Brazil plans to go offline from US-centric internet

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
There is a hell of a difference between 'any action' and spying. Ever heard of eves dropping??

If what you said in the bold part had been true, there would have been war with every country, practically.
not much difference between both,act of war is different from actual war

any senior members @Ray please suggest us regarding.i presume that spying on an embassy by its host is an act of war what do you say?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
not much difference between both,act of war is different from actual war

any senior members @Ray please suggest us regarding.i presume that spying on an embassy by its host is an act of war what do you say?
It sure is a departure for diplomatic niceties.

It does raise issues of distrust and contempt.

Most countries would take it as an aggressive, unfriendly and unwarranted action.

But declaration that it is an act of war would depend on whether the country has the wherewithal to wage a war against the offending country.

If the spying has damaged the Nation seriously, then it should indicate its ire, by discontinuing the diplomatic relationship.

And if not wanting to walk the mile, it can issue a strong démarche.

As far as India is concerned, we will do nothing, as we are doing nothing about the killing of our soldiers and beheading them since the Govt will still be talking to Pakistan on the sidelines of the UN confabulation!

India and Pakistan leaders to meet on UN sidelines
Times of Oman | News :: India and Pakistan leaders to meet on UN sidelines
 
Last edited by a moderator:

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,454
not much difference between both,act of war is different from actual war

any senior members @Ray please suggest us regarding.i presume that spying on an embassy by its host is an act of war what do you say?
I do welcome the seniors opinion, but in the meanwhile, I would like to quote some references regarding 'act of war'.

1.Act of war | Define Act of war at Dictionary.com

2. 18 USC § 2331 - Definitions | Title 18 - Crimes and Criminal Procedure | U.S. Code | LII / Legal Information Institute
(4) the term "act of war" means any act occurring in the course of—
(A) declared war;
(B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared, between two or more nations; or
(C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin;
3.http://fortunascorner.wordpress.com/2013/09/17/do-cyber-attacks-really-constitute-an-act-of-war/

4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage

5. http://defensetech.org/2008/06/18/what-constitutes-an-act-of-cyber-war/
 
Last edited by a moderator:

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
It sure is a departure for diplomatic niceties.

It does raise issues of distrust and contempt.

Most countries would take it as an aggressive, unfriendly and unwarranted action.

But declaration that it is an act of war would depend on whether the country has the wherewithal to wage a war against the offending country.

If the spying has damaged the Nation seriously, then it should indicate its ire, by discontinuing the diplomatic relationship.

And if not wanting to walk the mile, it can issue a strong démarche.

As far as India is concerned, we will do nothing, as we are doing nothing about the killing of our soldiers and beheading them since the Govt will still be talking to Pakistan on the sidelines of the UN confabulation!

India and Pakistan leaders to meet on UN sidelines
Times of Oman | News :: India and Pakistan leaders to meet on UN sidelines
this spying will cost us a lot of course,they probably know about every action the govt is going to make..serious crime imo
 

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
few years back britain said they will enter ecuador embassy with force and arrest julian assange,who is still here in ecuador embassy in london.international diplomats criticised britain gov,despite of the support from usa they could not make a step,all they got was a bad name.

point 4. electronic espionage has been done on our embassies but denied by our govt.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
this spying will cost us a lot of course,they probably know about every action the govt is going to make..serious crime imo
We are currently in a moribund state.

Forget what the US has done.

Even a small Nation like the Maldives whose existence depends on global warming, is kicking us in our teeth and we accept it.

If that is our honour as a Nation, what can one say!
 

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
We are currently in a moribund state.

Forget what the US has done.

Even a small Nation like the Maldives whose existence depends on global warming, is kicking us in our teeth and we accept it.

If that is our honour as a Nation, what can one say!
hail congress.....
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
It sure is a departure for diplomatic niceties.

It does raise issues of distrust and contempt.

Most countries would take it as an aggressive, unfriendly and unwarranted action.

But declaration that it is an act of war would depend on whether the country has the wherewithal to wage a war against the offending country.
No one is going to declare a war on foreign spies because everyone has their own footprint in this dirty game, including india.

If the spying has damaged the Nation seriously, then it should indicate its ire, by discontinuing the diplomatic relationship.
And if not wanting to walk the mile, it can issue a strong démarche.
Generally, countries don't response that way unless they are cornered. Otherwise, they will face the same embarassment as americans.

As far as India is concerned, we will do nothing, as we are doing nothing about the killing of our soldiers and beheading them since the Govt will still be talking to Pakistan on the sidelines of the UN confabulation!

India and Pakistan leaders to meet on UN sidelines
Times of Oman | News :: India and Pakistan leaders to meet on UN sidelines
[/QUOTE]

Well, to be fair, your gov doesn't only talk: your soldiers are also killing their soldiers or militants.

Rediff On The NeT: At least 50 Pak soldiers killed as India strikes back
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
No one is going to declare a war on foreign spies because everyone has their own footprint in this dirty game, including india.
I presume this went over your head

Most countries would take it as an aggressive, unfriendly and unwarranted action.

