#big news ! Dictator's sister gets command of north korea

[kisansatta]

बड़ी खबर ! तानाशाह की बहन को मिली नार्थ कोरिया की कमान

नई दिल्ली : नार्थ कोरिया के तानाशाह किम जोंग उन की तबियत खराब होने की खबर आ रही है। बताया जा रहा है कि किम जोंग का स्वास्थ्य काफी बिगड़ा हुआ है और वे कोमा की हालत में हैं। इस बात का दावा नार्थ कोरिया के एक पूर्व राजनयिक ने किया है। बता दें कि किम जोंग कई दिनों से किसी सार्वजनिक कार्यक्रम में नजर नहीं आये, वहीं उनकी अनुपस्थिति में सरकार के सारे अधिकार उनकी बहन के पास हैं।

कोमा में किम जोंग, बहन को दी गई सत्ता की शक्ति

दरअसल बात यह है कि ब्रिटिश अखबार ने आज कई महीनों के बाद यह जानकारी दी है कि दक्षिण कोरिया के पूर्व राष्ट्रपति किम डे जुंग के ��रीबी के हवाले से बताया है कि किम जोंग अभी जीवित हैं, लेकिन कोमा मे हैं जिसके चलते अब उनकी बहन को सत्ता दे जा रही है |

क्या सोनिया गाँधी देंगी इस्तीफ़ा,CWC की बैठक में होगा फैसला

चांग सॉन्ग मिन ने दक्षिण कोरियाई मीडिया को बताया है कि उत्तराधिकार की योजना अभी पूरी तरह से तैयार नहीं है और किम की गैरहाजिरी में सत्ता ज्यादा वक्त तक खाली न रहे, इसको देखते हुए उनकी बहन किम यो जोंग को फिलहाल शक्तियां दे दी गई हैं |

खुशखबरी ! कोरोना काल में डॉक्टरों का बीमा करवाएगी योगी सरकार

इससे पहले दावा किया गया था कि दिल की सर्जरी में गड़बड़ी होने के कारण किम या तो बुरी तरह बीमार हैं या उनकी मौत हो गई | हालांकि, इसके कुछ दिनों बाद ही एक फर्टिलाइजर प्लांट के उद्घाटन के दौरान किम को देखा गया था, जिसके बाद ये दावा खारिज कर दिया गया था |

https://kisansatta.com/big-news-dictators-sister-gets-command-of-north-korea/ #BigNewsDictatorSSisterGetsCommandOfNorthKorea big news ! Dictator's sister gets command of north korea International, Top, Trending #International, #Top, #Trending KISAN SATTA - सच का संकल्प

[shirlleycoyle]

How Twitter Could Start a Nuclear War

Last Wednesday, a Twitter insider helped hackers gain access to several high profile Twitter accounts. Elon Musk, Joe Biden, Bill Gates and others were suddenly tweeting about a Bitcoin scam. The hack revealed just how vulnerable Twitter is to malicious actors, but in many ways we were lucky. According to a research paper released just hours before the attack, a similar hack could pave the way to a nuclear war.

“It took me a moment to realize that pretty much everything we had suggested and what we thought were quite extravagant and perhaps doomsday-esque scenarios that we suggested, had always been blown out of the water by reality,” Dr. Alexi Drew, a Research Associate at King’s College London and co-author of Escalation by Tweet: Managing the New Nuclear Diplomacy, told Motherboard on the phone. “This was a dangerous hack, especially given the nature of the access gained."

According to Drew, we were all lucky that the hackers seemed financially motivated. “Access gained through this administrator tool could have caused far greater damage and far wider damage than it did,” she said.

Escalation by Tweet makes the case that politicians and others in power need to be more careful about how they do business on social media. The line between personal shitpost and official government dictum has evaporated in the Trump era.

“The usage of social media, and Twitter in particular, has accelerated into the official space faster than there’s an actual understanding of what that means by those using it,” Drew said. “The more tonality you introduce to the messages, the easier it is to be misinterpreted or reinterpreted by intermediary actors.”

In their paper, Drew and her co-author Heather Williams make the case that aggressive tweets by political actors could have real world consequences. In a worst case scenario, that consequence could be nuclear war.

It sounds ridiculous on the surface, but the idea that Trump’s bad tweets could cause a nuclear war has been the subject of concern and consideration since his inauguration. In 2018, Jeffrey Lewis—a nuclear policy expert and professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies—published The 2020 Commission Report on the North Korean Attacks Against the United States .

