• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Cold War 2.0 Trump and Putin New Yorker Article

Status
Not open for further replies.

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/03/06/trump-putin-and-the-new-cold-war

Fascinating read. Russia is scary as fuck and not to be underestimated.

They have hijacked our electoral process.

It's hard for me to even know what to excerpt there is so much here. If anyone wants to help please do so.

Ok excerpt 1:

“What we have is a situation in which the strong leader of a relatively weak state is acting in opposition to weak leaders of relatively strong states,” General Sir Richard Shirreff, the former Deputy Supreme Allied Commander of nato, said. “And that strong leader is Putin. He is calling the shots at the moment.”

Excerpt 2:

In the fall of 2014, a hacking group known as the Dukes entered an unclassified computer system at the U.S. State Department and gained enough control so that, as one official put it, they “owned” the system. In security circles, the Dukes—also referred to as Cozy Bear—were believed to be directed by the Russian government. Very little is known about the size and composition of Russia’s team of state cyberwarriors.

Excerpt 3:

By March, 2016, the threat was unmistakable. Cybersecurity experts detected a second group of Russian hackers, known as Fancy Bear, who used “spear-phishing” messages to break into accounts belonging to John Podesta and other Democratic officials. Like Cozy Bear, Fancy Bear had left a trail around the globe, with its technical signature visible in cyberattacks against the German parliament, Ukrainian artillery systems, and the World Anti-Doping Agency. “I’ve never seen a group that doesn’t change its style of work after it has been detected,” Ilya Sachkov, who runs a leading cybersecurity firm in Moscow, said. “What logic led them to not adjust their methods?” Charles Carmakal, a specialist at FireEye, a cybersecurity organization that had previously studied the hacking groups implicated in the election operation, said that sophisticated hackers often leave forensic trails. “Even the best teams make mistakes, and, a lot of times, the guys who are great at hacking are not forensics guys who also know how to do investigations and understand all the artifacts that they’re leaving on a machine.”

Ultimately, the attack didn’t require an enormous amount of expertise. Gaining access to an e-mail account through spear-phishing is more akin to breaking into a car with a clothes hanger than to building a complex cyberweapon like Stuxnet. Oleg Demidov, the information-security expert, said that, from a technical perspective, the hacking was “mediocre—typical, totally standard, nothing outstanding.” The achievement, from Demidov’s perspective, was the “knowledge of what to do with this information once it had been obtained.”

On July 22nd, three days before the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks released nearly twenty thousand e-mails, the most damaging of which suggested that the D.N.C., though formally impartial, was trying to undermine Bernie Sanders’s campaign. In one e-mail, the D.N.C. chair, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, said of Sanders, “He isn’t going to be President.” Her resignation did little to tamp down public anger that was fuelled by the themes of secrecy, populism, and privilege—already a part of Trump’s arsenal against Clinton. Months later, Wasserman Schultz reproached the F.B.I. for not reacting more aggressively to the hacking. “How do they spend months only communicating by phone with an I.T. contractor?” she said in an interview. “How was that their protocol? Something has to change, because this isn’t the last we’ve seen of this.”

Excerpt 4:

By mid-February, law-enforcement and intelligence agencies had accumulated multiple examples of contacts between Russians and Trump’s associates, according to three current and former U.S. officials. Intercepted communications among Russian intelligence figures are said to include frequent reference to Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign chairman for several months in 2016, who had previously worked as a political consultant in Ukraine. “Whether he knew it or not, Manafort was around Russian intelligence all the time,” one of the officials said. Investigators are likely to examine Trump and a range of his associates—Manafort; Flynn; Stone; a foreign policy adviser, Carter Page; the lawyer Michael Cohen—for potential illegal or unethical entanglements with Russian government or business representatives.
 
The first nuke to be launched will start what may very well be the literal end of the world. Keep an eye on this, it'll affect you far more than ANYTHING else.
 

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
The first nuke to be launched will start what may very well be the literal end of the world. Keep an eye on this, it'll affect you far more than ANYTHING else.

