U.S. Weighs Risks of Civilian Harm In Cyberwarfare -- The New York Times
It would have been the most far-reaching case of computer sabotage in history. In 2003, the Pentagon and American intelligence agencies made plans for a cyberattack to freeze billions of dollars in the bank accounts of Saddam Hussein and cripple his government’s financial system before the United States invaded Iraq. He would have no money for war supplies. No money to pay troops.
“We knew we could pull it off — we had the tools,” said one senior official who worked at the Pentagon when the highly classified plan was developed.
But the attack never got the green light. Bush administration officials worried that the effects would not be limited to Iraq but instead create worldwide financial havoc, spreading across the Middle East to Europe and perhaps to the United States.
Fears of such collateral damage are at the heart of the debate as the Obama administration and its Pentagon leadership struggle to develop rules and tactics for carrying out attacks in cyberspace.
Read more ....
My Comment: U.S. military planners have always been worried on what would be the collateral damage from a full scale cyberwar with a formidable enemy. The conclusions have always been the same .... a destruction of the world wide web as we know it. Fortunately, as the world becomes more wired, the countries who would be a formidable threat to the world wide web are now (also) invested in its success .... I am thinking of both China and Russia .
The threat comes from the smaller nations .... North Korea and Iran being on the top of the list. I do not include hackers nor criminal organizations.
The U.S. will focus on the smaller threats and the inconveniences that they may cause. But as to using the "heavy guns" in their arsenal, I doubt that the U.S. will use them. Like nuclear weapons .... it is good to have them to deter any enemy .... but it is not in your self interest to use them.
