan 11 10:17:55 EST 1996
 	From: game@all.net
 	Originally-From: game (WarGame)
 		# the Originally-from part of the message indicates the
 		# from field on the message as originally sent to the game
 	Subject: WarGame Communication
 		# If another subject field is presnt, it is used
 		# otherwise, the game provides this subject field
 	To: fc@all.net
 	X-Class: Fast
 	Precedence: first-class
 	Priority: fast
 		# to enhance performance, all messages are sent 1st class
 		# which is higher priority than almost all other email
 	Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 	Apparently-To: game@all.net
 	Message-Id: <9601111517.AA15909@all.net>
 	        id AA15909 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
 	Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 
 	>From game  Thu Jan 11 10:17:54 1996
 	Status: RO
 
 	=================WarGame Message==================
 		# All wargame messages start with a header indicating the
 		# source of the message (War Game) the role of the player
 		# (Information WarGame Account - Test Posting), the subject
 		# and the name of the list to which the communication was sent.
 	From:    War Game
 	Role:    Information WarGame Account - Test Posting
 	Subject: WarGame Communication
 	To:      testlist
 	==================Begin Message===================
 		# This is the message actually sent - note that it is indented
 		# by one space to differentiate it from the game information.
 
 	 Test of the game
 		# The message actually sent ends here
 	===================End Message====================
 
 4 - The scenario for move 2 will be provided at the start of the move
 (Wednesday, Jan 17, 1996 at 9AM ET).  Up until that time, you may (and
 are encouraged to) introduce yourselves to each other.  It is customary
 for each participant to give a 1-paragraph summary of their life and
 current status.  You may also wish to get together and elect (or
 otherwise decide on) a team leader, discuss the previous scenario, and
 otherwise get to know each other.
 
 
 5 - Other rules may be added and these rules may change at the sole
 discretion of the game management at any time and without notice.
 
 Have a great game!
---------------------------
 From x85899c4@cadet2.usma.edu  Sat Jan 13 09:26:48 1996
 Received: from cadet2.usma.edu by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA26727 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 13 Jan 96 09:26:48 EST
 Received: by cadet2.usma.edu (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
 	id AA08069; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 09:29:03 -0500
 Message-Id: <9601131429.AA08069@cadet2.usma.edu>
 Date: Sat Jan 13 09:29:03 1996
 From: x85899c4@cadet2.usma.edu (Whyte Jesse CDT)
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: Introduction
 
 Well, custom says I give a 1 paragraph intro so here goes.  I missed out of 
 most of the first scenario because I was on vacation and away from any 
 machines, but I'm a student at the United States Military Academy at West Point
 and I'm interested mostly in networking and network security.
---------------------------
 From dolphin@interramp.com  Sat Jan 13 11:40:53 1996
 Received: from smtp1.interramp.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA00618 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 13 Jan 96 11:40:53 EST
 Received: from [38.11.94.249] by smtp1.interramp.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1.3-PSI-irsmtp)
 	id LAA02525; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 11:40:41 -0500
 X-Sender: cd000674@pop3.interramp.com
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1996 13:34:18 +0900
 To: game@all.net
 From: dolphin@interramp.com (Tidewater Cyberfish)
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 
 
 
 Well, disregard the last message I posted to you re: COMSEC for the game.
 I just found the message on the rules.
 
 rmck
 
 >>From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sat Jan 13 02:03:45 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    Michael Wilson
 >Role:    G-Force Team Member
 >Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 >To:      g-force
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > While we are still out of game time, just a few issues:
 > 1) Straw poll, post review and time to think, is everybody happy with
 > me as G-force leader?
 > 2) Do we want to discuss any skill divisions?
 > 3) Any game related comments to make or pass along?  I received a total
 > of zero comments on what we did, which really makes me wonder.
 > MW
 >
 >===================End Message====================
 
 __________________________________________________
 Bob McKisson
 CEO
 Cypress Systems Corporation
 McLean, VA 22102
 (703) 273-2150  Voice
 (703) 273-2151  FAX
 (703) 691-2434  STU-III
 pelican@interramp.com  National Capital Region
 dolphin@interramp.com  Chesapeake/Norfolk/VA Beach
 
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Sat Jan 13 18:24:09 1996
 Received: from ix3.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA11988 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 13 Jan 96 18:24:09 EST
 Received: from  by ix3.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id PAA03492; Sat, 13 Jan 1996 15:23:58 -0800
 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 1996 15:23:58 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601132323.PAA03492@ix3.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 To: game@all.net
 
 You wrote: 
 >
 >>From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sat Jan 13 02:03:45 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    Michael Wilson
 >Role:    G-Force Team Member
 >Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 >To:      g-force
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > While we are still out of game time, just a few issues:
 > 1) Straw poll, post review and time to think, is everybody happy with
 > me as G-force leader?
 > 2) Do we want to discuss any skill divisions?
 > 3) Any game related comments to make or pass along?  I received a 
 total
 > of zero comments on what we did, which really makes me wonder.
 > MW
 > 
 >===================End Message====================
 >
 I am new as of yesterday, so have no intelligent comment to make.
 Just responding so that your comment count is >0
 
 Michael
 -- 
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From dolphin@interramp.com  Sun Jan 14 12:16:21 1996
 Received: from smtp2.interramp.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA18279 for /u/game/bin/game; Sun, 14 Jan 96 12:16:21 EST
 Received: from [38.11.94.63] by smtp2.interramp.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1.3-PSI-irsmtp)
 	id MAA29777; Sun, 14 Jan 1996 12:16:11 -0500
 X-Sender: cd000674@pop3.interramp.com
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 14:09:47 +0900
 To: game@all.net
 From: dolphin@interramp.com (Tidewater Cyberfish)
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 
 Big time problem here at field site "Chesbay".  Last evening we experienced
 a rather severe fire that has left our primary and secondary servers, the
 entire modem rack, a power conditioner and about twenty-five feet of cable
 race, and the cables in it, in ashes.  I am now communicating on a
 "borrowed" system to tell you that we will be down until we can rebuild.
 We think we can get the equipment back on-line by the middle of next week.
 
 rmck
 
 
 
---------------------------
 From dolphin@interramp.com  Sun Jan 14 12:21:55 1996
 Received: from smtp2.interramp.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA18500 for /u/game/bin/game; Sun, 14 Jan 96 12:21:55 EST
 Received: from [38.11.94.63] by smtp2.interramp.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1.3-PSI-irsmtp)
 	id MAA29874; Sun, 14 Jan 1996 12:21:46 -0500
 X-Sender: cd000674@pop3.interramp.com
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Sun, 14 Jan 1996 14:15:22 +0900
 To: game@all.net
 From: dolphin@interramp.com (Tidewater Cyberfish)
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 
 Due to a fire in our facility late yesterday, until further notice all
 communications to dolphin@interramp.com are being handled by
 pelican@interramp.com
 
 rmck
 
 _________________________________________________
 Bob McKisson
 Cypress Systems Corporation
 McLean, VA 22102
 (703) 273-2150  Voice
 (703) 273-2151  FAX
 (703) 691-2434  STU-III
 pelican@interramp.com  National Capital Region
 dolphin@interramp.com  Norfolk/Chesapeak/VA Beach
 
 
---------------------------
 From Johann.O.Jokulsson@iti.is  Mon Jan 15 05:05:11 1996
 Received: from isgate.is by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA20313 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 15 Jan 96 05:05:11 EST
 Received: from iti.is by isgate.is (8.7.3/ISnet/14-10-91); Mon, 15 Jan 1996 10:05:04 GMT
 Received: from korpa.iti.is (joj.iti.is) 
 	by iti.is (1.37.109.15/ISnet/11-02-92); Mon, 15 Jan 1996 10:09:25 GMT
 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 10:09:25 GMT
 Message-Id: <199601151009.AA150220565@iti.is>
 X-Sender: joj@iti.is
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
 To: game@all.net
 From: Johann O Jokulsson 
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
 
 At 10:02 11.01.96 EST, you wrote:
 
 > If you wish to participate in Move 2, you don't have to do anything.  I=
 f
 > you do NOT want to participate in Move 2, please send mail to game@all.=
 net
 
 Please remove me from this game.=20
 
 Thank you.
 ---
 J=F3hann =D3 J=F6kulsson 		Netfang: Johann.O.Jokulsson@iti.is
 Kerfistj=F3ri				S=EDmi: 587-7000
 I=F0nt=E6knistofnun =CDslands		Fax: 587-7409=09
 Keldnaholti, IS-112 Reykjavik 	URL: http://www.iti.is
 		=09
 
---------------------------
 From Chris.Liljenstolpe@SSDS.com  Mon Jan 15 13:36:00 1996
 Received: from balder.ssds.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA15197 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 15 Jan 96 13:36:00 EST
 Received: (from mail@localhost) by balder.ssds.com (8.6.9/8.6.9.SSDSnet-hub) id LAA25906 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 11:35:52 -0700
 Received: from denver(134.127.16.1) by balder via smap (V1.3)
 	id sma025903; Mon Jan 15 11:35:48 1996
 Received: from freke.ssds.om (pc_cds_sjc.sanjose.ssds.com [134.127.10.53]) by denver.ssds.com (8.6.9/8.6.9.SSDSnet-hub) with SMTP id LAA12020 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 11:35:46 -0700
 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960115183432.00c271c4@denver.ssds.com>
 X-Sender: cds@denver.ssds.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 12:34:32 -0600
 To: game@all.net
 From: "Chris Liljenstolpe (Swanson) - SSDS" 
 Subject: Introduction
 
 Greetings,
 
         Just as a quick introduction - I am one of the prinicipal
 INFOSEC/COMPUSEC/COMSEC engineers with SSDS, a mid-size network integration
 firm.  I have been working primarily in the government and financial space
 the last two years.
 
         Regards,
         -+Chris
 
 
 --
    ( (   | (               Chris Liljenstolpe 
     ) ) (|  ), inc.        SSDS, Inc; 8400 Normandale Lake Blvd.; Suite 993
    business driven         Bloomington, MN   55437; 
  technology solutions      TEL 612.921.2392  FAX 612.921.2395   Um Yah Yah!
  PGP Key 1024/E8546BD5     FE 43 BD A6 3C 13 6C DB  89 B3 E4 A1 BF 6D 2A A9
 
---------------------------
The address you posted from (chris.liljenstolpe@ssds.com) is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From tju@akira.corp.sgi.com  Mon Jan 15 17:24:45 1996
 Received: from sgigate.sgi.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA01299 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 15 Jan 96 17:24:45 EST
 Received: from palladium.corp.sgi.com by sgigate.sgi.com via ESMTP (950911.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH825/940406.SGI)
 	for <@sgigate.sgi.com:game@all.net> id OAA04424; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:24:41 -0800
 Received: from akira.corp.sgi.com by palladium.corp.sgi.com via ESMTP (950511.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH526/911001.SGI)
 	for <@palladium.corp.sgi.com:game@all.net> id OAA03177; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:24:40 -0800
 Received: by akira.corp.sgi.com (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO)
 	for game@all.net id OAA16404; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:21:54 -0800
 From: tju@akira.corp.sgi.com (T. Jason Ucker)
 Message-Id: <9601151421.ZM16402@akira.corp.sgi.com>
 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 14:21:54 -0800
 X-Mailer: Z-Mail-SGI (3.2S.2 10apr95 MediaMail)
 To: game@all.net
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 
 Please remove me from this game.
 (not enough time right now)
 
 Thanks,
 
 -Jason
 --
 T. Jason Ucker					 Systems Engineer
 tju@sgi.com					 Silicon Graphics Inc.
 
---------------------------
 From game  Mon Jan 15 17:41:27 1996
 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 96 17:41:27 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA02511 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 15 Jan 96 17:41:27 EST
 Message-Id: <9601152241.AA02511@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GAME *****
 				WarGame Player's Manual
 				-----------------------
 ==============================================================================
 
 Introduction:
 -------------
 
 	Welcome to the WarGame system.  The WarGame system is a
 semi-automated software contrivance designed to permit a skilled
 operator to manage a wargame with some degree of efficiency.  It is not
 designed to handle real-time tactical maneuvers or to automatically
 evaluate moves.  Rather, it is an attempt to allow some strategic
 planning games to be played without the expense of travel, housing, etc.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 About Strategic Games:
 ----------------------
 
 	Strategic games of this sort may be best thought of as
 structured interactions between players designed to get at underlying
 issues through the use of made-up scenarios.  Scenarios don't have to be
 particularly realistic and don't even have to involve enemies (although
 sometimes it helps to get you thinking when you have to think against
 someone else).
 
 	In these games, you are on a team with a team leader, a
 scenario, and a set of orders.
 
 	Failure to follow orders is called treason and can get you
 killed or sent to jail indefinitely, so please try your best to follow
 them.
 
 	The team leader is in charge of the team, but that doesn't make
 it a dictatorship.  If the team leader tries to suggest something
 illegal, infeasible, or even different than what you think should be
 done, please bring it up.  If, in the end, the leader says to follow a
 different path, please try to do so.
 
 	The scenario is what it is.  It cannot be altered except by your
 actions within the game.  If the scenario makes bad assumptions, you
 can't change them, but you can posit things that help you get around
 them - but try to stick to it.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 How the WarGame System Works:
 -----------------------------
 
 	The wargame system is very simple.  Mostly, it just forwards
 email and keeps copies for analysis.  Almost all communications consist
 of sending email to game@all.net.  The game address automatically figures
 out who you are and forward mail to the proper recipients.
 
 	Team leaders are given an additional capability.  By placing the
 following line anywhere in their message, they can send a "diplomatic"
 message that reaches the other team:
 
 ***** DIPCOM *****
 
 	DIPlomatic COMmunication should be used sparingly! Think of it
 like using the red phone between Moscow and Washington - or like sending
 a private letter in the pouch to Tehran. 
 
 	Other special telecommunication behaviors are also available in
 WarGame, but they are only explained to players on a need-to-know basis.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 What WarGame Messages Look Like:
 --------------------------------
 
 Messages from the WarGame systems look (approximately) like the example
 message below.  In this example, lines starting with '#' are comments
 intended to clarify the meaning of the information presented. 
 
 	From game@all.net Thu Jan 11 10:17:56 1996
 		# All messages shoud come from game@all.net
 	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         	id AA15919 for fc; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:55 EST
 	Date: Thu Jan 11 10:17:55 EST 1996
 	From: game@all.net
 	Originally-From: game (WarGame)
 		# the Originally-from part of the message indicates the
 		# from field on the message as originally sent to the game
 	Subject: WarGame Communication
 		# If another subject field is presnt, it is used
 		# otherwise, the game provides this subject field
 	To: fc@all.net
 	X-Class: Fast
 	Precedence: first-class
 	Priority: fast
 		# to enhance performance, all messages are sent 1st class
 		# which is higher priority than almost all other email
 	Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 	Apparently-To: game@all.net
 	Message-Id: <9601111517.AA15909@all.net>
 	        id AA15909 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
 	Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 
 	>From game  Thu Jan 11 10:17:54 1996
 	Status: RO
 
 	=================WarGame Message==================
 		# All wargame messages start with a header indicating the
 		# source of the message (War Game) the role of the player
 		# (Information WarGame Account - Test Posting), the subject
 		# and the name of the list to which the communication was sent.
 	From:    War Game
 	Role:    Information WarGame Account - Test Posting
 	Subject: WarGame Communication
 	To:      testlist
 	==================Begin Message===================
 		# This is the message actually sent - note that it is indented
 		# by one space to differentiate it from the game information.
 
 	 Test of the game
 		# The message actually sent ends here
 	===================End Message====================
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 Rules of Engagement:
 --------------------
 
 1 - All participants must remain within the game:
 
 	You must only participate in the game by sending email from
 	your normal email address to game@all.net, and not by any other
 	means. (no phone calls, conversations, email forgery, etc.)
 	We do a reasonable job of detecting forged email and other
 	attempts at subversion, but it is not our intent to provide a
 	technical solution to real-world problems in this game.  The
 	idea is that the players learn a lot more and the game works
 	a lot better when the players follow the rules.  Please do so.
 
 2 - All communications from the game (as opposed to communications from
 your teammates and other sources) are to be treated at face value:
 
 	If a communication tells you that your analysts reports a
 	yellow dress hanging from the flagpole of the Pentagon, you are
 	to treat this assertion (that one of your analysis reports it)
 	as factually accurate.
 