But declaration that it is an act of war would depend on whether the country has the wherewithal to wage a war against the offending country.
It has a subtle underlining essence.



Generally, countries don't response that way unless they are cornered. Otherwise, they will face the same embarassment as americans.
Even when cornered, if it does not have the wherewithal to counter, then it has to grin and bear it!

Well, to be fair, your gov doesn't only talk: your soldiers are also killing their soldiers or militants.

Rediff On The NeT: At least 50 Pak soldiers killed as India strikes back
Do you talk before the bodies killed by the adversary has still not gone cold?
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
I presume this went over your head
It went over everyone's head including yours!

Even when cornered, if it does not have the wherewithal to counter, then it has to grin and bear it!
No, it can cry publicly and ask some compensation secretly: for example, sharing the information about its own enemies!

Do you talk before the bodies killed by the adversary has still not gone cold?
Whatelse do you want your govt to do, starting a war for the death of some soldiers? Chinese, Russians, Americans will like it!
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Snowden fallout: India's meow, Brazil's roar


The contrasting reactions in India and Brazil to revelations by the former US National Security Agency (NSA) contractor, Edward Snowden, is a study in varying diplomatic style, substance and context.

Contrasting reactions in India and Brazil to revelations by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden about the US government's intrusive surveillance of communications in the two countries are a study in varying diplomatic style, substance and context.

Recent confirmation from journalists working with Snowden that India was a prime victim caught in the crosshairs of the NSA's megalithic data-sweeping operations did not deter Prime Minister Manmohan Singh from visiting Washington and keeping his date with President Barack Obama on September 27.

India's phlegmatic take is the antithesis of the mass indignation in Brazil...
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,454
That's the difference between having seen a dictatorship in living memory, and having never known one. Many Indians simply have no idea how mass surveillance can be used for unchecked political power. Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Greece - they all know, far too well.
What about China????

You will always live under it:pound:
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
That's the difference between having seen a dictatorship in living memory, and having never known one. Many Indians simply have no idea how mass surveillance can be used for unchecked political power. Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Greece - they all know, far too well.

I would add Chile to that list.
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
709
I would add Chile to that list.
Good point. Part of the reason why South Americans are so hypersensitive towards the NSA allegations are because the last time their governments snooped into their lives, it attempted sociopolitical re-engineering via torture and forced disappearance.
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,454
Beyond the Brazil-U.S spat

The NSA snooping revelations have underlined the urgent need for multilateral governance of the world wide web

As per tradition, the opening address of the 68th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) was given by Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff. She was followed by President Barack Obama, who, as one wag put it, had read her speech the day before. Although the previous week's cancellation of the Brazilian presidential visit to the United States, something unheard of in recent memory, had already sent a strong signal about Brazil's displeasure with the NSA's snooping revelations (including the President's own e-mails and phone calls), Ms Rousseff didn't mince words in her UNGA speech either, delivering a second rebuke to Mr. Obama and his administration.

Latin American ties

How significant is this spat between the two largest powers in the Western Hemisphere? Is it just another piece of diplomatic posturing, soon to be forgotten and swept under the rug, or is there more to it than meets the eye? What does it tell us about the state of U.S.-Latin American relations, on a downhill spiral since 2009? Brazil is often described as a swing state, in the South, but from the West, a democracy traditionally friendly to the U.S., that fought on the side of the Allies in World War Two, but with an independent foreign policy.

One standard response is that the spat only hurts Brazil. The U.S. President has enough on his plate these days to worry about Latin America. Moreover, Brazil's recent economic slump would seem to indicate the South American country needs more U.S. trade and investment. Not taking part in this year's only White House state dinner would thus represent a missed opportunity for Brazil. Yet, Washington can't have it both ways. Either Brazil is considered a strategic partner or it is not, in which case one wonders about the criteria that inform such a category, which would exclude the world's seventh largest economy. If the former, having these differences aired in public, let alone in such a high-visibility platform as the UNGA's opening address, cannot be a good thing.

To be fair, Brasilia gave Washington plenty of time to come up with a satisfying response, including at a bilateral meeting between both Presidents at the G20 summit in St. Petersburg earlier last month, and a special visit by Foreign Minister Luiz Alberto Figueiredo to Washington to meet with U.S. National Security Advisor Susan Rice. Yet, both the White House and the State Department dithered and allowed the visit, the first by a Brazilian President since 1995, to unravel. Given what is at stake in the multilayered U.S.-Brazilian agenda, this is surprising.

Oil stakes

What takes the NSA's Brazilian spying allegations beyond the tired and trite argument that "everybody does it" (to which the Brazilian response is, "well, we don't") is the targets involved. President Rousseff's own e-mails and phone calls merited particular attention from Washington. Moreover, according to the revelations of the O Globo newspaper from the files provided by Edward Snowden, another top target was Petrobras, the Brazilian state oil company.

