Cyber Warfare

I think this topic is very interesting and completely over my head considering I would rather do without a lot of technology we have today. I know most of it makes our lives convenient helps more than it destroys, or does it? I know, I know, Im old school.

At the Air Force Academy in Colorado, the military are raising a special breed of warriors, warriors who fight in the cyber arena. I keep telling myself that this Occupation within the military is not silly, but this job could be one of the most important now and in the near future. America is very dependent upon electricity and technology, therefore shouldn't we have someone to protect that just as we have the National Guard to protect our Nation.

Only Army, Navy, Air Force are taking part in the computer warfare in Colorado. The military has been training men and women in the area of cyber warfare for about ten years now, but now the training has been taken to a new level with the increasing amount of internet break in by foreign countries.

I dont even know if there are any laws concerning the cyber warfare that is taking place today. James Clapper, who is the director of the nation intelligence, classified a cyber attack as the number one threat to out national security. This provides awesome job opportunity in computer science and technological studies.

Hatred

I've been reading the memoirs of E. B. Sledge in his book "With The Old Breed", and I keep hearing a common theme among the Marines in the Pacific during WWII. Most of the Marines or soldiers who fought in the pacific or directly against the Japanese developed a strong hatred towards them. Sledge explains in his book that noncombatants hated the Japanese, but the infantry who actually fought face to face with them, held a deep and bitter hatred for the Japanese. Throughout the war in the pacific, the hatred for the Japanese increased, but started off with a great leap in the bombing of Pearl Harbor. The American forces believed the Japanese to be animals, savages, and wicked creatures with the way they fought. Mutilating dead Marine, Kamikaze and Banzai attack (suicidal attacks from planes and charges). The Japanese very well may have view us in the same way, Im not sure. Sledge mentions on his book that, "This collective attitude, Marines and Japanese, resulted in savage, ferocious fighting and with no holds barred. This was not the dispassionate killing seen on other fronts or in other wars. This was brutish, primitive hatred, as characteristic of the horror of war in the Pacific as the palm trees and the islands".

Im trying to understand this hatred between the two enemies at war. Even though they may be at war and deeply hurt by the other, they are both humans and both put there pants on the same way every morning, but in a different part of the world. Does the hatred fuel unneeded or unwanted war and fighting among the two? The Americans, I believe had their minds set for unconditional surrender for the Japanese by whatever means possible.

Today, does this same hatred exist for particular ethnic groups or people we are at war with? It seems if you hate the enemy you are fighting it makes it easier to fight him without guilt or restraint. Its either you are him who dies, or him or your Marine buddy next you. I mean it make sense to hate your enemy when you are fighting him, right? I have concluded that this hate for the enemy that men at war face for the enemy is almost like they are rotting from the inside. They seem to lose the innocence they once had, and all sanity. Maybe war itself is a factor as well.

My question is how do you go battle against someone that is just like you, but from a different part of the world and that usually has a different worldview than you. Will you be an effective Soldier without this attitude fueling you? And is there a case where the attitude is ok? I understand going to battle with someone you utterly despise like the Japanese for the Pacific Marines. How do you avoid this attitude while you are fighting and your buddy next to you dies or your homeland was attacked by these terrorist. What is the proper way to respond?

Lately, I have been exploring different job opportunities. I realized that if Officer Candidate School does not fall through right away, I have a little over a year to work and I would prefer working somewhere I could use my degree in political science/international studies.

I was scanning the internet and stumbled across an organization call the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). CNAS is a non profit think tank based in Washington DC. The CNAS seeks to develop strong and sound defense and security policy for the benefit of the United States. "CNAS engages policymakers, experts and the public with innovative, fact-based research, ideas and analysis to shape and elevate the national security debate". Also, they help to prepare policy makers and military leaders for possible future events. Obama and administration have turned to CNAS for recent Afghanistan affairs and also affairs in the new emerging Asia-Pacific region. 

After looking through many of there publications and projects, I was quickly overwhelmed with all the information they have on security issues. (I guess this is the organization the government can go to for sound advise and analysis). I thought it would neat to work for this organization one day, but Im not sure it would fit my idea of a job. I don't want to wear a suit and tie everyday, or have a really cool office and my own computer. Discussing security issues would be cool, but I think I would prefer "being in the field".