 	Game communications in this game are labelled as coming from:
 		Fred Cohen or War Game or Information Warfare Mailing List
 
 
 3 - Other rules may be added and these rules may change at the sole
 discretion of the game management at any time and without notice.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 Proper behavior during War Games:
 ---------------------------------
 
 War is Hell!  Strategic war games are not.
 
 Be nice to your team mates.  Remember, they are the good guys.
 
 Be polite to your enemies.  Remember, you may end up their prisoners.
 
 Email isn't like in-person communication - you can only smile by using
 stupid little character sequences that many people ignore or don't
 understand.  Remember this both when you read and when you type.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 Have a great game!
---------------------------
 From game  Mon Jan 15 17:46:38 1996
 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 96 17:46:38 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA02942 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 15 Jan 96 17:46:38 EST
 Message-Id: <9601152246.AA02942@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 Minor Error in last communication - being resent with repair - sorry for
 the inconvenience.
 
 ***** GAME *****
 				WarGame Player's Manual
 				-----------------------
 ==============================================================================
 
 Introduction:
 -------------
 
 	Welcome to the WarGame system.  The WarGame system is a
 semi-automated software contrivance designed to permit a skilled
 operator to manage a wargame with some degree of efficiency.  It is not
 designed to handle real-time tactical maneuvers or to automatically
 evaluate moves.  Rather, it is an attempt to allow some strategic
 planning games to be played without the expense of travel, housing, etc.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 About Strategic Games:
 ----------------------
 
 	Strategic games of this sort may be best thought of as
 structured interactions between players designed to get at underlying
 issues through the use of made-up scenarios.  Scenarios don't have to be
 particularly realistic and don't even have to involve enemies (although
 sometimes it helps to get you thinking when you have to think against
 someone else).
 
 	In these games, you are on a team with a team leader, a
 scenario, and a set of orders.
 
 	Failure to follow orders is called treason and can get you
 killed or sent to jail indefinitely, so please try your best to follow
 them.
 
 	The team leader is in charge of the team, but that doesn't make
 it a dictatorship.  If the team leader tries to suggest something
 illegal, infeasible, or even different than what you think should be
 done, please bring it up.  If, in the end, the leader says to follow a
 different path, please try to do so.
 
 	The scenario is what it is.  It cannot be altered except by your
 actions within the game.  If the scenario makes bad assumptions, you
 can't change them, but you can posit things that help you get around
 them - but try to stick to it.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 How the WarGame System Works:
 -----------------------------
 
 	The wargame system is very simple.  Mostly, it just forwards
 email and keeps copies for analysis.  Almost all communications consist
 of sending email to game@all.net.  The game address automatically figures
 out who you are and forward mail to the proper recipients.
 
 	Team leaders are given an additional capability.  By placing the
 following line anywhere in their message, they can send a "diplomatic"
 message that reaches the other team:
 
  ***** DIPCOM *****
 
 	DIPlomatic COMmunication should be used sparingly! Think of it
 like using the red phone between Moscow and Washington - or like sending
 a private letter in the pouch to Tehran. 
 
 	Other special telecommunication behaviors are also available in
 WarGame, but they are only explained to players on a need-to-know basis.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 What WarGame Messages Look Like:
 --------------------------------
 
 Messages from the WarGame systems look (approximately) like the example
 message below.  In this example, lines starting with '#' are comments
 intended to clarify the meaning of the information presented. 
 
 	From game@all.net Thu Jan 11 10:17:56 1996
 		# All messages shoud come from game@all.net
 	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         	id AA15919 for fc; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:55 EST
 	Date: Thu Jan 11 10:17:55 EST 1996
 	From: game@all.net
 	Originally-From: game (WarGame)
 		# the Originally-from part of the message indicates the
 		# from field on the message as originally sent to the game
 	Subject: WarGame Communication
 		# If another subject field is presnt, it is used
 		# otherwise, the game provides this subject field
 	To: fc@all.net
 	X-Class: Fast
 	Precedence: first-class
 	Priority: fast
 		# to enhance performance, all messages are sent 1st class
 		# which is higher priority than almost all other email
 	Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 	Apparently-To: game@all.net
 	Message-Id: <9601111517.AA15909@all.net>
 	        id AA15909 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
 	Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
 
 	>From game  Thu Jan 11 10:17:54 1996
 	Status: RO
 
 	=================WarGame Message==================
 		# All wargame messages start with a header indicating the
 		# source of the message (War Game) the role of the player
 		# (Information WarGame Account - Test Posting), the subject
 		# and the name of the list to which the communication was sent.
 	From:    War Game
 	Role:    Information WarGame Account - Test Posting
 	Subject: WarGame Communication
 	To:      testlist
 	==================Begin Message===================
 		# This is the message actually sent - note that it is indented
 		# by one space to differentiate it from the game information.
 
 	 Test of the game
 		# The message actually sent ends here
 	===================End Message====================
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 Rules of Engagement:
 --------------------
 
 1 - All participants must remain within the game:
 
 	You must only participate in the game by sending email from
 	your normal email address to game@all.net, and not by any other
 	means. (no phone calls, conversations, email forgery, etc.)
 	We do a reasonable job of detecting forged email and other
 	attempts at subversion, but it is not our intent to provide a
 	technical solution to real-world problems in this game.  The
 	idea is that the players learn a lot more and the game works
 	a lot better when the players follow the rules.  Please do so.
 
 2 - All communications from the game (as opposed to communications from
 your teammates and other sources) are to be treated at face value:
 
 	If a communication tells you that your analysts reports a
 	yellow dress hanging from the flagpole of the Pentagon, you are
 	to treat this assertion (that one of your analysis reports it)
 	as factually accurate.
 
 	Game communications in this game are labelled as coming from:
 		Fred Cohen or War Game or Information Warfare Mailing List
 
 
 3 - Other rules may be added and these rules may change at the sole
 discretion of the game management at any time and without notice.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 Proper behavior during War Games:
 ---------------------------------
 
 War is Hell!  Strategic war games are not.
 
 Be nice to your team mates.  Remember, they are the good guys.
 
 Be polite to your enemies.  Remember, you may end up their prisoners.
 
 Email isn't like in-person communication - you can only smile by using
 stupid little character sequences that many people ignore or don't
 understand.  Remember this both when you read and when you type.
 
 ==============================================================================
 
 Have a great game!
---------------------------
 From boneill@mail.alliance.net  Mon Jan 15 19:37:58 1996
 Received: from allinux1.alliance.net by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA10540 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 15 Jan 96 19:37:58 EST
 Received: from [198.110.233.66] by allinux1.alliance.net with smtp
 	(Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0tbzPH-000pXCC; Mon, 15 Jan 96 19:37 EST
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 19:37:42 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: boneill@mail.alliance.net
 Subject: self-intro to I-force members
 
  Greetings fellow I-forcers...
 
 Thought I'd test out protocol here and try to make contact...
 
 Introduction: I'm Brad.
 I'm in software development.
 Interested in crypto, east asian security issues, etc.
 I like Bordeaux wine, hate brie.
 Get in touch.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
---------------------------
 From mdevost@chelsea.ios.com  Mon Jan 15 21:16:07 1996
 Received: from chelsea.ios.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA16687 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 15 Jan 96 21:16:07 EST
 Received: from ios.ios.com (ppp-6.ts-1.dc.idt.net [169.132.17.65]) by chelsea.ios.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA26505 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 1996 21:11:14 -0500
 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960116021348.00682f54@chelsea.ios.com>
 X-Sender: mdevost@chelsea.ios.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Mon, 15 Jan 1996 21:13:48 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: "Matthew G. Devost" 
 Subject: I-Force Intro.
 
 I'll follow Brad's lead.
 
 My name is Matt.
 I'm an IW researcher with a Political Science background.
 Looking forward to a second shot at this wargame.
 
 Later,
 
 Matt
 ________________________________________________________________
 Matthew G. Devost          They tell me that this is "cyberspace."
 mdevost@chelsea.ios.com    I don't know what cyberspace is.
                            But, it sure feels like home.
                                             -Garth Brooks
 
---------------------------
 From ab129@dayton.wright.edu  Tue Jan 16 09:10:38 1996
 Received: from selene.wright.edu by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA10757 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 09:10:38 EST
 Received: from dayton.wright.edu by mailhost.wright.edu (PMDF V5.0-5 #2485)
  id <01I02MQ9CUJ4000785@mailhost.wright.edu> for game@all.net; Tue,
  16 Jan 1996 09:10:35 -0500 (EST)
 Received: by dayton.wright.edu; id AA11023; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 09:10:14 -0500
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 09:10:14 -0500
 From: Mark Perry 
 Subject: Wargame
 To: game@all.net
 Message-Id: <9601161410.AA11023@dayton.wright.edu>
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
 
 I will be unable to participate in the game this week as I will be
 out of town from this afternoon till Friday night and will be away
 from my email connection.  I will be interested in hearing about the
 results next week.
 
 Mark Perry
---------------------------
 From MAILER-DAEMON  Tue Jan 16 09:28:44 1996
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 96 09:28:44 EST
 From: MAILER-DAEMON (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA11094 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 09:28:44 EST
 Subject: Returned mail: Cannot send message for 3 days
 Message-Id: <9601161428.AA11094@all.net>
 To: 
 
    ----- Transcript of session follows -----
 421 wicker.com: Host woven.wicker.com is down
 
    ----- Unsent message follows -----
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA26503 for rjones@wicker.com; Sat, 13 Jan 96 09:23:11 EST
 Date: Sat Jan 13 09:22:55 EST 1996
 From: game@all.net
 Originally-From: game (WarGame)
 Subject: WarGame Communication
 To: rjones@wicker.com
 X-Class: Fast
 Precedence: first-class
 Priority: fast
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 Message-Id: <9601131422.AA26458@all.net>
         id AA26458 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 13 Jan 96 09:22:54 EST
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
 Date: Sat, 13 Jan 96 09:22:54 EST
 
 From game  Sat Jan 13 09:22:54 1996
 Status: RO
 
 =================WarGame Message==================
 From:    War Game
 Role:    Game Administrative Communication
 Subject: WarGame Communication
 To:      gamelist
 ==================Begin Message===================
  
  Participants:
  	The following represents a first draft of the rules of engagement for
  move 2 of game 96-01.  It would be very helpful if you would discuss these
  rules with each other (via the game system) to help debug them.
  
  Rules of Engagement:
  
  1 - All participants must remain within the game:
  
  	You must only participate in the game by sending email from
  	your normal email address to game@all.net, and not by any other
  	means. (no phone calls, conversations, email forgery, etc.)
  
  2 - All communications from the game (as opposed to communications from
  your teammates and other sources) are to be treated at face value:
  
  	If a communication tells you that your analysts reports a
  	yellow dress hanging from the flagpole of the Pentagon, you are
  	to treat this assertion (that one of your analysis reports it)
  	as factually accurate.
  
  	Game communications in this game are labelled as coming from:
  		Fred Cohen or War Game or Information Warfare Mailing List
  
  3 - A WarGame Posting looks like this (comments preceeded with #):
  
  	From game@all.net Thu Jan 11 10:17:56 1996
  		# All messages shoud come from game@all.net
  	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
          	id AA15919 for fc; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:55 EST
  	Date: Thu Jan 11 10:17:55 EST 1996
  	From: game@all.net
  	Originally-From: game (WarGame)
  		# the Originally-from part of the message indicates the
  		# from field on the message as originally sent to the game
  	Subject: WarGame Communication
  		# If another subject field is presnt, it is used
  		# otherwise, the game provides this subject field
  	To: fc@all.net
  	X-Class: Fast
  	Precedence: first-class
  	Priority: fast
  		# to enhance performance, all messages are sent 1st class
  		# which is higher priority than almost all other email
  	Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
  	Apparently-To: game@all.net
  	Message-Id: <9601111517.AA15909@all.net>
  	        id AA15909 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
  	Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
  	Date: Thu, 11 Jan 96 10:17:54 EST
  
  	>From game  Thu Jan 11 10:17:54 1996
  	Status: RO
  
  	=================WarGame Message==================
  		# All wargame messages start with a header indicating the
  		# source of the message (War Game) the role of the player
  		# (Information WarGame Account - Test Posting), the subject
  		# and the name of the list to which the communication was sent.
  	From:    War Game
  	Role:    Information WarGame Account - Test Posting
  	Subject: WarGame Communication
  	To:      testlist
  	==================Begin Message===================
  		# This is the message actually sent - note that it is indented
  		# by one space to differentiate it from the game information.
  
  	 Test of the game
  		# The message actually sent ends here
  	===================End Message====================
  
  4 - The scenario for move 2 will be provided at the start of the move
  (Wednesday, Jan 17, 1996 at 9AM ET).  Up until that time, you may (and
  are encouraged to) introduce yourselves to each other.  It is customary
  for each participant to give a 1-paragraph summary of their life and
  current status.  You may also wish to get together and elect (or
  otherwise decide on) a team leader, discuss the previous scenario, and
  otherwise get to know each other.
  
  
  5 - Other rules may be added and these rules may change at the sole
  discretion of the game management at any time and without notice.
  
  Have a great game!
 ===================End Message====================
---------------------------
The address you posted from (mailer-daemon) is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From lem@true.net  Tue Jan 16 10:01:24 1996
 Received: from  mx2.smtp.psi.net by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA12377 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 10:01:24 EST
 Received: from True.Net by  mx2.smtp.psi.net (8.6.12/SMI-4.1.3-PSI)
 	id JAA22108; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 09:56:33 -0500
 Received: from ws3.true.net (ws3.true.net [200.11.134.12]) by True.Net (8.7.3/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA10021; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 11:23:39 +0400 (GMT-4)
 Sender: lem@true.NET
 Message-Id: <30FB527A.68728E35@true.net>
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 11:23:38 +0400
 From: "Luis E. Munoz" 
 Organization: TRUEnet Red Internacional de Informacion
 X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0b4 (X11; I; BSD/OS 2.0 i386)
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: My intro
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
 
 Hi fellows:
 
 My name is Luis Mu#oz. I'm a CS engineer currently working at
 a local ISP as network manager/secadmin.
 
 -- 
  --------------------------------------------------------------
 Luis E. Mu#oz R.                         Tel/Phone: +582 2392544
 Network Manager                                Fax: +582 2375048
 TRUEnet Red Internacional de Informacion     Email: lem@true.net
---------------------------
 From boneill@mail.alliance.net  Tue Jan 16 10:25:37 1996
 Received: from allinux1.alliance.net by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13145 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 10:25:37 EST
 Received: from [198.110.233.32] by allinux1.alliance.net with smtp
 	(Smail3.1.29.1 #1) id m0tcDGL-000pWoC; Tue, 16 Jan 96 10:25 EST
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 10:25:25 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: boneill@mail.alliance.net
 Subject: ideas?
 
  I'm sure the rest of us will be introducing ourselves, but let me throw
 this out:
 
 -From what those of you who played last time learned (I did not play), what
 do we need
 to focus on accomplishing from the very beginning, scenario-free?
 
 --Brad
 
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Tue Jan 16 14:56:41 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA24405 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 14:56:41 EST
 Received: from mailgate2.mcimail.com (mailgate2.mcimail.com [166.38.40.100]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id TAA21676; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 19:58:20 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate2.mcimail.com id ae16278;
           16 Jan 96 19:57 WET
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 96 12:45 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: Wargame
 Message-Id: <03960116174530/0005514706DC1EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 Let me try it this way--will there be ANY member of G-force who will be
 available?  I should be able to get SOME time over the week-end, but I
 think I'm doing this move solo (or so it seems).
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil  Tue Jan 16 15:01:12 1996
 Received: from cs.nps.navy.mil by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA24589 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 15:01:12 EST
 Received: from prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil by cs.nps.navy.mil (4.1/SMI-4.1)
 	id AA02739; Tue, 16 Jan 96 12:01:11 PST
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 96 12:01:11 PST
 From: shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall)
 Message-Id: <9601162001.AA02739@cs.nps.navy.mil>
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: RE: Wargame
 
 I will be available, for a limited amount of time...
 			Tim
---------------------------
 From x85899c4@cadet2.usma.edu  Tue Jan 16 15:19:20 1996
 Received: from cadet2.usma.edu by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA25131 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 15:19:20 EST
 Received: by cadet2.usma.edu (5.x/SMI-SVR4)
 	id AA25083; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 15:21:42 -0500
 Message-Id: <9601162021.AA25083@cadet2.usma.edu>
 Date: Tue Jan 16 15:21:41 1996
 From: x85899c4@cadet2.usma.edu (Whyte Jesse CDT)
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: Re: RE: Wargame
 
 >>From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Tue Jan 16 14:56:41 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    Michael Wilson
 >Role:    G-Force Team Member
 >Subject: RE: Wargame
 >To:      g-force
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > Let me try it this way--will there be ANY member of G-force who will be
 > available?  I should be able to get SOME time over the week-end, but I
 > think I'm doing this move solo (or so it seems).
 > MW
 > 
 >===================End Message====================
 >
   
 Michael,
 
 I'm sorry that I wasn't around for the first move but I will be here for this 
 move.
 
