Iran's High Tech Copycat War Against the West: Drones and Cyberwar

An anonymous reader writes "Iran and its nuclear program seem to be getting all the headlines. Yet, Iran has found a way to respond to western cyber attacks such as Stuxnet, drone surveillance and targeted assassinations; they've decided to respond in kind. Iran has launched its own cyber attacks on U.S. banks via denial-of-service attacks. Iranian drones recently were used to spy on Israeli nuclear facilities. Cyberweapons were also used against Saudi oil facilities. The goal: to make sure the west, specifically the United States, knows that Iran does have the tools to strike back. While Iran does not have a world-class military like the United States, it does have the capabilities to cause damage if it wants to. With Iran taking to cyberspace and drones, it shows such technology is not just under the control of the U.S. Iran has been careful, though, not to escalate the conflict. The risk: what if the plan backfires and goes beyond its intended scope?"

Re:Ok, so...

[Anonymous Coward]

The ability to remote control aircraft from non-trivial distances and keep them out of "pool-skimmer range" of the target under surveillance while returning useful intelligence is somewhat noteworthy.

Re:I have to wonder

[Psyborgue]

So you don't think the balance of power in the middle east is important and Iran should be able to do whatever they want? "Once the threat of outside invasion recedes, the population will rise up and overthrow the extremists". If the threat of outside invasion doesn't actually exist (it does not. all that has discussed is bombing several hardened military facilities), then Iran will make up a threat, as it has, and the people will swallow it, as will some useful idiots in the west. It already blames Israel and America every chance it gets (even for Syria, which is absurd since it's a Shiite and Alawite vs Sunni conflict) and if you think the people see past it you're very naive. Some do, of course, but not enough to matter and controlling information as Iran does can indeed keep the necessary minority in the dark indefinately. Some protests in the street do not make a revolution. They got massacred. Sure we could back the MEK (sunni terrorists), but that's unlikely to get very far in Iran, despite the wishful thinking of some in the west. Even if they succeeded, they wouldn't be any more friendly to the west than the Taliban was after we helped them get rid of the soviets. It's like backing the sunni AQ "rebels" against Assad. Not much better. It'll likely result in ethnic cleansing against the Alawites, druze, Christians, and other minorities if the "rebels" ever do win. Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't. You want the solution to Iran? There isn't one. The best temporary measure is to make sure they don't gain nuclear capability and contain them until things change significantly.

Re:You know, Iran

[Jeng]

Is North Korea left alone because they have a bomb, or because if the US fucked with them China would come in and put a stop to it?

Personally I think it is because 75% China would step in and 25% because the South Koreans actually would be upset if we killed their relatives in the north.

Or hell, Pakistan has the bomb and we do drone strikes in Pakistan damn near daily.

Having a bomb will not stop the US from driving the Iranian government out of power.

Re:I have to wonder

[hey!]

Well as a result of the '53 coup, the shah reigned as an absolute dictator for the following 26 years. Anybody over the age of 40 or so has memories of the Shah, and that includes the entire current Iranian leadership -- they're the revolutionaries who overthrew the Shah in fact. Just like there are plenty of people alive in the US who remember Richard Nixon or Jimmy Carter there are plenty Iranians alive who remember the Shah, his secret police, and his torture chambers. They also remember that he was the closest US ally in the Middle East, after Israel.

So if you're waiting for the Iranian leadership to write off the years '53 to '79 as ancient history, you're going to have to wait at least another generation. That might even be two generations, as you might have to wait for the people who grew up personally knowing people in the revolution pass away. Just because it's ancient history for *you* doesn't mean other people have or should have forgotten the Shah.

And they certainly haven't forgotten George W. Bush. After watching in alarm as US forces toppled in weeks a country they'd fought to a stalemate for eight years at the cost of over half a million lives, the Iranian leadership floated an offer that gave the US everything it said it wanted. They offered complete transparency in their nuclear program and a withdrawal of support from Hezbollah and Hamas, in return for what amounted to a promise not to invade. The Bush administration didn't even bother responding.

Now if you were in the shoes of the Iranian leadership, what do you think would appear to be the rational course to pursue? Diplomacy and disarmament? Or arming yourself to the teeth?