How does this relate to the US military? Well, frankly I think the US government has put up with some nefarious activity from China in the past because they have always been our meal ticket. However, the Chinese government is one of the main sources backing this transition from within the economy. US businesses will undoubtedly suffer and have to adapt because of this economical change.

So here is the question: will US relations with China deteriorate if our economy becomes less dependent / prosperous because of China?

My theory is that the US government will put up with less if China is not such an integral component of our economy.

The purpose of the treaty is to replace the 1991 START treaty which was implemented after the Cold War to ensure that the US and Russia remained on friendly terms with their nuclear weapons. The Russian news reported that on Saturday Obama and Russian President Medvedev “expressed satisfaction with the highly advanced state of preparations.”

Currently the US has about 2200 nuclear warheads while Russia is believed to have 3000. Both parties agreed to dramatically cut down on these stockpiles to around 1500 nuclear warheads.

I must say that I am very pleased to see the US and Russia working together so well. It truly is a thing of diplomatic beauty to see two countries who had initially engaged in an arms race, now working together to reduce nuclear arms surpluses. The question is, how will this impact US and Russia relations.

I believe that this will bring us one tiny step forward in our relationship with Russia. Too often citizens forget that political histories take years if not centuries to undo. Russia and the US will not be on strong trusting terms any time soon. However, a relationship of mutual cooperation signifies that both nations respect one another. To me, this is a sign that we will not be going to war with Russia any time soon.

It is obvious that the current system is not working and that private firms need to be pulled in to ensure maximum security. Privatized firms have long been at the front of development for U.S. military weapons and aircraft development. It is time that we stepped up private firm involvement with domestic security through cyber protection.

Recently a bill passed through the U.S. House of Representatives and was emphatically approved. The bill will allow for greater funding to help deter cyber attacks as well as the use of private businesses in government contracts to make our networks safer from attacks.

So what is your opinion on all of this? Are we worrying too much when we should be trusting that the proper precautions are in place? What I want to know is whether or not our government files are safer that Google’s networks. I would be surprised if Google had inferior security measures to our government.

Google is one of the most technologically advanced companies in the world with the best and brightest working under their umbrella. I would trust a statement from Google before the Chinese government. Additionally intelligence groups from several different countries including the US have long stated that the Chinese government likely provides support to hacker groups and at a very minimum, lets those groups flourish undisturbed. Even if the Chinese government is not directly financing these hacker groups, they are providing a safe, regulation free environment for these groups to prosper and to attack American systems.

Obama responded to the accusations from Google about the Chinese government being involved in the attacks stating that he wanted official answers from the company.

It seems as though we are living in an increasingly complex time. Individuals around the globe can attack computer systems with little to trace. We have to make cyber protection a priority before it is too late.

Should the US be walking on egg shells with China? I personally believe that the US made the right decision to supply Taiwan with weapons because that is an exceptionally large marketplace to forgo. Additionally, I do believe that the US government remarks are accurate, that a bolstering of the Taiwanese military will help further solidify security and balance in the region. It is for this new security and balance that China is angry. The more Taiwan advances militarily, the less likely the absorption of Taiwan will become for China. The Chinese still maintain that Taiwan should be a territory of China. To that end they are frustrated at the newfound strength that Taiwan will have. However I find this foolish because had the US not stepped up to seal the deal, Russia would have promptly supplied the Taiwanese with weapons.

I can’t say that I am surprised that the US has decided to supply Taiwan with arms. In 2008 Bush supplied Taiwan with arms and China reacted by suspending arms trade with the United States. However China quickly came to their senses and lifted the suspension. After an interaction like that there is no reason to suspect that this time would be any different. However China has upped the ante here with more serious sanctions. Analysts are saying that this hard line that China is taking is reflective of their growing influence and power.  Beijing still believes that Taiwan is part of its ruling territory, which is why the Chinese are so angered at the new weapons Taiwan will be receiving.

In reality one nation is responsible for the bulk of our concerns – China. Dennis Blair the Director of National Intelligence made several statements which were alarming. Most notably he stated that “Malicious cyber activity is occurring on an unprecedented scale with extraordinary sophistication.” He outlined potential threats as hacker groups in China who are likely supported by the government made the top of the list. Also he pointed out that terrorists, organized crime groups, and others are attacking US networks to steal intelligence and intellectual property, or simply to cause harm.

The issue of intellectual property is of great importance. I can’t over stress the correlation between military might and economic prosperity. When businesses suffer taxation suffers which means the military can’t spend as much. Intellectual property theft from other countries is becoming an increasingly complex and costly problem for American businesses.

So I suppose the $20.00 question is simply this: how do we fix this problem? We already have swarms of people working to ensure that business and government networks are protected so what other options do we have? Is there any way that we can take action with the governing parties of these countries such as China?

Lastly, do you feel as though your information is safe online? When the Chinese attacked the Gmail accounts of several Chinese activists, did that taint your view of cyber security?

In a remark that really made me wonder, Dennis Blair, Director of National Intelligence, stated, “We cannot be certain that our cyberspace infrastructure will remain available and reliable during a time of crisis.”

In other words, the US should begin investing more heavily in cyber attack prevention methods while also developing contingency plans in the event that our networks were damaged by an enemy, most likely China.

Blair elaborated to say that there are plenty of countries who would, “steal, corrupt, harm or destroy the public and private assets vital to our national interests”

Blair called the attack on Google a “wake up call” for everyone who hasn’t taken cyber threats seriously in the past.

I have to say that this is relatively heavy stuff. When my internet isn’t working, I feel like I have landed in a desert island because I can’t do so many vital, everyday tasks that I take for granted. Furthermore imagine the effect of internet or server attacks on businesses. Productivity would dive bomb and our economic edge in our competitiveness in the global marketplace would immediately suffer.

How serious a threat is a cyber attack that could wipe out consumer and government networks? Are we really a sitting duck to the extent that Blair is advocating?

-        bargaining chip – the most likely scenario is that Iran wants a bargaining chip in order to receive favorable treatment from other nations. Having nuclear weapons entitles Iran to a virtual guarantee that they will not be exploited. This is the “get strong so no one can beat me up” mentality. I don’t approve of anything about Iran but this is a logical desire for a nation to have.

-        Keeping up with industrialized nations – most prominent world players both economically and politically have nuclear weapons. Can we really take a country seriously if they have no nuclear capabilities?

-        National pride – plain and simple – the people will be proud if they have a military capable of competing on a global or local level.

-        Respect from the global community – besides getting better trade agreements and having some guarantee of protection, people generally want to be valued and feel they are respected. I believe that the leaders of Iran may want the respect of other world leaders.

-        To attack Israel – its sad to say, but it’s a big possibility. This is one of the greatest reasons why Iran must be stopped. They repeatedly have gone on record stating that they would like to wipe Israel off the map. That’s a dangerous desire when coupled with nukes.

Note – I am not defending Iran . .  . I find them to be a despicable nation. I only wanted to outline possibilities for their development of nuclear facilities.

Is there any chance that Iran is really only seeking nuclear fuel and does not plan to develop nuclear weapons? In my  mind I can’t reconcile that as even a slight possibility, but perhaps you can make a case for this.

In my mind, Iran would have accepted the rather generous deal from the UN which would give them the desired nuclear fuel without all of the infrastructure costs associated with building nuclear plants. Additionally it would take the nation off of the radar of the UN and the US allowing them some peace to sleep at night. I really do believe that Iran is headed down a dangerous path, if they continue someone will engage them in war.

Tomorrow I plan to outline what I would call a defense for Iran. Basically I will sum up all of the possible reasons why Iran may want a nuclear program.