 Jesse Whyte
 Cadet, United States Military Academy
 x85899c4@cadet2.usma.edu
---------------------------
 From mdevost@chelsea.ios.com  Tue Jan 16 18:49:22 1996
 Received: from chelsea.ios.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA02680 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 18:49:22 EST
 Received: from ios.ios.com (ppp-59.ts-2.dc.idt.net [169.132.17.182]) by chelsea.ios.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA29679 for ; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 18:44:25 -0500
 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960116234658.00699dd4@chelsea.ios.com>
 X-Sender: mdevost@chelsea.ios.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 18:46:58 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: "Matthew G. Devost" 
 Subject: Re: ideas?
 
 
 >>From boneill@mail.alliance.net  Tue Jan 16 10:25:37 1996
 
 > -From what those of you who played last time learned (I did not play), what
 > do we need to focus on accomplishing from the very beginning, scenario-free?
 
 Well, actually taking a stab at offering moves after the scenario is
 distributed would be a good start. ;-)
 
 For now, further introductions would be great so that we know what our
 collective talents and areas of expertise are.  
 
 Later,
 
 Matt
 ________________________________________________________________
 Matthew G. Devost          They tell me that this is "cyberspace."
 mdevost@chelsea.ios.com    I don't know what cyberspace is.
                            But, it sure feels like home.
                                             -Garth Brooks
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Tue Jan 16 19:27:06 1996
 Received: from ix7.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA05096 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 16 Jan 96 19:27:06 EST
 Received: from  by ix7.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id QAA03540; Tue, 16 Jan 1996 16:26:57 -0800
 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 1996 16:26:57 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601170026.QAA03540@ix7.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: RE: Wargame
 To: game@all.net
 
 You wrote: 
 >
 >>From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Tue Jan 16 14:56:41 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    Michael Wilson
 >Role:    G-Force Team Member
 >Subject: RE: Wargame
 >To:      g-force
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > Let me try it this way--will there be ANY member of G-force who will 
 be
 > available?  I should be able to get SOME time over the week-end, but 
 I
 > think I'm doing this move solo (or so it seems).
 > MW
 > 
 >===================End Message====================
 >
 I don't know when it is to take place, so I can't tell you.
 But, I should be available for the move.
 
 MTT
 -- 
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From game  Wed Jan 17 06:41:21 1996
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 96 06:41:21 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA00447 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 06:41:21 EST
 Message-Id: <9601171141.AA00447@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GAME *****
 
 The next move is beginning soon.  The following messages will include
 the scenario for this move and your commander's orders. 
 
 Good Luck.
---------------------------
 From game  Wed Jan 17 06:42:21 1996
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 96 06:42:21 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA00579 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 06:42:21 EST
 Message-Id: <9601171142.AA00579@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GAME *****
 
 WarGame 96-01
 
 Scene 2
 
 	The date: Jan 17, 2021 - 25 years from now.  The situation has
 gotten far more dire.  Seeing the apparent weakness of the United States
 and desperate for access to oil reserves and world dominance, an as yet
 unidentified coalition of hostile forces have been detected massing
 troops and otherwise preparing for an attack of the United States on 5
 fronts:
 
 	1 - Hawaii is being surrounded by a large naval force and
 	the US naval forces in Hawaii believe they may soon come under
 	attack from the air, from submarines, and from surface ships.
 	The force appears to consist of vessels from the European Union
 	and Japan.
 
 	2 - Forces have been detected entering Alaska from over the
 	North pole. Information is still sketchy because of the
 	disrupted communications caused by the battle between G-force
 	and I-force.  These forces have not been identified, but it is
 	believed they are acting with the support of the current Russian
 	government.
 
 	3 - Ground forces with minimal tank support have been detected
 	massing just south of the Mexican boarder.  The tanks appear to be
 	near-relics.
 
 	4 - Using Cuba as a way point, Chinese forces appear to be
 	preparing to airdrop into Texas and Florida.  This report comes
 	from overflights and supports recent satellite information.
 
 	5 - Inside the Continental US small terrorist cells have become
 	very active.  Local news reports indicate that attempted bombings
 	have been stopped in several financial centers by local FBI
 	offices, and according to several FBI informants, this is part of
 	the new Jehad called for by Sheik Mohamad Luchani - now a leader
 	of the recently formed coallition of Arab States.
 
 The American public, already confused about the internal political
 situation, is now being bombarded by the media and in private electronic
 communications with disparaging rumors about the downfall of the United
 States, about people being killed in battles seemingly all over the
 country, about terrorist attacks on every major city, and about the coup
 attempt.  Much of this rumor appears to be unfounded, but the media is
 competing heavily for advertising dollars, and is having a field day.
 
 Neither side trusts the other.  News reports claim that unidentified FBI
 informants are now telling G-force commanders that I-force is actually
 run by a joint foreign operation consisting of Chinese, Eastern
 European, and Pacific Rim countries.  Other media reports claim that
 several CIA agents have defected to the I-force and are now helping
 I-force to defeat G-force.  Nobody really knows the whole story.
 
 Neither the I-force nor the G-force anticipated a coordinated threat,
 and the level of distrust is such that both sides now doubt almost all
 of the information they get.  Nonetheless, the sides have decided to
 temporarily work together on this limited issue.  To facilitate this, a
 coalition decision group has been formed to take independent
 recommendations from each side and make their own determination of how
 to act.  These group members than return to their own organizations to
 pursue action. 
 
 Because of your outstanding efforts in the last weeks, your teams have
 been chosen to act as the two advisory groups that feed the coalition
 group proposals on how to act.  Once team-leaders have been set for each
 team, the leaders will be provided with the ability to use diplomatic
 communications that go to all members of both teams so as to facilitate
 cooperation toward a workable and mutually acceptable set of
 recommendations. 
 
 Your specific orders will arrive shortly.
---------------------------
 From RDavies@domus.com  Wed Jan 17 08:30:57 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.domus.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA09751 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 08:30:57 EST
 Received: (from smap@localhost) by gatekeeper.domus.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id IAA03729 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 08:37:46 -0500
 Received: from wpgate.domus.com(198.166.59.10) by gatekeeper0.domus.com via smap (V1.3)
 	id sma003727; Wed Jan 17 08:37:34 1996
 Received: from DOMUS-Message_Server by wpgate.domus.com
 	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 08:31:54 -0500
 Message-Id: 
 X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 08:29:11 -0500
 From: Robert Davies 
 To: game@all.net
 Subject:  Re: ideas? -Reply
 
 
 
 >>>  01/16/96 06:46pm >>>
 >From mdevost@chelsea.ios.com  Tue Jan 16 18:49:22 1996
 Status: RO
 
 =================WarGame Message==================
 >From:    Matthew G. Devost
 Role:    I-Force Team Member
 Subject: Re: ideas?
 To:      i-force
 ==================Begin Message===================
  
  >>From boneill@mail.alliance.net  Tue Jan 16 10:25:37 1996
 
  For now, further introductions would be great so that we know what
 our
  collective talents and areas of expertise are.  
 
 Hi all..
 Sorry for the delay in my introduction, but I was away from work
 yesterday, and things didn't really start rolling till after I was gone for the
 day.
 My name is Bob Davies, and I am an ex-Security and Military Pollice
 Officer with the Canadian Forces.  I did some counter-int work, but I 
 specialized in certification and accreditation of secure IT systems for five
 years.  During that time, I developed a keen interest in IW as part of my IT
 Security Trainingn.  I have since left the military and am pursuing a
 computer science degree part time (A BA in European Military History
 with a Minor in Classical Studies will help round you out as a person, but
 is not conducive to further employment in these lean times), and working
 doing IT security consulting and Security Product Support for a software
 firm here in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
 That's probably more than you needed to know, but what the hey.
 I am setting up my work account to forward mail from home to the game
 and vice versa, because I missed a bunch of stuff. Over the past few
 days.  I can be reached at either rdavies@domus.com (work) or
 bdavies@magi.com (home)
 Looking forward to the game.
 Ciao for niao.
 PS...Matt...where is that GB quote from?
 
---------------------------
 From game  Wed Jan 17 09:08:17 1996
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 96 09:08:17 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14744 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 09:08:17 EST
 Message-Id: <9601171408.AA14744@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GCOM *****
 
 ----------------------------
 
 G-team:
 
 TOP SECRET - SCI - EYES ONLY - G-TEAM-MEMBERS
 
 	Unbeknownst to the I-Force, the entire coordinated threat to the
 United States is a deception carried out with the assistance of allies
 abroad at the request of the President of the United States.  Much of
 the armed forces are now coordinated at bases throughout the US via
 GWEN-2 - the second generation of Ground Wave Emergency Network.  The
 forces are now largely stationed at their bases and are awaiting orders.
 Similarly, the heads of most government agencies are secretly in touch
 with commanders of their regional coordination centers, with those
 commanders going to local military bases once a day for communications.
 You have two tasks before you:
 
 	1 - To create a set of plausible recommendations that will seem
 	to be designed to help the United States defend itself without
 	sacrificing I-Force security requirements.
 
 	2 - To outline a plan of action by which the I-Force can be
 	substantially eliminated based on their partial acceptance of the
 	recommendations made under (1) above.
 
 By virtue of a Top Secret emergency presidential finding, and supported
 by key members of congress, you have been authorized to plan for the
 combined use of all elements of the United States armed forces, all
 government agencies at all levels of government, and, to the extent
 agreement can be reached, the forces of our allies participating in the
 deception.  You have 48 hours to complete your task.  Good Luck. 
 
 TOP SECRET - SCI - EYES ONLY - G-TEAM-MEMBERS
---------------------------
 From game  Wed Jan 17 09:08:32 1996
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 96 09:08:32 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14804 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 09:08:32 EST
 Message-Id: <9601171408.AA14804@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** ICOM *****
 
 --------------------------
 
 I-team:
 
 Dispite the first hand observations of trusted I-Force members that
 confirm many aspects of the imminent invasion of the United States, the
 I-Force council is still very suspicious of the G-Force in general. 
 Furthermore, the I-Force is not blindly loyal to any government.  It is
 the belief of the I-Force council that the current position of I-Force
 is one of great strength.  The I-Force council has asked the I-team to
 perform two tasks:
 
 	1 - Create a set of recomendations that can be adopted and which
 	will help get the US out of this current situation.  This plan should
 	assure that I-force security is not sacrificed while providing enough
 	assistance to get the job done.
 
 	2 - Develop plans for forming a secret alliance with the forces
 	now preparing for invasion so that, in the event that these forces
 	succeed, I-Force interests can be easily alligned with the invaders
 	and I-Force will become a key member of the resulting coalition
 	government.
---------------------------
 From mdevost@chelsea.ios.com  Wed Jan 17 12:55:52 1996
 Received: from chelsea.ios.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13666 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 12:55:52 EST
 Received: (from mdevost@localhost) by chelsea.ios.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id MAA27876; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 12:50:30 -0500
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 12:50:30 -0500 (EST)
 From: Matthew Devost 
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 In-Reply-To: <9601171408.AA14804@all.net> id AA14804 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 09:08:32 EST
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
 
 
 
 On Wed, 17 Jan -1 game@all.net wrote:
 >  	1 - Create a set of recomendations that can be adopted and which
 >  	will help get the US out of this current situation.  This plan should
 >  	assure that I-force security is not sacrificed while providing enough
 >  	assistance to get the job done.
 
 In the scenario provided, invading forces are severly detached from their 
 respective command authoraties.  Using softkill methods we disable their 
 communication and navigation systems, thus delaying invasion indefinitely 
 or forcing the invaders to initiate the invasion without central 
 guidance.   Of course, if other options, such as SIGINT are available, we 
 might want to utilize intelligence to stay one step ahead of the game.
 
 More later,
 
 Matt
---------------------------
 From shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil  Wed Jan 17 13:41:26 1996
 Received: from cs.nps.navy.mil by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA19266 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 13:41:26 EST
 Received: from prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil by cs.nps.navy.mil (4.1/SMI-4.1)
 	id AA12595; Wed, 17 Jan 96 10:41:23 PST
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 96 10:41:23 PST
 From: shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall)
 Message-Id: <9601171841.AA12595@cs.nps.navy.mil>
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 
 
 G-team:
   Reactions to scenario (as indicated by instructions):
     a) This is a _really_ risky situation.  Borrowing from the intellegence
        model of the world, we have forces with strong capabilities on our
        borders.  This scenario could become real dangerous (from external
        factors) real fast.  I think then we have a third task, which is to
        ensure that the attack situation is not exploited by the foreign
        forces.  To that extent, the first task is _real_ (in game context), 
        not just simulated.
 
      b) If I-force is at all competent (and their actions have shown that
         they are) then they'll be looking for the double cross.  Task 2 is
         the real difficulty of the matter.  What we have to do is develop
         task items for them in national defense that will result in information
         gain for us about who they are and what capabilities they have.
 
 Open questions:
    - What information-gathering resources do we have and can we covertly
      use?
    - What ways would national security actions show up via these resources?
    - What are plausible defenses of the US in the shared portion of the
      scenario?
 Others?
 				Tim
---------------------------
 From RDavies@domus.com  Wed Jan 17 14:32:15 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.domus.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA25417 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 14:32:15 EST
 Received: (from smap@localhost) by gatekeeper.domus.com (8.6.8/8.6.6) id OAA04330 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 14:39:03 -0500
 Received: from wpgate.domus.com(198.166.59.10) by gatekeeper0.domus.com via smap (V1.3)
 	id sma004328; Wed Jan 17 14:39:01 1996
 Received: from DOMUS-Message_Server by wpgate.domus.com
 	with Novell_GroupWise; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 14:33:30 -0500
 Message-Id: 
 X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 14:30:46 -0500
 From: Robert Davies 
 To: game@all.net
 Subject:  WarGame Communication -Reply
 
 
 
 >>>  01/17/96 06:42am >>>
 >From game  Wed Jan 17 06:42:21 1996
 Status: RO
 
 =================WarGame Message==================
 >From:    War Game
 Role:    Game Administrative Communication
 Subject: WarGame Communication
 To:      gamelist
 ==================Begin Message===================
  
  WarGame 96-01
  
  Scene 2
  
  
  	1 - Hawaii is being surrounded by a large naval force and
  	the US naval forces in Hawaii believe they may soon come under
  	attack from the air, from submarines, and from surface ships.
  	The force appears to consist of vessels from the European Union
  	and Japan.
  
  	4 - Using Cuba as a way point, Chinese forces appear to be
  	preparing to airdrop into Texas and Florida.  This report comes
  	from overflights and supports recent satellite information.
  
 ---
 One important thing to remember here is that the forces only "appear" to
 be from the specified nationality.  The use of disguise to appear as these
 countries could be being used to provoke a retaliation against them,
 when the real culprit is someone else...
 Or am I reading too  much into this?
 As Mat said, the use of SIGINT  is recommended here to confirm the
 nationality if possible, prior to any firm conclusions or initial
 recommendations being made.  HUMINT sources in Cuba (god knows we
 have to have SOMEONE there ;^), could help confirm the identity of the
 troops in Cuba.
 
 Just my intitial kick at the cat. (hey...meow...).
 TTYAS.
 Bob
 
 
---------------------------
 From cobbjw@ornl.gov  Wed Jan 17 19:53:25 1996
 Received: from cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA07425 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 19:53:25 EST
 Received: from [128.219.80.88] (cobbjwmac.cmo.ornl.gov [128.219.80.88]) by cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id TAA04058 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 19:53:35 -0500 (EST)
 X-Sender: z19@cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 19:53:37 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: cobbjw@ornl.gov (John W. Cobb)
 Subject: RE: Wargame - Introduction
 
 Sorry to have been out of touch -- busy y'know. I've had pressing peronsal
 and work issues so my wargame activities have been neglected for several
 days. I have no excuse except that I have to set priorities. Hopefully, I
 can be a little more active in the next day or so. This birings up a >Meta<
 comment about this game system. While the e-mail system is nice about not
 requiring people to be physically present, the interaction IS different.
 Answers are written and therefore somewhat more thought through then oral
 comments, but they are also devoid of the entire span of interpersonal
 coomunication that comes with FTF meetings. Also, it tends to take more
 time to accomplish. I would suggest makeing the moves last much longer than
 24 hours in order that tema members can actually have a chance to discuss
 issues. Otherwise the scenario seems to be careen higgedly-piggedly from
 pre-set gamemaster unveiling of actions as they occur. The team members
 will just ride along the scenario instead of being able to meaningfully
 reflect on options and suggest genuinely innovative courses of action.
 