The article has very little to do with nukes but rather how crazy advanced Russia's cyber warfare is.
 

Alchemy

Member
The first nuke to be launched will start what may very well be the literal end of the world. Keep an eye on this, it'll affect you far more than ANYTHING else.

Republican health care bills are more likely to kill me than nuclear war so I'm cool I guess.
 
Russia is an economic minnow,
Their economy is Italy sized.
Since 2000 they have gone backwards is schools and hospital beds and built a mob-like economy that has minted billionaires.
They spend too much on their military.
Their international reserves are now far less than Putins personal nett worth.
But they have nukes and a strong yearning to regain the geo-political power they once had.
 

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
Russia is an economic minnow,
Their economy is Italy sized.
Since 2000 they have gone backwards is schools and hospital beds and built a mob-like economy that has minted billionaires.
They spend too much on their military.
Their international reserves are now far less than Putins personal nett worth.
But they have nukes and a strong yearning to regain the geo-political power they once had.

The size of their economy doesn't matter if they are calling the shots in Europe and the US (and elsewhere).
 
F3ign.gif
 
The size of their economy doesn't matter if they are calling the shots in Europe and the US (and elsewhere).
Agree just pointing out the ridiculousness of letting oneself be hacked by russians. They should be cleaned out of western politics, the world banking system fixed so they can't wash their money and like live kings while murdering dissent at home. And then the focus should shift to countries that deserve it.
 

Sandoval

Member
Read the article.
I'm laying in bed and don't have the inclination to get into this, but I have advanced degrees in history and poli sci, and I work in information security... I don't need to reread an article that I read two weeks ago to tell you that you're not exactly selling me on the fact that a failed hegemon has been playing a long con that included dumping their geopolitical power and GDP so they could subvert western society through the internet.
 
They have managed to successfully recruit others to do their dirty work for them including Americans. They have done so by burrowing themselves into the darkest pits of the internet, places like 4chan and Reddit are recruiting centers for them because they are filled with concentrated mobs of social outcasts who feel disenfranchised by women, the work force, the government, the "cool" monorities etc and a lot of times these largely male white groups are also really good at mob trolling or are even in a computer related field and have the know how to help in hacking attempts. They have unwittingly or worst purposely helped a foreign enemy government attack America and for what? A notch on their internet argument belt? Pathetic and dangerouse.
 
I'm laying in bed and don't have the inclination to get into this, but I have advanced degrees in history and poli sci, and I work in information security... I don't need to reread an article that I read two weeks ago to tell you that you're not exactly selling me on the fact that a failed hegemon has been playing a long con that included dumping their geopolitical power and GDP so they could subvert western society through the internet.

It's very unclear what you are trying to say.
It sounds like you don't buy that Russians are meddling anywhere via a multi pronged approach of hacking, news propaganda, dividing opposition to candidates that are tough on them, using social media bots and so on
But not buying any of that, after all that has occured in the last 12 months, would seem to be pretty much standing with Sputnik and RT and Peskov at this poInt. They are the ones bleating about russiaphobia.
 

Sandoval

Member
jellies_two-- @Jellies: What I'm saying is that The USSR lost The Cold War as an empirical fact.
They most certainly exercised a degree of influence to shift the opinions of idiots in America and likely Great Britain by means of propaganda, but to say that Russia is winning is some 'sky is falling' nonsense. Their country is a struggling petrostate that's unique in that they used to be a world power and they're trying their hardest to be relevant again by means of misdirection and poorly disguised land grabs that no one has the will to stop since it means engaging in a conflict with a state that has little to lose and a comparatively large military with access to nuclear and biological/chemical weapons left over from their glory days.
The fact remains that their economy is tied closely to the price on a barrel of oil and the near term future of oil is dicey due to downward pressure on the market from a global surplus that has China parking oil freighters off of their coast because it's the cheapest way to store the incredible amount of oil backlog that they've amassed. The long term prospects of oil are dire as the world increasingly moves toward renewable energy sources.

