Bill, some discontinuous dissonance as a mirror to rambling rebellion.

The thing is we do have a communications and computer systems agency for dealing with hostile attacks. That is the mission of the NSA along with all other forms of signals intelligence. Second the United States as a land of law has treaties that say we will not attack other nations. You said in an earlier post that you had engaged in cyber-attacks which would be a direct violation of federal law. The Air force is standing up a cyber warfare command which will be interesting for a bunch of other reasons.

Currently hacktivism and petty graffiti attacks are the primary "hacks" that occur. With the exception of a few different attacks like "Titan Rain" and high profile spy ware break outs.

You totally missed the metaphor of ubiquitous communications and commodity computing as a "utility" making it air or water rather than "special". You need C4IT like you need anything else like food. C4IT makes you a better warrior but it isn't the only battlefield or tool. When you realize the Internet exists beyond the http, ftp, protocols and you dig deeper (i'm not talking dark net) the vista of the Internet takes on a deeper and broader view.

How is a predator drone controlled?
What gives a jdam the high accuracy that it known for?
What provides the telemetry for a cruise missile?
How are operational orders transmitted between general staffs and unit commands?

There are only three forms of attack possible (plus two but that is another story) over networks and computer mediated environments.

You'll have to start defining your terms better here.

A point as to etiquette as a user of THIS web forum I'm interested in using THIS web forum. Provide a link in your signature to your blog but stop trying to send us off to your website. I'm not interested in having my IP harvested, my click through behavior analyzed, or my interactions and interests monitored. Further posting large volumes of information from another BLOG here on another forum without permission from the owners of SWC/SWJ is bad news. You are fairly anonymous (your introduction left a lot to be desired) and with anonymity comes distrust. For all I know you are just violating intellectual property laws (good taste at least) and posting somebody else's blog information here as part of some IW campaign.

In any regards I think you're mixing information warfare and cyber warfare. If you start reading something like "In Athena's camp: Preparing for conflict in the information age. (1997). Santa Monica, CA: RAND." and the updated "Networks and netwars: The future of terror, crime, and militancy. (2001). Santa Monica, CA: RAND"that will take you down the information warfare and network centric warfare path you seem to be going. This is more akin to information operations than it is to tactical use of a computer for attack.

Just as a simple example information warfare is about message, and controlling the communication channel. In my laboratory cyber warfare (sic) is about destroying your capability to communicate, intercepting your command and control information, or changing your message without you knowing that we've done so. Those are simplistic examples of the confidentiality, integrity, availability triad which you can read more about from "Maconachy, W. V., Schou, C. D., Ragsdale, D., & Welch, D. (2001). A Model for Information Assurance: An Integrated Approach. Paper presented at the 2001 IEEE Workshop on Information Assurance and Security, US Military Academy, West Point, NY.".

Think about defining your terms a little better within the context of your statements. Within this area of research the disciplines jargon is not fully understood.