 > end meta<
 
 Now for my short personal Bio.
 
 I am a computational/theoretical Physicist by training. My dissertation
 work concerned large-scale computer modelling an alternate fusion energy
 power concept called a "Field Reversed Configuration". Currently, I work at
 Oak Ridge National Laboratory (A Dept. of Energy multi-purpose research
 laboratory located in Tennessee.) Duties in my current position in ORNL's
 Office of Computing and Network Management include Coordination of
 Scientific Computing, Strategic Computing Planning, Program Development,
 and Technology Transfer. My interest in Information Warfare and my
 participation in this game is only marginally related to my professional
 work, but it does mesh with some of my personal and professional interests,
 particularly social consequences of the deployment of emerging
 technologies.
 
 -john .w cobb
 
 John W. Cobb                                    cobbjw@ornl.gov
 Office of Computing and Network Management       423.576.5439
 Oak Ridge National Laboratory
 MS-6486                                         "Quietly Making Noise"
 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6486                        -Jimmy Buffett
 
 
---------------------------
 From adept@minerva.cis.yale.edu  Wed Jan 17 20:27:45 1996
 Received: from minerva.cis.yale.edu by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA11323 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 20:27:45 EST
 Received: (from adept@localhost) by minerva.cis.yale.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA01446; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 20:27:37 -0500
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 20:27:36 -0500 (EST)
 From: Ben 
 X-Sender: adept@minerva
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: Intro
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
 
 Hey folks.
 
 I'm Ben Samman.  I'm a senior here at Yale that's graduating in May, 
 double-majoring in Political Science and Computer Science.  Indeed my 
 area of specialty in PS is IW and in CS it is INFOSEC/COMPUSEC.
 
 While I don't have the same background that most of y'all have from years 
 in industry, I hope I can bring a fresh point of view to the table that 
 will benefit us all.
 
 I can be reached at: adept@minerva.cis.yale.edu.
 
 Ben.
 ____
 Ben Samman..............................................samman@cs.yale.edu
 "If what Proust says is true, that happiness is the absence of fever, then
 I will never know happiness. For I am possessed by a fever for knowledge,
 experience, and creation."                                      -Anais Nin
 PGP Encrypted Mail Welcomed        Finger samman@suned.cs.yale.edu for key
 Want to hire a soon-to-be college grad? 		Mail me for resume
 
---------------------------
 From cobbjw@ornl.gov  Wed Jan 17 20:57:03 1996
 Received: from cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14692 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 20:57:03 EST
 Received: from [128.219.80.88] (cobbjwmac.cmo.ornl.gov [128.219.80.88]) by cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id UAA04515 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 20:57:13 -0500 (EST)
 X-Sender: z19@cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 20:57:14 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: cobbjw@ornl.gov (John W. Cobb)
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 
 Well,
 
 I'll take a cut at this situation this evening and try to look at things
 sometime tomorrow as well.
 
 
 
 > TOP SECRET - SCI - EYES ONLY - G-TEAM-MEMBERS
 
 So how does one shred e-mail? ;^}
 
 >
 > 	Unbeknownst to the I-Force, the entire coordinated threat to the
 > United States is a deception carried out with the assistance of allies
 > abroad at the request of the President of the United States.
 
 Nowe what $#^%^&%^&* fool thought of that dumb*** idea? I seem to recollect
 that in turn 1, G-force was pretty unanimous about being open.
 
 The most important factor in coming to an acceptable resolution of the
 I-force problem is to maintain crebility. Asking the rest of the world to
 mount a real or Faux invasion is probably THE WORST thing the president
 could do to destroy that credibility.
 
 My first suggestted course of action for the I-force is to find-out who
 recommended that course of action and sack them immediately!!!
 
 
 > 	1 - To create a set of plausible recommendations that will seem
 > 	to be designed to help the United States defend itself without
 > 	sacrificing I-Force security requirements.
 >
 > 	2 - To outline a plan of action by which the I-Force can be
 > 	substantially eliminated based on their partial acceptance of the
 > 	recommendations made under (1) above.
 
 Oh, so I get it. We DON'T do anything to try to come to a real resolution
 of this problem but rather we have EXPLICITLY embarked on a goal of
 complete annihilation of I-force's ability to project power. So did I miss
 somewhere directions to this effect? Personally, I think it is almost
 always easier to reach agreed accomodation instead of requiring the
 opponent to cry uncle. Unless there are very severe crimes against humanity
 this course should be tried.
 
 Well, enough of my personal opinions. I think it is clear that the CinC in
 this game has given us scorhed earth marching orders. To that extent it
 seems that even our diplomatic efforts are nothing more than subterfuge.
 
 I-force would be well-advised to sniff out the double-cross because that is
 exactly what we have been ordered to do.
 
 So let's ananlyze that framework. I see three very real dangers from this
 bird-brained staged crisis the president has precipitated.
 
 1) The "allies" the president has invited to posture against us will turn
 and take advantage of the situation for real conquest. In a real sense the
 president has opened the gates and invited the seizing army inside. By
 definition we are out to screw the I-force so we cannot rely on their
 assistance to be prepared to prevent this threat from becoming a reality.
 Even if they initially support the cooperative efforts, they will not do so
 once they learn we intend to double-cross. So now we see that this
 hair-brained staged invasion means that real military assets that could be
 used elsewhere will need to be committed to defense of our borders. We will
 ask the I-force to relinquish some of their control of the net but at the
 expense of us being required to commit very large portions of our physical
 military assets. We've swaped our Queen for their rook without a clear plan
 for check-mate. We've made our position worse.
 
 2) The I-force may be savvy enough to seize the opportunity to invite the
 external forces to come ahead in and depose G-force and install I-force. In
 short, I-force may turn a civil-war/coup into an externally supported
 effort. I think that this is a real prospect considering the cryptic
 message we received from a defector late in move 1, At least some I-force
 members beleive that we are at a water-shed where the old (read G-force)
 will be supplanted by the inevitable wave of the new (I-force).
 
 3) There is the chance of a mistake. Although the president has an
 understanding with the leaders of the other forces, I am sure that the fact
 that this is a fake invasion has not been communicated far down the chain
 of commands of either our military or our faux opponents. As in any
 conflict there is the real possibility that confusing rules of engagement,
 mistakes, and over-eagerness will force our hand into a conflict that is
 not planned (Shades of Tuchman's "Guns of August"). Such an accident could
 trigger problems 1) or 2) above. Additionally, even if G-force is wildly
 successful, the president will have a political debacle trying to explain
 how he could have orchestrated events that led to the needless death of 6
 U.S. servicemen for the sake in political intrigue against the I-force.
 Gosh this was really a STUPID idea!
 
 
 By the way that I see it, G-force has no alternative but to commit nearly
 all of our forces to a high state of readiness at all posts to both the
 fake and real threat of external agression. We should implement
 conservative rules of engagement to minimize the risk of accidental
 ignition.
 
 Now comes the hard part, we have to figure out how to sucker I-force into
 revealing itself.
 
 What I think we need to do is to sell I-force on the criticality of the
 problem so that we need their utmost cooperation. If we are going to
 squander our credibility, we should go all the way (heaven knows we will
 have to pay later.)
 
 Here is one way to try to sell them. Suggest that our only posture to be
 able to deter simultaneous aggression by multiple aggressive parties is
 nuclear deterrance. We must tell I-force that we need to re-target a
 portion of our nuclear weapons against all potential aggressors.
 
 Then we must sell I-force on the notion that we do not want accidental
 launch and that their shenigans have been so effective that we are
 concerned about the quality of our missile control and targeting systems.
 Therefore we need both their cooperation in not interfering with this
 effort and their assistance in repairing the damage. We can use their
 assistance in working with our teams to try to identify the I-force team.
 
 As a safeguard we must take the nuclear missiles off-line and require a separate
 line of authorization by the backdoor methods we have implemented during
 this crisis in order to be sure that I-force will not be able to initiate
 launch.
 
 Now if our "allies" have been foolhardy enough to mobilize forces in a
 staged crisis (think of their internal political problems with that) then
 they shouldn't blink about being tageted by warheads in a simliarly staged
 response -- well we have suspending disbelief a long time ago anyway.
 
 This is a big gamble. If I-force outfoxes us, they will have control over
 nuclear weapons. But it is the only way I see to convincingly sell them on
 the need to cooperate and risk being discovered. Of course if their leader
 is as gullible as the President was in staging this fake attack, maybe we
 should tell I-force their shoe is untied :>
 
 The other response is to make our statement that we wish to retarget a PORTION
 of our missiles, so we can hold some back and keep them away from I-force
 as a reserve should we need a REAL deterrance if our allies turn on us.
 
 So here is my suggestted list of actions:
 
 ACTIONS:
 1) activate all forces (includiong reserves) and stand at or near maximum
 readiness in a defensive posture will conservative rules of engagement.
 
 2) Invite I-force to "help" re-targeting 1/2 of our nuclear missiles. Use
 this exercise to extract information about I-force membership to penetrate
 their information centers. Consider preparations at a later time for an
 assualt on I-force, either physically or electronically.
 
 3) Physically secure missiles from launch by a seperate, additional layer
 of command authorization which will be required for launch. Additionally,
 remove requirements for standard authorization method on a porton of hte
 remaining missilesso that G-force can control them even if I-force
 interferes electronically.
 
 4) Pubicly announce the re-targeting for U.S. consumption. Privately advise
 allies staging the attack that they need not worry (and hope we can keep
 THAT promise).
 
 
 BTW, in the last turn I made a declaration about being a disaffected IF'er
 and asked the game system to make their communications available. Well, I
 never heard anything back from it, so I guess the notion of being able to
 "POSIT" conditions is not really true (see my previous >META< comment about
 the game system just taking us for a ride instead of actually allowing the
 participants to affect the outcome).
 
 
 > TOP SECRET - SCI - EYES ONLY - G-TEAM-MEMBERS
 
 oh , and shush, don't tell those I-forces about our little secret ,
 
 -john .w cobb
 
 John W. Cobb                                    cobbjw@ornl.gov
 Office of Computing and Network Management       423.576.5439
 Oak Ridge National Laboratory
 MS-6486                                         "Quietly Making Noise"
 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6486                        -Jimmy Buffett
 
 
---------------------------
 From mjsus@atlanta.com  Wed Jan 17 21:47:13 1996
 Received: from atlanta.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA24013 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 21:47:13 EST
 Received: from mjsus.atlanta.com (mjsus.atlanta.com [155.229.129.103]) by atlanta.com (8.7.1/8.6.4) with SMTP id VAA09584 for ; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 21:42:34 -0500 (EST)
 Message-Id: <199601180242.VAA09584@atlanta.com>
 X-Sender: mjsus@pop.atlanta.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 21:47:13 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: mjsus@atlanta.com
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 
 
 I thought that the I-force could initiate the following main IW actions:
 
 1. Identify and study  main enemy leaders, their communication systems and
 their main alliances
 
 2. Develop the strategy to distrupt the enemy's communication system by
 utilizing the following techniques
 
               1. Create an open and reliable commuication channels with main
 enemy's alliances
               2. Disseminate "deceiving information" to your main's enemy's
 alliances against the main enemy
               3. Disseminate "deceiving information" to all enemy's
 intelligence channels by identifying and using:
                         1. Enemy's intelligence collectors: human,
 satellites and other
                         2. Any direct battle contacts with the enemy or its
 alliances
 
 3. Provide the enemy's intelligence sources information about major
 defensive preparation in any suspected battle areas. For example, provide
 the information that both Florida and Texas are prepared to fight against
 any airdrops or ground attacks.
 
 4. Identify all terrorist cells inside the Continental US and remove these
 groups from their existing locations and isolate them so that they can be
 monitored and controlled during the crisis. At the same time, feed the
 enemy's intelligence channels and the media the appropriate information that
 there are no terrorist attacks.
 
 5. Develop "the counterattack strategy" and communicate it to the enemy's
 intelligence to redirect the enemy's main efforts from an offensive warfare
 to the defensive warfare. At the same time, plan, develop and design the
 real counter attack strategy against the enemy's current offensive areas. 
 
 Best regards,
 
 Mark
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Wed Jan 17 22:46:24 1996
 Received: from ix10.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA00674 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 17 Jan 96 22:46:24 EST
 Received: from  by ix10.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id TAA16507; Wed, 17 Jan 1996 19:45:55 -0800
 Date: Wed, 17 Jan 1996 19:45:55 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601180345.TAA16507@ix10.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: Preliminary Assessment
 To: game@all.net.G-team:Reactions.to.scenario:    (as indicated by instructions)
 
 I agree with Tim that the biggest danger seems to be the external 
 "threats". There are three different reasons for this:
 
 1. One of them may decide to take advantage of a sudden change in the 
 situation for their own advantage. (I don't see why they should be 
 loyal to the US or the President beyond their own self interest)
 
 2. They may not be doing this at the request of the President, but with 
 the connivance of the i-force.  Just because the president believes he 
 knows what is going on doesn't mean he does.
 
 3. The total confusion of the situation can lead to many very costly 
 HONEST mistakes.
 
 The problems of cooperation with the i-force are:
  
 1. What do they know about the external situation?
 2. How are they connected with the external situation?
 3. Can they be expected to take any actual joint action with us, or 
 merely share intelligence?
 
 In addition to tim's open questions:
 
 1. what kind of dis-information can we send out to determine the 
 strength of i-force intelligence?
 2. what information can we expect from the i-force in detemining 
 localised strength estimates?
 
  
 Any one else??
 
 NOTE: I am having difficulties getting to my e-mail account. This seems 
 to be area wide down here, but the i-force MIGHT be involved.
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Thu Jan 18 08:42:13 1996
 Received: from ix5.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA06370 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 18 Jan 96 08:42:13 EST
 Received: from  by ix5.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id FAA09577; Thu, 18 Jan 1996 05:42:10 -0800
 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 05:42:10 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601181342.FAA09577@ix5.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: Question
 To: game@all.net
 
 John Cobbs comments bring to mind two interesting questions:
 
 Whose side IS the President on ?
 What can we do about it?
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Thu Jan 18 12:47:12 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA03629 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 18 Jan 96 12:47:12 EST
 Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by gatekeeper.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id RAA12343; Thu, 18 Jan 1996 17:44:42 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id am06109;
           18 Jan 96 17:47 WET
 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 96 12:23 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: Unable to get any time until weekend
 Message-Id: <65960118172356/0005514706DC4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 Need to either have the turn due on Monday, or need to pass baton to
 someone who thinks they can handle it.  Frankly, my first pass on the
 scenario is that, in real life, I would offer my resignation to command.
 Disregard for our advice, putting the country into grave risk (I don't
 trust any force approaching the borders), and the almost certain
 result that I-Force will discover the ruse and make matters worse,
 leaving the country wide open.
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Thu Jan 18 13:08:55 1996
 Received: from ix13.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA05963 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 18 Jan 96 13:08:55 EST
 Received: from  by ix13.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id KAA03465; Thu, 18 Jan 1996 10:08:52 -0800
 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 10:08:52 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601181808.KAA03465@ix13.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: Re: Unable to get any time until weekend
 To: game@all.net
 
 MW Wrote:
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > Need to either have the turn due on Monday, or need to pass baton to
 > someone who thinks they can handle it.  Frankly, my first pass on the
 > scenario is that, in real life, I would offer my resignation to  
 command.
 > Disregard for our advice, putting the country into grave risk (I 
 don't
 > trust any force approaching the borders), and the almost certain
 > result that I-Force will discover the ruse and make matters worse,
 > leaving the country wide open.
 > MW
 > 
 >===================End Message====================
 >
 While I agree with your assessment of our CiC, (see my last note),
 I suggest that in real life your resignation would not be best. While 
 it is unclear who the true enemy are (I-force, foreign forces, 
 President, etc.) you are in a position to TRY something where you are.
 