Petrobras, the fourth largest oil company in the world, with an annual turnover of $90 billion, can hardly be considered a security risk or potential funder of terrorism. What Petrobras does have, is some of the most sophisticated technology for deep-sea oil drilling, something U.S. oil companies are keen to get their hands on. Petrobras also plays a leading role in the bidding process for the Libra subsalt oilfields in the Santos Basin, off Brazil's southern coast — coming up in October — in which U.S. oil giant Chevron takes part. These are rich pickings, totalling some 12 billion barrels of recoverable oil, out of 80 to 100 billion of barrels of oil in that area. Petrobras says the security of the auction is not compromised, and that the bid will go on as planned. Yet, who can be absolutely sure about that? If Chevron walks off with some prize oil blocks, can anybody guarantee it was not because of privileged information, courtesy of the NSA?

Defence contracts

Another significant issue on the bilateral agenda is defence contracts. The Brazilian Air Force needs to upgrade its fleet of fighter jets, and U.S. company Boeing is competing with France's Dassault and Sweden's Saab for a lucrative contract valued at $4 to 5 billion. Brazil is undertaking a major upgrade of its military platforms, and the last thing the U.S. wants is to be excluded from some of the juiciest defence hardware purchases around.

Beyond these rather narrow U.S. concerns, there are larger issues at stake for two of the world's largest democracies. Perhaps none is as salient as that of Internet governance.

Controlling the net

The United States has for long portrayed itself as the foremost champion of internet freedom. Efforts by a number of countries in the South to establish a multilateral framework for internet governance have been rejected by Washington and its allies as misguided efforts by government to interfere in a self-regulating system that has thrived because it is managed by (mostly U.S.) business.

Under this guise of internet freedom, however, Big Brother is watching all of us, and leading U.S. internet companies like Google, Microsoft and Facebook have provided whatever information the NSA and the U.S. government request. Suddenly, the cause of internet freedom has morphed into the cause of finding out what we are all writing and telling each other — all for our own good, of course.

With 80 per cent of global internet traffic going through U.S. servers, there is a problem. Brazil, with 44 per cent internet penetration and a population that includes some of the highest numbers of users on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, would like to see this changed. Brazil would also like to upgrade its ineffectual cybersecurity systems. Fibre-optic submarine cables that link up Brazil directly with western Europe (thus bypassing the U.S.), bills that would mandate the storing of digital data on Brazilians in Brazil, and other such measures are on the table. Some of these measures may work, some may not. In turn, this might lead other countries to create their own "national Internet," defeating the very purpose of the world wide web.

Thus, the danger of a Balkanisation of the Internet is real and rings especially for countries like India, whose IT and IT-enabled services sector depend so heavily on it. It is in everybody's interest that the U.S.-Brazil spat be resolved amicably. For those who believe that the knowledge society is here to stay, and that worldwide connectivity is its handmaiden, this should include a step back from the abyss of breaking up the internet. One way forward is through multilateral governance of the web and stronger penalties for violating our privacy.

(Jorge Heine is CIGI professor of global governance at the Balsillie School of International Affairs, Wilfrid Laurier University in Waterloo, Ontario. He tweets at @jorgeheinel)

Beyond the Brazil-U.S spat - The Hindu
 

no smoking

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
5,000
Likes
2,302
Country flag
What about China????

You will always live under it:pound:
Not only China, every country is managing her citizens network to some extent.
What shocks everyone is that "democratic" govts is doing the same thing as dictators!
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,454
Not only China, every country is managing her citizens network to some extent.
What shocks everyone is that "democratic" govts is doing the same thing as dictators!
Yeah, democratic govts like INDIA has also given us the freedom of the INTERNET. We have facebook, twitter and all other access to a host of other sites. And what do you have....Tapatalk, Sina Webo???? Rip offs of facebook and twitter. Your govt does not trust you to use the internet safely. The hell, your govt doesn't not even allow you to piss without surveillance.

China Threatens To Jail Anyone Guilty Of Spreading "Online Rumors" | SiliconANGLE

Can you challenge that. If you can, show me one instance where your govt has allowed unfettered access to Internet for the public.
 

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Petrobras, the fourth largest oil company in the world, with an annual turnover of $90 billion, can hardly be considered a security risk or potential funder of terrorism. What Petrobras does have, is some of the most sophisticated technology for deep-sea oil drilling, something U.S. oil companies are keen to get their hands on. Petrobras also plays a leading role in the bidding process for the Libra subsalt oilfields in the Santos Basin, off Brazil's southern coast — coming up in October — in which U.S. oil giant Chevron takes part. These are rich pickings, totalling some 12 billion barrels of recoverable oil, out of 80 to 100 billion of barrels of oil in that area. Petrobras says the security of the auction is not compromised, and that the bid will go on as planned. Yet, who can be absolutely sure about that? If Chevron walks off with some prize oil blocks, can anybody guarantee it was not because of privileged information, courtesy of the NSA?
Don't forget Obama gave $2,000,000,000,000 to Brazil for offshore oil exploration!
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top