Conventional Weaponry VS Cyber Terrorism

Insightful comment on how assymetric warfare and abusing the most versatile communication medium is something conventional weaponry cannot and should not aim to fight :

"Terrorists use a flat, open network of communications and pass their information mainly through the Internet, Lute said as he briefed the group at the Pentagon. These are aspects that defy U.S. military capability. “We buy airplanes, ships and tanks and recruit and train soldiers to deal with the geographics of a tangible target,” he said. “We can bomb training camps, and we can hunt down the enemy, but we can’t bomb the Internet.” By using a nodal network to spread their extremist ideologies, Lute said, terrorists are able to easily recruit members, acquire weapons, build leaders and receive financial backing."

A short excerpt from a previous post :

"A terrorists' training camp is considered a military target since it provides them the playground to develop their abilities. Sooner or later, it will feel the heat and dissapear from the face of the Earth, they know it, but don't care mainly because they've already produced and are distributing Spetsnaz type of video training sessions. So abusing information or the information medium itself is much more powerful from their perspective then destroying their means for communication, spread propaganda, and obviously recruit."

Reminds me of a great cartoon where soldiers are in the middle of a network centric warfare situation, all the equiptment on the field is in smoke or doesn't work, and soldiers beg the generals for more "shock and awe" action and less ELINT attacks. Which, of course, doesn't mean known adversary locations shouldn't get erased from the face of the Earth. Post strike imagery courtesy of FAS, here's the rest of the collection.