 A best shot might be to tell the I-force what has been done, and try to 
 get them to band with the g-force to destroy the "friendly" foreign 
 forces, and then split up what is left in the end (which may not be a 
 hell of a lot)
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil  Thu Jan 18 13:42:29 1996
 Received: from cs.nps.navy.mil by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA09489 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 18 Jan 96 13:42:29 EST
 Received: from prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil by cs.nps.navy.mil (4.1/SMI-4.1)
 	id AA19807; Thu, 18 Jan 96 10:42:25 PST
 From: shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall)
 Received: by prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil (4.1) id AA03015; Thu, 18 Jan 96 10:42:24 PST
 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 96 10:42:24 PST
 Message-Id: <9601181842.AA03015@prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil>
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: Re: Unable to get any time until weekend
 
 
 Michael Thayer's suggestion:
 
 > A best shot might be to tell the I-force what has been done, and try to 
 > get them to band with the g-force to destroy the "friendly" foreign 
 > forces, and then split up what is left in the end (which may not be a 
 > hell of a lot)
 
 Has a lot of merit!
   a) It has the potential to build a lot of credability with the I-Force.
   b) It opens real communication, and offers the opportunity for accomodation.
   c) Destruction of the "friendly" forces aren't required - simple
      neutralization will do.
 
 Recommendations:
   a) Send a DIPCOM message to I-Force, containing the G-Force "eyes only"
      message and disclaiming task 2.  We don't need to know who I-Force is,
      or to eliminate them, we need to reach an accomodation and move toward
      stability. In this message, request immediate dialogue on resolving this
      issue directly with the I-Force.
   b) Request that the president immediately mobilize all conventional forces
      to defensive postures against the external threats.  Indicate to I-Force
      via a DIPCOM message that this is recommended.  Request their assistance
      in facilitating this defense, by "cosigning" through their established
      channels into the conventional forces.
   c) Request the president ask the forign forces to withdraw, via established
      communication channels.
 
 In short, let's stop whispering among ourselves and reacting to the scenario,
 and let's start taking control of it in concert with the I-Force.
 				Tim
---------------------------
 From cobbjw@ornl.gov  Thu Jan 18 14:42:51 1996
 Received: from cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA15866 for /u/game/bin/game; Thu, 18 Jan 96 14:42:51 EST
 Received: from [128.219.80.88] (cobbjwmac.cmo.ornl.gov [128.219.80.88]) by cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id OAA02386 for ; Thu, 18 Jan 1996 14:42:54 -0500 (EST)
 X-Sender: z19@cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Thu, 18 Jan 1996 14:42:55 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: cobbjw@ornl.gov (John W. Cobb)
 Subject: What does I-force think?
 
 I had a night to think about the scenario. The question I have been
 wrestling with is "What does I-force think and what are their
 instructions?"
 
 Looking at our instructions, I would guess that the scenario-master has
 given the I-force instructions that are equally extreme as the instructions
 given to us, the G-force. So I would bet either that I-force is attempting
 use the call for cooperation as a ruse to defeat the G-force or else they
 have been instructed to initiate a dislogue with the massed friendlies to
 make an info-coup an armed coup or civil war. Given our interaction with
 the scenario generator thus far, I would be surprised if I-force's command
 instructions would allow them to pursue mediation either.
 
 
 Now what about the psychology of the I-force members themselves? Well
 judging from our comments, they are probably more pre-disposed to mediation
 than the scenario allows, as we are.
 
 Well, that's my guess at this point. Other thoughts from fellow team members?
 
 Looking at the collected comments I've seen go past my site they seem to
 follow one of 2 courses.
 
 1) Play along with the scenario and try to figure out a way to sucker-punch
 the I-force, eventhough we question the position that the CinC has placed
 us into, we will go along, follow orders, and give a recommendation.
 
 or
 
 2) Attempt to break-out of the scenario, or at least explore the game's
 ability to adapt to our reactions by either:
 
    a) Resigning en-mass. "Homey don't play that game"
    b) Deposing the president through constitutional or extra-constitutional
       means. I think this means either treason (if we do it forcibly) or almost
       certain capitulation to the I-force if we try to do it via constitutional
       means (In some sense this would almost seem to be the G-force BECOMING an
       I-force in oppopsing the president.)
    c) Openly flouting the president's orders and initiating contact with
 I-force
       to attempt resolution.
 
 I think all three of these break-out scenarios could be called treason or
 insubordination. Now this brings us back to the old question of where do
 our oaths of loyalty reside and when should a military officer refuse an
 order. I won't rehash them here though. (I already drone on).
 
 Just one final comment. If we genuinely hold out the olive branch to the
 I-force we need to be sure that they are not preparing to sucker-punch us.
 I think is is a good bet that the I-force players may be a spre-disposed to
 talking it through as we are, there is still enough of a chance that they
 are not that our course of action should include some measure that will
 demonstrate their commitment (just as we will probably be asked the smae
 thing) - "Trust, but verify."
 
 >meta<
 In terms of game mechanics, I would vote to ask for an extension until Monday
 to give Michael Wilson time to collect and collate. I certainly will not
 have the time personally to try to do this function.
 
 I also kind-of liked the idea of requiring the G-force team leader to do
 his own synthesis of our conversation. It really is a lot like a
 real-command decision in that subordinates are suggesting courses of
 action, but the leader must make the final call. It mimics real command
 rather than having a more bridge-club like discussion.
 
 I would suggest that Michael might want to make more demands of his G-force
 subordinates to address specifics, etc. But with only 48 hours (or even the
 later Monday deadline) it if difficult to have any intr-force dialog much
 beyond simply weighing-in.
 
 >end meta<
 
 cheers,
 
 -john .w cobb
 
 John W. Cobb                                    cobbjw@ornl.gov
 Office of Computing and Network Management       423.576.5439
 Oak Ridge National Laboratory
 MS-6486                                         "Quietly Making Noise"
 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6486                        -Jimmy Buffett
 
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sat Jan 20 05:19:11 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13749 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 05:19:11 EST
 Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by gatekeeper.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id KAA01161; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 10:16:46 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id an12859;
           20 Jan 96 10:19 WET
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 96 00:01 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: Notes on this move
 Message-Id: <75960120050157/0005514706DC1EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 To:	G-force and whomever else may be listening on this channel
 Fr:	Michael Wilson, G-force team leader
 Re:	Current situation
 
 Forgive my being redundant, but let me examine the situation in some small 
 detail, taking in to account our previous move, and how I would like to resolve 
 this move.
 
 The military situation--
 Frankly, I suspect that our CinC has made a tactical error.  Considering the 
 global situation, I refuse to believe that we can trust any potential force 
 anywhere near our borders.  We have been assured by Command that these forces 
 are in fact our own or invited to be where they are, acting as shadows into the 
 infosphere; do we take this as a legitimate statement?
 
 - Hawaii appears to be threatened by surfaces forces, submarine based forces, 
 and a likely Marine-style assault.  I wish anyone attempting such a foolish 
 manoeuvre luck--Hawaii must be just about the hardest target to sneak up on 
 these days, and if the forces truly are EU and Japanese, they should remember 
 what this sort of attack got them the last time they tried it;
 - An entry into Alaska via the North Pole, potentially the Russians, is almost 
 humorous.  They might be better off trying to move into some of the rougher 
 parts of New York City; the Alaskans are better armed and have the home ground;
 - The threat at the Mexican border is slightly more troubling.  Are they really 
 'near relic' tanks?  A drive across the border could actually penetrate fairly 
 deeply before a force could swing around and kick them in the ass; meanwhile, a 
 lot of border-raid style bandito action will be occurring;
 - An airdrop into Texas and Florida by the Chinese by way of Cuba?  Based on 
 questionable sources (electronic intelligence).  Anything with a range to drop 
 men into Texas can do it along the Eastern Seaboard;
 - Domestic terrorists, potentially a Jihad (a poorly applied term, by the way). 
 More a job for John Law, but that takes time.
 
 What is the purpose of such forces?
 - Any problem that the U.S. has with fuel concerns is a global issue; since the 
 U.S. gobbles a big piece of the pie, the neighbors are inviting themselves to 
 dinner;
 - The U.S. doesn't really have any allies, just allies-of-convenience; anyone 
 who can sneak up and take advantage of Uncle Sam is going to give it a shot;
 - In theory, these forces are making their moves based on Presidential 
 invitation; anyone who remembers places like Afghanistan realizes that just 
 makes things worse;
 - By establishing an external threat, the CinC and the advisors appear to be 
 looking for a mechanism to unite the public; I think it will backfire.
 
 What is our relationship with I-force?
 I'm going to assume that our last message, the letter to the President where we 
 recommended a policy of total honesty, was sent by us to I-force.  I would 
 certainly have done it if the game didn't get called immediately.  I still think
 we should follow such a policy.
 
 How would I have dealt with I-force?  Simple.  I still think they didn't intend 
 to become the next government, and they didn't want to be criminals; I think 
 they made some bad choices (aka, game admin gave it to them).  So we would 
 slowly have moved to establish physical control of critical pieces of the 
 national infrastructure.  In places where a critical system was in dispute, we 
 would have used confrontation tactics--any fight for control would have forced 
 an I-force member to use active measures to retain control, which could have be 
 tracked back to said member.  Piece by piece the net would have come back under 
 secure control.  Instead, we've moved to a point where by some half-baked 
 diplomatic distraction, we're trying to make I-force surface.
 
 I reject this philosophical approach, and I reject this course of action.
 
 What are we really looking at here?
 The invasions may be real, in whole or part.  I am willing to give an almost 
 certainty estimation on at least on direction of attack being real.
 I-force may be independent, or may be controlled from abroad; they certainly 
 will find out about any ruse that is being run by the government.  Too big a 
 deception, with too great a public relations mess to maintain so many players 
 keeping mum.  Their course of action?  Scramble what they can, attack us on all 
 fronts, and any way about it, we get left wide open to foreign attack.
 The public is still confused; while the attacking forces may be in our pocket, 
 and while I-force might be in foreign control, I can guarantee you that the 
 press is the enemy.
 
 I propose we follow our original strategy:
 -- Rely on the truth.  Tell I-force that we've been asked to eliminate them as a
 threat; we ask for them to stand down while we move to cope with the external 
 threat.  If they are an independent group, they lose nothing by backing 
 down--they still have access to the network later on.  If they are foreign 
 controlled, this is their time to move; because of this, we must maintain 
 command and control through the GWEN2 commo system.  We move to a confrontation 
 system directly after we deal with the external threat, unless we feel at such 
 time I-force will not reactivate.
 -- I-force may be used to attack the potential invading forces.  Catch this 
 double-bind.  If we use them prior to attack by any external force, we may be 
 turning friendlies into enemies.  If we wait until after a confirmed attack on 
 American soil, it may be too late, as I-force may be foreign controlled.  If we 
 ask them to demonstrate their goodwill by taking offensive action, we still 
 can't trust that it wasn't intended as a coordinated effort.  So guess 
 what--trust, but verify.  Ask them to stand down, and wait to see what they do. 
 If they really have, then the next move is to inform them that we recommend 
 amnesty and ask them to renounce I-force.  If not, we go Soviet on them.  In 
 fact, I'm fighting against a strong streak (borne of such training) to simply 
 initiate tactics to take out I-force now, but I see that as being 
 counterproductive.
 -- I-force is going to be distrustful of us.  I can't blame them, I sure would 
 be.  We burn that bridge when we come to it.
 -- That external threat... We adopt a radical poison pill strategy; prepare to 
 damage any productive resource in regions that are actually invaded.  Military 
 hardware doesn't need to be scuttled, it will be busy being used.  The military 
 network for nuclear weapons must be prepared to go active, and possibly fire on 
 any country that is the sponsor of an invading force.  All messages will travel 
 via secure courier; no missiles are time-critical, so the delay helps prevent 
 confusion of targets.
 
 Please feel free to chime in and round out the strategy on any points you feel I
 missed or went light on.  I'm still prepared to submit a resignation in the next
 turn if the CinC continues to disregard a sane approach; I don't like 
 crapshoots, and we're dealing with someone who doesn't know when to walk away 
 from the table.
 
 MW
 
 P.S. to game admin, thanks for delaying the turn deadline; I think perhaps you 
 might want to think about longer time periods inside the turn loop, otherwise I 
 won't be able to play -and- serve my clients.
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sat Jan 20 05:19:15 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13764 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 05:19:15 EST
 Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by gatekeeper.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id KAA11550; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 10:16:50 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id aq12859;
           20 Jan 96 10:19 WET
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 96 00:02 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: DIPCOM
 Message-Id: <94960120050249/0005514706DC1EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 ***** DIPCOM *****
 
 To:	All forces
 Fr:	G-force leader, Michael Wilson
 Re:	Threat
 
 We are currently marshalling our resources and strategy to cope with the 
 threat--please be patient while we attempt to manage the chaos and confusion on 
 our end.  Our forces are still horribly impacted by the recent difficulties, a 
 state which works to neither of our benefits against the current threat.
 
 Best wishes,
 MW
 
---------------------------
The address you posted from (DIPCOM0005514706@mcimail.com) is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sat Jan 20 18:21:25 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA27285 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 18:21:25 EST
 Received: from mailgate2.mcimail.com (mailgate2.mcimail.com [166.38.40.100]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id XAA06476; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 23:23:13 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate2.mcimail.com id af08821;
           20 Jan 96 23:21 WET
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 96 18:20 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: Diplomatic Communication
 Message-Id: <80960120232008/0005514706DC1EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 ***** DIPCOM *****
 
 To:	All forces
 Fr:	G-force leader, Michael Wilson
 Re:	Threat
 
 We are currently marshalling our resources and strategy to cope with the 
 threat--please be patient while we attempt to manage the chaos and confusion on 
 our end.  Our forces are still horribly impacted by the recent difficulties, a 
 state which works to neither of our benefits against the current threat.
 
 Best wishes,
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From mdevost@chelsea.ios.com  Sat Jan 20 18:26:42 1996
 Received: from chelsea.ios.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA28200 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 18:26:42 EST
 Received: from ios.ios.com (ppp-50.ts-2.dc.idt.net [169.132.17.173]) by chelsea.ios.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA01829 for ; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 18:20:58 -0500
 Message-Id: <2.2.32.19960120232415.00697cdc@chelsea.ios.com>
 X-Sender: mdevost@chelsea.ios.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32)
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 18:24:15 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: "Matthew G. Devost" 
 Subject: Leader...
 
 We seem to be having a participation problem again.
 
 Who is our leader for this session?
 
 Later,
 
 Matt
 ________________________________________________________________
 Matthew G. Devost          They tell me that this is "cyberspace."
 mdevost@chelsea.ios.com    I don't know what cyberspace is.
                            But, it sure feels like home.
                                             -Garth Brooks
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Sat Jan 20 20:40:39 1996
 Received: from ix4.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA11803 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 20:40:39 EST
 Received: from  by ix4.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id RAA11492; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 17:40:36 -0800
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 17:40:36 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601210140.RAA11492@ix4.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: Current situation
 To: game@all.net.To:G-force.and.whomever.else.may.be.listening.on.this.channel.Fr:Michael.Thayer.Re:Current.situation
 
 While I agree with most of MW's assessment and proposed actions there 
 are two problems that I have.
 1. =============================================================
 >>- That external threat... We adopt a radical poison pill strategy; 
 >>prepare to  damage any productive resource in regions that are 
 >>actually invaded.  Military  hardware doesn't need to be scuttled, 
 >>it will be busy being used.  The military  network for nuclear 
 >>weapons must be prepared to go active, and possibly fire on  any 
 >>country that is the sponsor of an invading force.  All messages will 
 >>travel  via secure courier; no missiles are time-critical, so the 
 >>delay helps prevent  confusion of targets.
 ==================================================================
 This might be making the CinC's ruse an even more idiotic maneuver than 
 necessary, as we run the risk of alienating whatever friends we may 
 have left internationally.  (I agree that "The U.S. doesn't really have 
 any allies, just allies-of-convenience; anyone who can sneak up and 
 take advantage of Uncle Sam is going to give it a shot", but some will 
 not see that as in their long range interest unless we ask them in to 
 help and then beat the crap out of them for doing so.
 
 I would thus prefer that the scorched earth policy have some strngent 
 guidlines on the notion of "sponsor of an invading force".  And that we 
 request the President to communicate these to the good friends that are 
 mounting this phony attack for him.  If they choose to ignore these, 
 THEN let'em rip.
 