They've been in an economic contraction since 2008 due to their commodities based economy and their internal propaganda along with a strong man style of governance that's unafraid to crack down on dissidents has been the main factors keeping the current regime in place. They're flailing about trying to find a hold in the world and causing chaos in the US and EU is one of their last ditch efforts at avoiding becoming a failed state yet again.

So what I'm driving at is that they certainly didn't win The Cold War and they're in a tenuous position that may be exacerbated by their current actions. They're in the middle of one hell of a desperate gambit. I hope it doesn't work out for them.
 
To me, it's that Russia won the first Cold War and we are now in Cold War 2.0.

They certainly didn't win the cold war. Their economy crashed, standards of living dropped, the following countries gained independence from them; Ukraine, Belorussia, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Their population was halved overnight and this was all after their sphere of puppet governments collapsed.

The full extent of the Trump-Russia connection remains to be seen. It's exceptionally unlikely that Trump is taking direct marching orders from Putin, the arrangement is far more likely to be that the Russians backed Trump and hacked the DNC in exchange for the incoming administration softening policies on Russia and granting concessions in some areas. This only goes so far though. He doesn't have "control" of America.
 

IrishNinja

Member
i feel you OP

i once watched a docu on Peak Oil in the early aughts and thought we'd be in Mad Mas territory by the end of the week
 
They won it by installing a puppet as head of state in the most powerful country in the world.

Russia doesn't win with shady international business dealings, Putin and his billionaire friends do. The average North Korean doesn't win when the Kims flex their military muscle and the rest of the world imposes more sanctions.
 

Hexa

Member
They won it by installing a puppet as head of state in the most powerful country in the world.

There's no way that relates back to the first one, is there? You could say that's how they won the second one, but how does that relate to their loss in the first one?
 
There's no way that relates back to the first one, is there? You could say that's how they won the second one, but how does that relate to their loss in the first one?

Cold War 2.0 is still being fought. That's what we are watching.

The Republicans are trying to hand Russia the 'W'.

I get that people say that Putin won no matter how this resolves, but it's not true. He won the biggest battle of the war so far though.
 
Russia hacked the 2016 election and for all intents and purposes appear to have gotten away with it. What's stopping them from no threat doing it too for 2020???

The shining beacon of democracy, amirite?
 

Blablurn

Member
Yevgenia Albats, the author of “The State Within a State,” a book about the K.G.B., said that Putin probably didn’t believe he could alter the results of the election, but, because of his antipathy toward Obama and Clinton, he did what he could to boost Trump’s cause and undermine America’s confidence in its political system.

Super scary. He went all out and won.
 
This is like saying France lost World War I because they got rolled over in World War II.

Yep.
The first Cold War ended when the Soviet Union collapsed and lost everything.
As bad as Trump being president may be, this is nowhere near the end of 2.0, there's still more to happen, and I think once again it will only end when one of the two major players collapses.
What people seem to forget to this day is that what we see today is a result of over a decade of Putin's efforts into setting up the international scene in his favor, Trump's victory being his biggest win yet. Depending on what US agencies and leaders are willing to do, it could take more or less the same time to be able to hit back.

EDIT: Oh right. Foundations of Geopolitics was released 20 years ago. Keep that in mind.
 

el jacko

Member
To me, it's that Russia won the first Cold War and we are now in Cold War 2.0.
If by "won the first" you mean through getting Trump elected? The article makes it clear that nobody on the Russian side expected that, and now they're not entirely sure what to expect from Trump - they're tampering down on the fawning over him on their TV shows.

if anything, the Russians definitely lost the first Cold War (are you kidding?) and won a battle (maybe a few) in the second Cold War - we'll see how the next 3+ years go.

EDIT: and of course a bunch of replies came in the meantime answering the same thing...
 

ZOONAMI

Junior Member
Yeah I guess I may have been a bit hyperbolic. Cold War ended with the end of the Soviet Union but Cold War tactics never ended, and they are actively expanding the sphere of influence via advanced cyber warfare. I guess their economy is shit bit how much of that oil money is off the books?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom