German Cyber-Security Expert: Stuxnet’s Target, Natanz Reactor « Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

German Cyber-Security Expert: Stuxnet’s Target, Natanz Reactor

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “German Cyber-Security Expert: Stuxnet’s Target, Natanz Reactor”.

Tags: george-bush, iran-nuclear-program, stuxnet, Wikileaks

This entry was posted on Thursday, September 23rd, 2010 at 3:45 PM and is filed under Mideast Peace. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

7 Responses to “German Cyber-Security Expert: Stuxnet’s Target, Natanz Reactor”

Muhammad says:

September 23, 2010 at 7:08 PM

Richard:

Good post. Many years ago Patrick Clawson of the WINEP advocated exactly the same type of operations against the Natanz facility. He claimed that if the centrifuges that are spinning with gaseous hexafluride are damaged, it will not hurt the civilians, an utter nonsense.

Reply
John Yorke says:

September 23, 2010 at 11:26 PM

Now, if only we could introduce the equivalent of this computer virus into the Palestinian/Israeli conflict.

Shutting that down might well be worth all the time and the effort.

Stuxnet? That’s for the small stuff.
We do have bigger fish to fry.

http://yorketowers.blogspot.com

Reply
- Shai says:
  
  September 24, 2010 at 7:02 AM
  
  Not to be an ass, are you aware of the “Website” editbox? I’ve noticed you manually add a link to your blog in every single one of your comments.
  
  As for Stuxnet – There’s more speculation than facts. It’s very interesting nonetheless.
  
  Reply
  - Richard Silverstein says:
    
    September 24, 2010 at 11:32 AM
    
    I don’t like such blatant self promotion either. Thanks for bringing this up. John, use the URL field to link to your site, not the comment box.
    
    Reply
John Yorke says:

September 25, 2010 at 2:53 PM

.

Thanks, Shai and Richard for the advice on the website box/URL field. I hadn’t realised that option was available. No more ‘blatant self-promotion.’

I ‘d like to pose a question.

Given commonly held expectations, how would you evaluate the Israel – Palestinian situation as it might appear ten years from now?

Settled, still in dispute, marginally better or worse than ever?

Today, after sixty years and more of trial and error, that choice, most likely, would still be the last one; the ongoing efforts of Messrs. Obama, Clinton, Mitchell, Abbas, Netanyahu notwithstanding.

Why should this be so?
Sixty years is a long time and yet the dispute seems as firmly entrenched as ever. Either the bulk of a multitude of discussions, meetings, summits and all attempts to rectify the matter have counted for nothing or the subject has become so complex, so out of control that it defies all logic and reasoned argument to remedy it.

Our options may have become too limited by the inherent nature of the conflict ; its deadlocked protagonists, its tragic history, its uncertain future.

What is needed now is a specific direction, some clear path to follow. If this is not forthcoming, then, in ten years time, it may very well be too late to salvage anything. Or anybody.

‘Pull if it does not work when you push.’ Japanese proverb.

Reply
almabu says:

September 26, 2010 at 2:24 AM

If a “Cyber-war” in “stuxnet-style” worked that good, why is the “real-war” against Iran still necessary and in discussion?

Reply
- Joseph Curven says:
  
  September 26, 2010 at 5:44 AM
  
  Because the Iranians will only ever be a few steps behind in the Virtual War.
  Israel wishes Iran (and any other group that opposes it in any way) to be several centuries behind in development.
  
  The real attack IS coming, you just have to be a little more patient.
  The ‘phoney war” has already begun, in the form of multile sanctions, and like with Iraq, the list of victims will envelope the innocent and stretch on for a decade.
  
  Reply