 
 2. =============================================================
 
 
 My second concern is the nature of the CinC's whole strategy to this 
 point: grant (for the sake of argument) that he is not some foreign 
 power's mole.  What about the people who counseled him to pull this 
 invasion stunt? 
  If we do have a concern about them, how do we let the CinC know 
 without losing our (g-force's)own creditability?
 
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From mjsus@atlanta.com  Sat Jan 20 21:10:40 1996
 Received: from atlanta.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14516 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 21:10:40 EST
 Received: from mjsus.atlanta.com (mjsus.atlanta.com [155.229.129.103]) by atlanta.com (8.7.1/8.6.4) with SMTP id VAA26189 for ; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 21:06:05 -0500 (EST)
 Message-Id: <199601210206.VAA26189@atlanta.com>
 X-Sender: mjsus@pop.atlanta.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 21:10:43 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: mjsus@atlanta.com
 Subject: Re: Leader...
 
 > We seem to be having a participation problem again.
 > 
 > Who is our leader for this session?
 > 
 > Later,
 > 
 > Matt
 > __>
 
 I think that Matt is right ... we really should have an proactive leader ...
 if this person is not assigned yet, I think that we should do it ASAP...
 
 Regards,
 
 Mark
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sat Jan 20 21:46:25 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA17771 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 21:46:25 EST
 Received: from mailgate2.mcimail.com (mailgate2.mcimail.com [166.38.40.100]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id CAA02775; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 02:48:13 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate2.mcimail.com id ab26851;
           21 Jan 96 2:46 WET
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 96 21:44 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: Current situation
 Message-Id: <50960121024405/0005514706DC3EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 About my poison pill comments:
 You'll notice that I introduced the dependency on any such action:
 Destruction of domestic assets only within an area that is falling into
 foreign control; I would assume that such actions would be taken by
 military forces in command in the region.
 Retaliation will only occur against targets that take unauthorized or
 unapproved actions (in my opinion, ANY actions) on American soil.  The
 question is one of degree.
 I-force will be asked to stand down until after the crisis, which should
 simply be a matter of getting such a committment from them.
 Does that make things slightly more clear on how I think we should
 approach?
 Now we just need to hear back from I-force.
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From rjones@wicker.com  Sat Jan 20 22:01:17 1996
 Received: from woven.wicker.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA19117 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 22:01:17 EST
 Message-Id: 
 From: rjones@wicker.com (Ry Jones)
 Subject: Re: Leader...
 To: game@all.net
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 18:57:03 -0800 (PST)
 In-Reply-To: <199601210206.VAA26189@atlanta.com> from "game@all.net" at Jan 20, 96 09:10:43 pm
 Reply-To: rjones@wicker.com
 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
 Content-Type: text
 Content-Length: 801       
 
 Mark,
 You're it.
 Ry
 > 
 > >From mjsus@atlanta.com  Sat Jan 20 21:10:40 1996
 > Status: RO
 > 
 > =================WarGame Message==================
 > >From:    Mark J. Saarelainen
 > Role:    I-Force Team Member
 > Subject: Re: Leader...
 > To:      i-force
 > ==================Begin Message===================
 >  > We seem to be having a participation problem again.
 >  > 
 >  > Who is our leader for this session?
 >  > 
 >  > Later,
 >  > 
 >  > Matt
 >  > __>
 >  
 >  I think that Matt is right ... we really should have an proactive leader ...
 >  if this person is not assigned yet, I think that we should do it ASAP...
 >  
 >  Regards,
 >  
 >  Mark
 >  
 > ===================End Message====================
 > 
 
 
 -- 
 Finest handcrafted code since 1987.
 Ry's Pathetic Homepage
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Sat Jan 20 23:17:53 1996
 Received: from ix3.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA26098 for /u/game/bin/game; Sat, 20 Jan 96 23:17:53 EST
 Received: from  by ix3.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id UAA25391; Sat, 20 Jan 1996 20:17:53 -0800
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 1996 20:17:53 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601210417.UAA25391@ix3.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: RE: Current situation
 To: game@all.net
 
 Michael Wilson wrote: 
 [snip]
 
 > About my poison pill comments:
 [snip]
 > Retaliation will only occur against targets that take unauthorized or
 > unapproved actions (in my opinion, ANY actions) on American soil.  
 >The question is one of degree.
 
 ..
 > Does that make things slightly more clear on how I think we should
 > approach?
 
 Yes, clear.  It seems fine to me.
 MT
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Sun Jan 21 00:01:22 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA00131 for /u/game/bin/game; Sun, 21 Jan 96 00:01:22 EST
 Received: from mailgate2.mcimail.com (mailgate2.mcimail.com [166.38.40.100]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id FAA01224; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 05:03:11 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate2.mcimail.com id ae28144;
           21 Jan 96 5:01 WET
 Date: Sat, 20 Jan 96 23:59 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: Current situation
 Message-Id: <94960121045949/0005514706DC2EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 My review of our recent orders makes me slightly nervous about the time
 limit until the next move is due; we need to provide a co-ordinated plan
 with I-force as well as our own specific recommendations.  Guess what?
 That leaves us with an I-force dependency.  Boom.  So now we have to add
 in a another set of options--I-force is going to ignore us, or they are
 having their own Boyd loop problems.
 If we don't hear, we are going to have to get some sort of traffic
 analysis from admin--something we would have in a real life scenario.  Are
 they ignoring us, or just out of it.  Also, for the attention of game
 admin, shoot me some sort of analysis telling me whether any I-force
 traffic supports their being controlled by a foreign entity or entities.
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From fc  Sun Jan 21 07:12:18 1996
 From: fc (Fred Cohen)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA08894 for /u/game/bin/game; Sun, 21 Jan 96 07:12:18 EST
 Message-Id: <9601211212.AA08894@all.net>
 Subject: I-force team leader
 To: game@all.net
 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 07:12:18 -0500 (EST)
 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
 Content-Type: text
 Content-Length: 247       
 
 ***** ICOM *****
 
 mjsus@atlanta.com has now been named I-force team leader for this move.
 Any questions, please send to fc@all.net
 
 -> See: Info-Sec Heaven at URL http://all.net/
 Management Analytics - 216-686-0090 - PO Box 1480, Hudson, OH 44236
---------------------------
 From mjsus@atlanta.com  Sun Jan 21 10:21:44 1996
 Received: from atlanta.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA26122 for /u/game/bin/game; Sun, 21 Jan 96 10:21:44 EST
 Received: from mjsus.atlanta.com (mjsus.atlanta.com [155.229.129.103]) by atlanta.com (8.7.1/8.6.4) with SMTP id KAA06241 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 10:17:08 -0500 (EST)
 Message-Id: <199601211517.KAA06241@atlanta.com>
 X-Sender: mjsus@pop.atlanta.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 10:21:47 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: mjsus@atlanta.com
 Subject: Re: I-force team leader
 
 
 > mjsus@atlanta.com has now been named I-force team leader for this move.
 > Any questions, please send to fc@all.net
 > 
 
 Because I was named to be the team leader, I suggest that all team members
 shall take the following actions steps:
 
                 1. Provide 5-10 unique strategic plan actions steps for the
 team's review
                 2. I shall consolidate all action steps to the main action
 item listing
                 3. I shall provide the action item listing / IW Strategic
 Plan to all team members for review 
                 4. Team Member shall review and provide additional comments
 on the Strategic Plan
                 5.  .. and and additional instructions shall follow.....
 
 I have provide my 5 actions items for everybody's review... please, provide
 your within two days (today 1/21/96).
 
 Regards,
 
 Mark
 
 ****************************************************************
 Markku J. Saarelainen                  	Tel: USA-(770)-998-7855
 P.O.Box 1672                           	FAX: USA-(770)-232-1425
 Roswell, GA 30077, USA              Email: mjsus@atlanta.com
 
 DISCLAIMER:     
 No thought written in this message is a statement of any 
 organization by which I am employed or for which I work. 
 
 The author of ....."Quality Systems Behavior Newsletter" (QSBN)
                            "Global Strategic Systems Newsletter" (GSSN)
 *****************************************************************
 
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Sun Jan 21 20:27:04 1996
 Received: from ix2.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA24249 for /u/game/bin/game; Sun, 21 Jan 96 20:27:04 EST
 Received: from  by ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id RAA03647; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 17:27:05 -0800
 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 17:27:05 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601220127.RAA03647@ix2.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: In a vacuum
 To: game@all.net
 
 does this section of g-force usually act in such an information vacuum?
 
 I would have expected info-glut, not sensory deprivation
 
 
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From mjsus@atlanta.com  Sun Jan 21 22:04:11 1996
 Received: from atlanta.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA02497 for /u/game/bin/game; Sun, 21 Jan 96 22:04:11 EST
 Received: from mjsus.atlanta.com (mjsus.atlanta.com [155.229.129.103]) by atlanta.com (8.7.1/8.6.4) with SMTP id VAA19548 for ; Sun, 21 Jan 1996 21:59:34 -0500 (EST)
 Message-Id: <199601220259.VAA19548@atlanta.com>
 X-Sender: mjsus@pop.atlanta.com
 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Sun, 21 Jan 1996 22:04:11 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: mjsus@atlanta.com
 Subject: Additional Information  ----> Strategic Plan Development ...
 
 
 Because I was named to be the team leader, I suggest that all team members
 shall take the following actions steps:
 
  1. Provide 5-10 unique strategic plan actions steps for the team's review
  2. I shall consolidate all action steps to the main action item listing
  3. I shall provide the action item listing / IW Strategic Plan to all team
 members for review 
  4. Team Member shall review and provide additional comments on the
 Strategic Plan
  5.  .. and additional instructions shall follow.....
 
 I have provided my five actions items for everybody's review (see the list
 below)... please, provide yours within two days (today = 1/21/96).
 
 Regards,
 
 Mark
 
 ------------------------------------------------------
 
 I thought that the I-force could initiate the following main IW actions:
 
 1. Identify and study  main enemy leaders, their communication systems and
 their main alliances
 
 2. Develop the strategy to weaken the enemy's communication system by
 utilizing the following techniques
 
      1. Create an open and reliable communication channels with main enemy's
 alliances
      2. Disseminate "deceiving information" to your main enemy's alliances
 against the main enemy
      3. Disseminate "deceiving information" to all enemy's intelligence
 channels by identifying and using:
               1. Enemy's intelligence collectors: human, satellites and other
               2. Any direct battle contacts with the enemy or its alliances
 
 3. Provide the enemy's intelligence sources information about major
 defensive preparation in any suspected battle areas. For example, provide
 the information that both Florida and Texas are prepared to fight against
 any airdrops or ground attacks.
 
 4. Identify all terrorist cells inside the Continental US and remove these
 groups from their existing locations and isolate them so that they can be
 monitored and controlled during the crisis. At the same time, feed the
 enemy's intelligence channels and the media the appropriate information that
 there are no terrorist attacks.
 
 5. Develop "the counterattack strategy" and communicate it to the enemy's
 intelligence to redirect the enemy's main efforts from an offensive warfare
 to the defensive warfare. At the same time, plan, develop and design the
 real counter attack strategy against the enemy's current offensive areas.
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Mon Jan 22 01:07:50 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA18969 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 22 Jan 96 01:07:50 EST
 Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by gatekeeper.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id GAA15592; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 06:05:27 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id aa28323;
           22 Jan 96 6:07 WET
 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 96 01:07 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 Message-Id: <74960122060747/0005514706DC2EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 To:	President of the United States
 Fr:	G-Force Team Leader
 CC:	G-Force
 Re:	Action
 
 Sir:
 
 *** This is much the same report as the one sent to you via the common channel, 
 with only a few additional comments on implementation and reasoning.
 
 It is to my deep regret that I report we have been unsuccessful in communicating
 for a cooperative strategy with the members of the domestic action group 
 I-Force.  This may be intentional, as they do not have a level of trust with our
 organization; this may be unintentional, as the complex events of the time have 
 disrupted many communication paths and effected many lived adversely.  Because 
 of this failure, for which I must take responsibility, we present to you the 
 best option strategy for this time.
 
 *** Any details that can be provided on the traffic of I-Force would help us to 
 make an assessment of the current capabilities of the Force, and whether they 
 have foreign control, aid, or contact.
 
 Hostile Forces (External)
 Military forces are poised to attack on the soil of the United States by every 
 conceivable means, and on almost every front.  Military forces must be put on 
 full alert, with full military protocol in force to prepare for such attacks.  
 We recommend a log-scale response in our rules of engagement; no hostile action 
 equates to no hostile response, but if force is offered, it must be returned 
 quickly and decisively.  To reduce any friendly fire problems, we recommend full
 usage of IFF systems by ALL friendly forces; full category and role 
 identification should be implemented, including an issue of provisional status 
 to any I-Force members who wish to claim such.
 
 *** If forces are potentially friendly, we need to establish these key rules of 
 engagement; it insures that we don't hurt allies, and provides for a response if
 any forces attempt to take advantage of the situation.
 
 Considering the magnitude of the threat facing the Nation, it is possible that 
 force being met with greater force may not be sufficient to the task.  We 
 recommend a poison pill strategy be taken by military support and local National
 Guard forces across the country.  Forces attacking will be doing so for access 
 or control of the not inconsiderable American resources; if a region is going to
 be lost, in the opinion of the region's military command structure, then any 
 non-mobile resources must be made inaccessible to what must be considered an 
 investing force.  Local populations must be encouraged to move back from border 
 areas, or prepare to be behind the lines and in a hostile combat environment.  
 The poison pill strategy should be announced--while it sacrifices a small 
 strategic edge of surprise, the greater strategic value helping to prevent an 
 actual invasion may be worthwhile.
 
 *** Once again, the helps prevent any allies from thinking it to their advantage
 to actually invest a part of the United States.
 
 Finally, retaliation may be a necessary part of the logarithmic - response 
 spectrum.  Loss of an area to an opponent should lead to a punishment being 
 delivered--preferably by missile.  The option to go nuclear is a political one, 
 but it is the belief of the force that only such a response being ready will act
 as a serious enough deterrent factor in the political decisions of hostile 
 nations.  Command and control these forces should be via secured physical 
 mechanism--instant retaliation is not necessary, and in fact may be 
 counterproductive.  Threat of launch may be sufficient to convince hostile 
 forces into retrograde action; the delay of a physical delivery in the message 
 loop also gives enough time to provide solid confirmation of the identity and 
 sponsor of the hostile force.  A nuclear package is not the sort of thing you 
 deliver to the wrong address.
 
 *** This provides the final reminder that the American government is still a 
 dominant power, and not lightly trifled with.
 
 Hostile Forces (Internal)
 Any terrorist groups operating inside the water's edge, while a serious threat, 
 must be handled within the structure of FBI response teams and other relevant 
 Law Enforcement Agencies.  Military assistance will be provided if and only if 
 the groups are using Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), and then only on a 
 limited basis.
 
 *** This maintains a necessary split as required by the Constitution.
 
 While the media must be considered a 'hostile' force at this time, we endorse a 
 policy of disclosure to cut the veil of confusion.  The public must be made 
 aware of the level of danger they are facing, and it is the belief of the group 
 that, as much as the media might resist it, they will fall into line and behave 
 in a proper and responsible fashion in the face of the grave threat.
 
 The other force to be considered is that of the 'I-Force.'  We ask them at this 
 time to stand their own forces down and cease all operations.  If indeed all 
 hostile operations cease, we endorse a policy of full amnesty for these forces. 
 The possibility remains that I-Force is, in whole or part, foreign controlled; 
 any hostile movements taken by the I-Force after this point will be considered 
 confirmation of their foreign control or other negative intent, and they will be
 treated as an element of the invading force.  I-Force members who wish to 
 cooperate with G-Force in the defense of the nation may do so by establishing 
 physical contact with the military arm nearest them; we recommend that they do 
 not wear civilian clothing, and adopt a patch or other symbol which they inform 
 us of as soon as possible (see Geneva Code).  Additional, I-Force is notified 
 that we will be moving to regain complete control of all national resources 
 during this time of crisis.  Any group or element attempting to resist the 
 reassertion of control will be viewed as a hostile element, and will be treated 
 as such.
 
 *** I-Force members who 'surrender' must be treated with honor; they can be used
 in a positive fashion, or isolated during the course of hostilities in special 
 battalions who are essentially orthogonal to the command structure.  Control of 
 the infrastructure should be through confrontation methods--one a system by 
 system basis, overwhelming effort will be used to reassert control; hostile 
 forces must either release control, or attempt to fight for it, which will 
 require them to act in trackable realtime.  This effort should be backed up by 
 as much of the domestic trusted forces as can be used; such teams must be used 
 in redundant effort to confirm trust.
 
 Conclusion
 All that remains us is to wait, and attempt to keep control of events as they 
 unfold.  We hope that the Commander-in-Chief will see fit to include us in the 
 strategic decisions, rather than so far into the decision cycle.
 
 Best wishes,
 MW
 G-Force Leader
 
 [Note to G-Force:  This is prelim, I'll ship the final if nobody has
 comments; the 'common' channel message is the same body minus the comments
 to the CinC.]
 
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Mon Jan 22 09:34:44 1996
 Received: from ix2.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA02904 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 22 Jan 96 09:34:44 EST
 Received: from  by ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id GAA06626; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 06:34:45 -0800
 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 06:34:45 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601221434.GAA06626@ix2.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 To: game@all.net
 
 > 
 > [Note to G-Force:  This is prelim, I'll ship the final if nobody has
 > comments; the 'common' channel message is the same body minus the 
 comments
 > to the CinC.]
 > 
 >===================End Message====================
 >
 Looks best possible in the circumstances.
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Mon Jan 22 11:29:50 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13042 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:29:50 EST
 Received: from mailgate2.mcimail.com (mailgate2.mcimail.com [166.38.40.100]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id QAA08965; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 16:31:22 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate2.mcimail.com id ah12606;
           22 Jan 96 16:30 WET
 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:28 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 Message-Id: <90960122162809/0005514706DC4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 ***** DIPCOM *****
 
 To:	President of the United States
 Fr:	G-Force Team Leader
 CC:	G-Force, I-Force Team Leader, I-Force Team
 Re:	Action
 
 Sir:
 
 It is to my deep regret that I report we have been unsuccessful in communicating
 for a cooperative strategy with the members of the domestic action group 
 I-Force.  This may be intentional, as they do not have a level of trust with our
 organization; this may be unintentional, as the complex events of the time have 
 disrupted many communication paths and effected many lived adversely.  Because 
 of this failure, for which I must take responsibility, we present to you the 
 best option strategy for this time.
 
 Hostile Forces (External)
 Military forces are poised to attack on the soil of the United States by every 
 conceivable means, and on almost every front.  Military forces must be put on 
 full alert, with full military protocol in force to prepare for such attacks.  
 We recommend a log-scale response in our rules of engagement; no hostile action 
 equates to no hostile response, but if force is offered, it must be returned 
 quickly and decisively.  To reduce any friendly fire problems, we recommend full
 usage of IFF systems by ALL friendly forces; full category and role 
 identification should be implemented, including an issue of provisional status 
 to any I-Force members who wish to claim such.
 
 Considering the magnitude of the threat facing the Nation, it is possible that 
 force being met with greater force may not be sufficient to the task.  We 
 recommend a poison pill strategy be taken by military support and local National
 Guard forces across the country.  Forces attacking will be doing so for access 
 or control of the not inconsiderable American resources; if a region is going to
 be lost, in the opinion of the region's military command structure, then any 
 non-mobile resources must be made inaccessible to what must be considered an 
 investing force.  Local populations must be encouraged to move back from border 
 areas, or prepare to be behind the lines and in a hostile combat environment.  
 The poison pill strategy should be announced--while it sacrifices a small 
 strategic edge of surprise, the greater strategic value helping to prevent an 
 actual invasion may be worthwhile.
 
 Finally, retaliation may be a necessary part of the logarithmic - response 
 spectrum.  Loss of an area to an opponent should lead to a punishment being 
 delivered--preferably by missile.  The option to go nuclear is a political one, 
 but it is the belief of the force that only such a response being ready will act
 as a serious enough deterrent factor in the political decisions of hostile 
 nations.  Command and control these forces should be via secured physical 
 mechanism--instant retaliation is not necessary, and in fact may be 
 counterproductive.  Threat of launch may be sufficient to convince hostile 
 forces into retrograde action; the delay of a physical delivery in the message 
 loop also gives enough time to provide solid confirmation of the identity and 
 sponsor of the hostile force.  A nuclear package is not the sort of thing you 
 deliver to the wrong address.
 
 Hostile Forces (Internal)
 Any terrorist groups operating inside the water's edge, while a serious threat, 
 must be handled within the structure of FBI response teams and other relevant 
 Law Enforcement Agencies.  Military assistance will be provided if and only if 
 the groups are using Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), and then only on a 
 limited basis.
 
 While the media must be considered a 'hostile' force at this time, we endorse a 
 policy of disclosure to cut the veil of confusion.  The public must be made 
 aware of the level of danger they are facing, and it is the belief of the group 
 that, as much as the media might resist it, they will fall into line and behave 
 in a proper and responsible fashion in the face of the grave threat.
 
 The other force to be considered is that of the 'I-Force.'  We ask them at this 
 time to stand their own forces down and cease all operations.  If indeed all 
 hostile operations cease, we endorse a policy of full amnesty for these forces. 
 The possibility remains that I-Force is, in whole or part, foreign controlled; 
 any hostile movements taken by the I-Force after this point will be considered 
 confirmation of their foreign control or other negative intent, and they will be
 treated as an element of the invading force.  I-Force members who wish to 
 cooperate with G-Force in the defense of the nation may do so by establishing 
 physical contact with the military arm nearest them; we recommend that they do 
 not wear civilian clothing, and adopt a patch or other symbol which they inform 
 us of as soon as possible (see Geneva Code).  Additional, I-Force is notified 
 that we will be moving to regain complete control of all national resources 
 during this time of crisis.  Any group or element attempting to resist the 
 reassertion of control will be viewed as a hostile element, and will be treated 
 as such.
 
 Conclusion
 All that remains us is to wait, and attempt to keep control of events as they 
 unfold.  We hope that the Commander-in-Chief will see fit to include us in the 
 strategic decisions, rather than so far into the decision cycle.
 
 Best wishes,
 MW
 G-Force Team Leader
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Mon Jan 22 11:31:28 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13240 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:31:28 EST
 Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by gatekeeper.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id QAA09715; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 16:28:56 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id ay08515;
           22 Jan 96 16:31 WET
 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:28 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 Message-Id: <75960122162857/0005514706DC4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 To:	President of the United States
 Fr:	G-Force Team Leader
 CC:	G-Force
 Re:	Action
 
 Sir:
 
 *** This is much the same report as the one sent to you via the common channel, 
 with only a few additional comments on implementation and reasoning.
 
 It is to my deep regret that I report we have been unsuccessful in communicating
 for a cooperative strategy with the members of the domestic action group 
 I-Force.  This may be intentional, as they do not have a level of trust with our
 organization; this may be unintentional, as the complex events of the time have 
 disrupted many communication paths and effected many lived adversely.  Because 
 of this failure, for which I must take responsibility, we present to you the 
 best option strategy for this time.
 
 *** Any details that can be provided on the traffic of I-Force would help us to 
 make an assessment of the current capabilities of the Force, and whether they 
 have foreign control, aid, or contact.
 
 Hostile Forces (External)
 Military forces are poised to attack on the soil of the United States by every 
 conceivable means, and on almost every front.  Military forces must be put on 
 full alert, with full military protocol in force to prepare for such attacks.  
 We recommend a log-scale response in our rules of engagement; no hostile action 
 equates to no hostile response, but if force is offered, it must be returned 
 quickly and decisively.  To reduce any friendly fire problems, we recommend full
 usage of IFF systems by ALL friendly forces; full category and role 
 identification should be implemented, including an issue of provisional status 
 to any I-Force members who wish to claim such.
 
 *** If forces are potentially friendly, we need to establish these key rules of 
 engagement; it insures that we don't hurt allies, and provides for a response if
 any forces attempt to take advantage of the situation.
 
 Considering the magnitude of the threat facing the Nation, it is possible that 
 force being met with greater force may not be sufficient to the task.  We 
 recommend a poison pill strategy be taken by military support and local National
 Guard forces across the country.  Forces attacking will be doing so for access 
 or control of the not inconsiderable American resources; if a region is going to
 be lost, in the opinion of the region's military command structure, then any 
 non-mobile resources must be made inaccessible to what must be considered an 
 investing force.  Local populations must be encouraged to move back from border 
 areas, or prepare to be behind the lines and in a hostile combat environment.  
 The poison pill strategy should be announced--while it sacrifices a small 
 strategic edge of surprise, the greater strategic value helping to prevent an 
 actual invasion may be worthwhile.
 
 *** Once again, the helps prevent any allies from thinking it to their advantage
 to actually invest a part of the United States.
 
 Finally, retaliation may be a necessary part of the logarithmic - response 
 spectrum.  Loss of an area to an opponent should lead to a punishment being 
 delivered--preferably by missile.  The option to go nuclear is a political one, 
 but it is the belief of the force that only such a response being ready will act
 as a serious enough deterrent factor in the political decisions of hostile 
 nations.  Command and control these forces should be via secured physical 
 mechanism--instant retaliation is not necessary, and in fact may be 
 counterproductive.  Threat of launch may be sufficient to convince hostile 
 forces into retrograde action; the delay of a physical delivery in the message 
 loop also gives enough time to provide solid confirmation of the identity and 
 sponsor of the hostile force.  A nuclear package is not the sort of thing you 
 deliver to the wrong address.
 
 *** This provides the final reminder that the American government is still a 
 dominant power, and not lightly trifled with.
 
 Hostile Forces (Internal)
 Any terrorist groups operating inside the water's edge, while a serious threat, 
 must be handled within the structure of FBI response teams and other relevant 
 Law Enforcement Agencies.  Military assistance will be provided if and only if 
 the groups are using Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), and then only on a 
 limited basis.
 
 *** This maintains a necessary split as required by the Constitution.
 
 While the media must be considered a 'hostile' force at this time, we endorse a 
 policy of disclosure to cut the veil of confusion.  The public must be made 
 aware of the level of danger they are facing, and it is the belief of the group 
 that, as much as the media might resist it, they will fall into line and behave 
 in a proper and responsible fashion in the face of the grave threat.
 
 The other force to be considered is that of the 'I-Force.'  We ask them at this 
 time to stand their own forces down and cease all operations.  If indeed all 
 hostile operations cease, we endorse a policy of full amnesty for these forces. 
 The possibility remains that I-Force is, in whole or part, foreign controlled; 
 any hostile movements taken by the I-Force after this point will be considered 
 confirmation of their foreign control or other negative intent, and they will be
 treated as an element of the invading force.  I-Force members who wish to 
 cooperate with G-Force in the defense of the nation may do so by establishing 
 physical contact with the military arm nearest them; we recommend that they do 
 not wear civilian clothing, and adopt a patch or other symbol which they inform 
 us of as soon as possible (see Geneva Code).  Additional, I-Force is notified 
 that we will be moving to regain complete control of all national resources 
 during this time of crisis.  Any group or element attempting to resist the 
 reassertion of control will be viewed as a hostile element, and will be treated 
 as such.
 
 *** I-Force members who 'surrender' must be treated with honor; they can be used
 in a positive fashion, or isolated during the course of hostilities in special 
 battalions who are essentially orthogonal to the command structure.  Control of 
 the infrastructure should be through confrontation methods--one a system by 
 system basis, overwhelming effort will be used to reassert control; hostile 
 forces must either release control, or attempt to fight for it, which will 
 require them to act in trackable realtime.  This effort should be backed up by 
 as much of the domestic trusted forces as can be used; such teams must be used 
 in redundant effort to confirm trust.
 
 Conclusion
 All that remains us is to wait, and attempt to keep control of events as they 
 unfold.  We hope that the Commander-in-Chief will see fit to include us in the 
 strategic decisions, rather than so far into the decision cycle.
 
 Best wishes,
 MW
 G-Force Team Leader
 
---------------------------
 From   Mon Jan 22 11:32:13 1996
 Received: from mail6.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13329 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:32:13 EST
 Received: from localhost by mail6.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom)
 	id IAA11194; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:31:29 -0800
 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:31:29 -0800
 From: Mailer-Daemon@netcom.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
 Subject: Returned mail: Bad usage
 Message-Id: <199601221631.IAA11194@mail6.netcom.com>
 To: 
 
 The original message was received at Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:31:15 -0800
 from netcomsv.netcom.com [192.100.81.101]
 
    ----- The following addresses had delivery problems -----
 "|/usr/ucb/vacation ddt"  (unrecoverable error)
     (expanded from: )
 
    ----- Transcript of session follows -----
 vacation: No message to send
 cannot open database /u2/ddt/.vacation
 500 "|/usr/ucb/vacation ddt"... Bad usage
 
    ----- Original message follows -----
 Return-Path: 
 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com by mail6.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom)
 	id IAA11165; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:31:15 -0800
 From: game@all.net
 Received: from all.net by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1)
 	id IAA26408; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 08:30:53 -0800
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA13227 for ddt@lsd.com; Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:31:09 EST
 Date: Mon Jan 22 11:29:55 EST 1996
 Originally-From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 To: ddt@lsd.com
 X-Class: Fast
 Precedence: first-class
 Priority: fast
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Message-Id: <90960122162809/0005514706DC4EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 To: game 
 Date: Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:28 EST
           22 Jan 96 16:30 WET
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate2.mcimail.com id ah12606;
 Received: from mailgate2.mcimail.com (mailgate2.mcimail.com [166.38.40.100]) by gatekeeper2.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id QAA08965; Mon, 22 Jan 1996 16:31:22 GMT
         id AA13042 for /u/game/bin/game; Mon, 22 Jan 96 11:29:50 EST
 Received: from gatekeeper2.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
 
 >From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Mon Jan 22 11:29:50 1996
 Status: RO
 
 =================WarGame Message==================
 >From:    Michael Wilson
 Role:    G-Force Team Leader
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 To:      gamelist
 ==================Begin Message===================
  
  To:	President of the United States
  Fr:	G-Force Team Leader
  CC:	G-Force, I-Force Team Leader, I-Force Team
  Re:	Action
  
  Sir:
  
  It is to my deep regret that I report we have been unsuccessful in communicating
  for a cooperative strategy with the members of the domestic action group 
  I-Force.  This may be intentional, as they do not have a level of trust with our
  organization; this may be unintentional, as the complex events of the time have 
  disrupted many communication paths and effected many lived adversely.  Because 
  of this failure, for which I must take responsibility, we present to you the 
  best option strategy for this time.
  
  Hostile Forces (External)
  Military forces are poised to attack on the soil of the United States by every 
  conceivable means, and on almost every front.  Military forces must be put on 
  full alert, with full military protocol in force to prepare for such attacks.  
  We recommend a log-scale response in our rules of engagement; no hostile action 
  equates to no hostile response, but if force is offered, it must be returned 
  quickly and decisively.  To reduce any friendly fire problems, we recommend full
  usage of IFF systems by ALL friendly forces; full category and role 
  identification should be implemented, including an issue of provisional status 
  to any I-Force members who wish to claim such.
  
  Considering the magnitude of the threat facing the Nation, it is possible that 
  force being met with greater force may not be sufficient to the task.  We 
  recommend a poison pill strategy be taken by military support and local National
  Guard forces across the country.  Forces attacking will be doing so for access 
  or control of the not inconsiderable American resources; if a region is going to
  be lost, in the opinion of the region's military command structure, then any 
  non-mobile resources must be made inaccessible to what must be considered an 
  investing force.  Local populations must be encouraged to move back from border 
  areas, or prepare to be behind the lines and in a hostile combat environment.  
  The poison pill strategy should be announced--while it sacrifices a small 
  strategic edge of surprise, the greater strategic value helping to prevent an 
  actual invasion may be worthwhile.
  
  Finally, retaliation may be a necessary part of the logarithmic - response 
  spectrum.  Loss of an area to an opponent should lead to a punishment being 
  delivered--preferably by missile.  The option to go nuclear is a political one, 
  but it is the belief of the force that only such a response being ready will act
  as a serious enough deterrent factor in the political decisions of hostile 
  nations.  Command and control these forces should be via secured physical 
  mechanism--instant retaliation is not necessary, and in fact may be 
  counterproductive.  Threat of launch may be sufficient to convince hostile 
  forces into retrograde action; the delay of a physical delivery in the message 
  loop also gives enough time to provide solid confirmation of the identity and 
  sponsor of the hostile force.  A nuclear package is not the sort of thing you 
  deliver to the wrong address.
  
  Hostile Forces (Internal)
  Any terrorist groups operating inside the water's edge, while a serious threat, 
  must be handled within the structure of FBI response teams and other relevant 
  Law Enforcement Agencies.  Military assistance will be provided if and only if 
  the groups are using Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs), and then only on a 
  limited basis.
  
  While the media must be considered a 'hostile' force at this time, we endorse a 
  policy of disclosure to cut the veil of confusion.  The public must be made 
  aware of the level of danger they are facing, and it is the belief of the group 
  that, as much as the media might resist it, they will fall into line and behave 
  in a proper and responsible fashion in the face of the grave threat.
  
  The other force to be considered is that of the 'I-Force.'  We ask them at this 
  time to stand their own forces down and cease all operations.  If indeed all 
  hostile operations cease, we endorse a policy of full amnesty for these forces. 
  The possibility remains that I-Force is, in whole or part, foreign controlled; 
  any hostile movements taken by the I-Force after this point will be considered 
  confirmation of their foreign control or other negative intent, and they will be
  treated as an element of the invading force.  I-Force members who wish to 
  cooperate with G-Force in the defense of the nation may do so by establishing 
  physical contact with the military arm nearest them; we recommend that they do 
  not wear civilian clothing, and adopt a patch or other symbol which they inform 
  us of as soon as possible (see Geneva Code).  Additional, I-Force is notified 
  that we will be moving to regain complete control of all national resources 
  during this time of crisis.  Any group or element attempting to resist the 
  reassertion of control will be viewed as a hostile element, and will be treated 
  as such.
  
  Conclusion
  All that remains us is to wait, and attempt to keep control of events as they 
  unfold.  We hope that the Commander-in-Chief will see fit to include us in the 
  strategic decisions, rather than so far into the decision cycle.
  
  Best wishes,
  MW
  G-Force Team Leader
  
 ===================End Message====================
 
---------------------------
The address you posted from () is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From game  Tue Jan 23 05:05:29 1996
 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 96 05:05:29 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14338 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 23 Jan 96 05:05:29 EST
 Message-Id: <9601231005.AA14338@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GAME *****
 
 Test of the game communications system (per the request of Michael
 Wilson)
 
---------------------------
 From   Tue Jan 23 05:06:31 1996
 Received: from mail.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14490 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 23 Jan 96 05:06:31 EST
 Received: from localhost by mail.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom)
 	id CAA25610; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 02:06:02 -0800
 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 02:06:02 -0800
 From: Mailer-Daemon@netcom.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem)
 Subject: Returned mail: Bad usage
 Message-Id: <199601231006.CAA25610@mail.netcom.com>
 To: 
 
 The original message was received at Tue, 23 Jan 1996 02:06:00 -0800
 from netcomsv.netcom.com [192.100.81.101]
 
    ----- The following addresses had delivery problems -----
 "|/usr/ucb/vacation ddt"  (unrecoverable error)
     (expanded from: )
 
    ----- Transcript of session follows -----
 vacation: No message to send
 cannot open database /u2/ddt/.vacation
 500 "|/usr/ucb/vacation ddt"... Bad usage
 
    ----- Original message follows -----
 Return-Path: 
 Received: from netcomsv.netcom.com by mail.netcom.com (8.6.12/Netcom)
 	id CAA25607; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 02:06:00 -0800
 From: game@all.net
 Received: from all.net by netcomsv.netcom.com with SMTP (8.6.12/SMI-4.1)
 	id CAA03039; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 02:05:55 -0800
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA14467 for ddt@lsd.com; Tue, 23 Jan 96 05:06:17 EST
 Date: Tue Jan 23 05:05:31 EST 1996
 Originally-From: game (WarGame)
 Subject: WarGame Communication
 To: ddt@lsd.com
 X-Class: Fast
 Precedence: first-class
 Priority: fast
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 Message-Id: <9601231005.AA14338@all.net>
         id AA14338 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 23 Jan 96 05:05:29 EST
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 96 05:05:29 EST
 
 >From game  Tue Jan 23 05:05:29 1996
 Status: RO
 
 =================WarGame Message==================
 >From:    War Game
 Role:    Game Administrative Communication
 Subject: WarGame Communication
 To:      gamelist
 ==================Begin Message===================
  
  Test of the game communications system (per the request of Michael
  Wilson)
  
 ===================End Message====================
 
---------------------------
The address you posted from () is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From mthayer@ix.netcom.com  Tue Jan 23 09:19:08 1996
 Received: from ix.ix.netcom.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA04900 for /u/game/bin/game; Tue, 23 Jan 96 09:19:08 EST
 Received: from  by ix.ix.netcom.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1/Netcom)
 	id GAA25405; Tue, 23 Jan 1996 06:19:11 -0800
 Date: Tue, 23 Jan 1996 06:19:11 -0800
 Message-Id: <199601231419.GAA25405@ix.ix.netcom.com>
 From: mthayer@ix.netcom.com (Michael Thayer )
 Subject: Re: WarGame Communication
 To: game@all.net
 
 You wrote: 
 >
 >>From game  Tue Jan 23 05:05:29 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    War Game
 >Role:    Game Administrative Communication
 >Subject: WarGame Communication
 >To:      gamelist
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > 
 > Test of the game communications system (per the request of Michael
 > Wilson)
 > 
 >===================End Message====================
 >
 Received
 -- 
 Michael
 ================================
 My other computer is an Apple II
 
---------------------------
 From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Wed Jan 24 11:33:54 1996
 Received: from gatekeeper.mcimail.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA16193 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 24 Jan 96 11:33:54 EST
 Received: from mailgate.mcimail.com (mailgate.mcimail.com [166.38.40.3]) by gatekeeper.mcimail.com (8.6.12/8.6.10) with SMTP id QAA32588; Wed, 24 Jan 1996 16:31:28 GMT
 Received: from mcimail.com by mailgate.mcimail.com id cw21575;
           24 Jan 96 16:25 WET
 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 96 11:22 EST
 From: Michael Wilson <0005514706@mcimail.com>
 To: game 
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 Message-Id: <51960124162215/0005514706DC6EM@MCIMAIL.COM>
 
 Team,
 Since the system appears to be live, and I have heard anyone call the
 turn, we should keep in action.
 First, sound off so I know who is actually live on the wire these days.
 Second, any comments on the turn I handed in?  We might still have time
 to refine it; I see it more as getting ready for action and how to play
 the waiting game, but someone may have better ideas.
 Third, should we continue to try to chat with I-Force?  About what?
 Forth, anyone care to posit why the turn wasn't called?  I'm beginning
 to feel more like the white mouse heading through the grey maze to touch
 the red lever myself; are these scenarios helping anyone out there with
 their thinking on infowar?
 MW
 
---------------------------
 From shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil  Wed Jan 24 13:19:00 1996
 Received: from cs.nps.navy.mil by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA24554 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 24 Jan 96 13:19:00 EST
 Received: from prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil by cs.nps.navy.mil (4.1/SMI-4.1)
 	id AA14590; Wed, 24 Jan 96 10:18:57 PST
 From: shimeall@cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall)
 Received: by prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil (4.1) id AA01747; Wed, 24 Jan 96 10:18:55 PST
 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 96 10:18:55 PST
 Message-Id: <9601241818.AA01747@prudence.cs.nps.navy.mil>
 To: game@all.net
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 
 
 I'm still around.  I've no further comments - except I still think we
 should try a DIPCOM asking the I-Force to get in contact, ahead of further
 developments. It would be interesting to move this game into one in which
 the players are more proacting than reacting to the game management.
 				Tim
---------------------------
 From cobbjw@ornl.gov  Wed Jan 24 13:47:51 1996
 Received: from cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA26853 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 24 Jan 96 13:47:51 EST
 Received: from [128.219.80.88] (cobbjwmac.cmo.ornl.gov [128.219.80.88]) by cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov (8.7.1/8.7.1) with SMTP id NAA25254 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 1996 13:48:01 -0500 (EST)
 X-Sender: z19@cosmail3.ctd.ornl.gov
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 13:48:00 -0500
 To: game@all.net
 From: cobbjw@ornl.gov (John W. Cobb)
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 
 >>From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Wed Jan 24 11:33:54 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    Michael Wilson
 >Role:    G-Force Team Member
 >Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 >To:      g-force
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > Team,...
 
 
 > First, sound off so...
 
 Wire's still live here.
 
 
 > Third, should we continue to try to chat with I-Force?  About what? ...
 
 Well, I kind of said my piece already and it seems that we are pretty much
 in agreement up to this point.
 
 The only thing I can think to do beyond M's already submitted turn advice
 to the P is perhaps to continue to initiate I-force contact.
 
 Shimeall's "Is anybody out-there" suggestion is probably a good start. In fact
 I'll take a cut at phrasing another msg.
 
 >DIPCOM< to I-f from G-f
 
 Together, we are facing a critical situation from external forces. We, the
 G-force, feels that there is an immediate and urgent need for I-F and G-F
 to cooperate in order to protect our common interests from external
 threats. To that end, we need to develop both a familiarity and a working
 relationship between our groups. Any such arrangement must be a mutually
 arrived at, effective arrangement. We are requesting an I-force response to
 this invitation. We propose to begin a dialogue between us that will,
 hopefully, lead to just such a working arrangement.
 
 Please respond ASAP, preferable before the end of the current game-turn.
 
 >end<
 
 -john .w cobb
 
 John W. Cobb                                    cobbjw@ornl.gov
 Office of Computing and Network Management       423.576.5439
 Oak Ridge National Laboratory
 MS-6486                                         "Quietly Making Noise"
 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6486                        -Jimmy Buffett
 
 
---------------------------
 From Pelican@interramp.com  Wed Jan 24 15:09:12 1996
 Received: from smtp1.interramp.com by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA03477 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 24 Jan 96 15:09:12 EST
 Received: from [38.12.4.84] by smtp1.interramp.com (8.6.12/SMI-4.1.3-PSI-irsmtp)
 	id PAA16395; Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:09:12 -0500
 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:09:12 -0500
 X-Sender: cd000674@pop3.interramp.com (Unverified)
 Message-Id: 
 Mime-Version: 1.0
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 To: game@all.net
 From: Pelican@interramp.com (Bob McKisson)
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 
 Well, I'm trying to lurk while we rebuild after a near disasterous fire.
 But we are still hear.  don't be confused by the change in address from
 dolphin to pelican, we just had to re-route the taffic through Pelican in
 order to stay on-line.  This is not a spoof.
 
 rmck
 
 >>From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Wed Jan 24 11:33:54 1996
 >Status: RO
 >
 >=================WarGame Message==================
 >>From:    Michael Wilson
 >Role:    G-Force Team Member
 >Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 >To:      g-force
 >==================Begin Message===================
 > Team,
 > Since the system appears to be live, and I have heard anyone call the
 > turn, we should keep in action.
 > First, sound off so I know who is actually live on the wire these days.
 > Second, any comments on the turn I handed in?  We might still have time
 > to refine it; I see it more as getting ready for action and how to play
 > the waiting game, but someone may have better ideas.
 > Third, should we continue to try to chat with I-Force?  About what?
 > Forth, anyone care to posit why the turn wasn't called?  I'm beginning
 > to feel more like the white mouse heading through the grey maze to touch
 > the red lever myself; are these scenarios helping anyone out there with
 > their thinking on infowar?
 > MW
 >
 >===================End Message====================
 
 ________________________
 Bob McKisson
 CEO
 Cypress Systems Corporation
 3702 Pender Drive
 McLean, VA 22102
 (703) 273-2150  Voice
 (703) 273-2151  FAX
 (703) 691-2434 STU-III
 pelican@interramp.com
 dolphin@interramp.com
 
 "Technology is great and wonderful, but only selling creates wealth."
 
 
---------------------------
The address you posted from (pelican@interramp.com) is not properly registered for this game
---------------------------
 From fc  Wed Jan 24 15:28:15 1996
 From: fc (Fred Cohen)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA04987 for /u/game/bin/game; Wed, 24 Jan 96 15:28:15 EST
 Message-Id: <9601242028.AA04987@all.net>
 Subject: RE: WarGame Communication (fwd)
 To: game (WarGame)
 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:28:14 -0500 (EST)
 X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL22]
 Content-Type: text
 Content-Length: 2907      
 
 ***** GCOM *****
 Forwarded message:
 > From game@all.net Wed Jan 24 15:09:17 1996
 > Date: Wed Jan 24 15:09:15 EST 1996
 > From: game@all.net
 > Originally-From: Pelican@interramp.com (Bob McKisson)
 > Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 > To: fc@all.net
 > X-Class: Fast
 > Precedence: first-class
 > Priority: fast
 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 > To: game@all.net
 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
 > Mime-Version: 1.0
 > Message-Id: 
 > X-Sender: cd000674@pop3.interramp.com (Unverified)
 > Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:09:12 -0500
 > 	id PAA16395; Wed, 24 Jan 1996 15:09:12 -0500
 > 
 > >From Pelican@interramp.com  Wed Jan 24 15:09:12 1996
 > Status: RO
 > 
 > =================WarGame Message==================
 > From:    unknown
 > Role:    unknown
 > Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 > To:      admin
 > ==================Begin Message===================
 >  Well, I'm trying to lurk while we rebuild after a near disasterous fire.
 >  But we are still hear.  don't be confused by the change in address from
 >  dolphin to pelican, we just had to re-route the taffic through Pelican in
 >  order to stay on-line.  This is not a spoof.
 >  
 >  rmck
 
 pelican has been placed on G-force and this message properly forwarded.
 
 >  
 >  >>From 0005514706@mcimail.com  Wed Jan 24 11:33:54 1996
 >  >Status: RO
 >  >
 >  >=================WarGame Message==================
 >  >>From:    Michael Wilson
 >  >Role:    G-Force Team Member
 >  >Subject: RE: WarGame Communication
 >  >To:      g-force
 >  >==================Begin Message===================
 >  > Team,
 >  > Since the system appears to be live, and I have heard anyone call the
 >  > turn, we should keep in action.
 >  > First, sound off so I know who is actually live on the wire these days.
 >  > Second, any comments on the turn I handed in?  We might still have time
 >  > to refine it; I see it more as getting ready for action and how to play
 >  > the waiting game, but someone may have better ideas.
 >  > Third, should we continue to try to chat with I-Force?  About what?
 >  > Forth, anyone care to posit why the turn wasn't called?  I'm beginning
 >  > to feel more like the white mouse heading through the grey maze to touch
 >  > the red lever myself; are these scenarios helping anyone out there with
 >  > their thinking on infowar?
 >  > MW
 >  >
 >  >===================End Message====================
 >  
 >  ________________________
 >  Bob McKisson
 >  CEO
 >  Cypress Systems Corporation
 >  3702 Pender Drive
 >  McLean, VA 22102
 >  (703) 273-2150  Voice
 >  (703) 273-2151  FAX
 >  (703) 691-2434 STU-III
 >  pelican@interramp.com
 >  dolphin@interramp.com
 >  
 >  "Technology is great and wonderful, but only selling creates wealth."
 >  
 >  
 > ===================End Message====================
 > 
 
 -> See: Info-Sec Heaven at URL http://all.net/
 Management Analytics - 216-686-0090 - PO Box 1480, Hudson, OH 44236
---------------------------
 From game  Fri Jan 26 08:39:20 1996
 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 08:39:20 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA17931 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 26 Jan 96 08:39:20 EST
 Message-Id: <9601261339.AA17931@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GAME *****
 
 Attention
 
 	The WarGame is now over.  The communications system will be
 shutting down very soon.  Team leaders should forward final reports
 in within the next 1 hour.
 
 	We thank you for playing the game, we hope you had a good time,
 and we look forward to future games.
 
 As always - your suggestions are welcomed.  Please use the following
 email addresses for the following subjects.
 
 	fc@all.net		WarGame technology issues.
 	iw@all.net		Comments about the game and what was learned.
 	iw@all.net		Anything else you want to bring out.
 
 Thank you again - and have a great day!
---------------------------
 From game  Fri Jan 26 08:39:39 1996
 Date: Fri, 26 Jan 96 08:39:39 EST
 From: game (WarGame)
 Received: by all.net (4.1/3.2.012693-Management Analytics);
         id AA17985 for /u/game/bin/game; Fri, 26 Jan 96 08:39:39 EST
 Message-Id: <9601261339.AA17985@all.net>
 Apparently-To: game@all.net
 
 ***** GAME *****
 
 We would like to thank all game participants for their contributions
 to our efforts, and would like to invite all of you back for further
 games of this sort.
 
 Thank you all for playing, and we hope it was a learning experience.
---------------------------
================================================================================