Lewis’ book is a fictional account of President Trump starting a nuclear war with North Korea. In the book, Trump insults North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un’s sister in a tweet which causes Kim to launch a nuclear weapon at the U.S.

“I’m getting a little anxious to be completely honest,” Lewis told Motherboard over the phone. “Trump has turned out to be way worse than I imagined. Could a tweet trigger a nuclear war? The answer to that question is so obviously yes.”

According to Lewis, people tend to see social media as a less serious form of speech. “If the president says it on CNN or in the newspaper or to a foreign leader, that’s somehow real speech and that all the things Trump says on Twitter somehow aren’t real speech. But of course they are.”

Escalation by Tweet sees a nuclear disaster as a worst case scenario. Drew never anticipated a twitter beef actually leading to nuclear war.

“The only thing that makes me reconsider is the hack,” she said. According to Drew, for a hacker to take control of a Twitter account and lead a country into nuclear war would take an extraordinary set of circumstances. Most political Twitter accounts, for all their bluster, aren’t antagonizing other countries to the point of conflict.

With one exception—Donald Trump. “That really is the problem, isn’t it?” Drew said.

According to both Drew and Lewis, politicians need to realize that their tweets are meaningful forms of speech. But part of the problem is that the platforms themselves incentivize incendiary rhetoric.

“Twitter is, as a medium, designed to incentivize the attraction of greater followers and greater interaction,” Drew said. “If you're a public service or public servant. It shouldn't be about maximizing your engagement or your follower account. It should be about transmitting accurate information in an effective manner and reaching your audience. What you need is a government wide set of social media policies that make it clear what Twitter and other platforms should be used for and what they should not be used for.”

We’ve seen codified government social media strategies before and they’re grim. On New Years Eve in 2019, U.S. Strategic Command (Stratcom)—a joint military command responsible for missile defense and nuclear operations—tweeted out a veiled nuclear threat. “#Timessquare tradition rings in the #NewYear by dropping the big ball…if ever needed, we are #ready to drop something much, much bigger,” Stratcom tweeted.

A Freedom of Information Act Request later revealed Stratcom’s social media strategy. The people in charge of America’s nuclear arsenal were more interested in gaining followers on Twitter than conveying accurate and reasonable information.

“The majority of the document is about how to maximize engagement with the public,” Drew said. “It should be guidelines as to how to ensure that you’re not destabilizing conflict by tweeting about potentially dropping nukes on New Year’s Eve. Which is what they did.”

Bad actors on the platform are only part of the problem. “Tech companies need to be held responsible for their platforms in a way they are not currently,” Lewis said. “They have created these spaces that have dramatic impacts on our society. The reality is that this is a mode of presidential communication and that comes with all the responsibilities of conveying high level political communication about life and death matters. Was anyone at Twitter fired for this? Possibly someone should go to jail. This is really serious stuff.”

According to Lewis, people tend to see social media as a public sphere run by tech companies. These spaces, we think, are free of agenda, blank slates people can fill in with whatever they want. “But that’s not right,” Lewis said. “Because [tech companies] make all kinds of choices about who sees what and who gets amplified. The extent to which they are held accountable is not commensurate with their responsibility.”

Drew also said tech companies have to take more responsibility. “I think they need to explain what happened, how it happened, and potentially more importantly, what they're going to do both technically, and in terms of policy moving forward, to ensure that it doesn't happen again. They need to rebuild trust.”

Changes to the platform will only go so far if a hot headed dictator or U.S. President decides to vent their frustrations on social media. “If these findings could be summarised in 280 characters or less,” Escalation by Tweet said. “It would be: ‘To manage escalation during crises, stop tweeting.’"

How Twitter Could Start a Nuclear War syndicated from https://triviaqaweb.wordpress.com/feed/

[thisdaynews]

Breaking News: Trump's 'astonishing' concession to Kim Jong Un and North Korea

New Post has been published on https://www.thisdaynews.net/2018/06/13/breaking-news-trumps-astonishing-concession-to-kim-jong-un-and-north-korea/

Breaking News: Trump's 'astonishing' concession to Kim Jong Un and North Korea

At Tuesday’s press conference in Singapore following his meeting with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, President Trump surprised America’s Asian allies, and reportedly his own Pentagon, by surrendering a major bargaining chip in the form of U.S.-South Korea military exercises.

“We will be stopping the war games, which will save us a tremendous amount of money, unless and until we see that the future negotiation is not going as it should,” Trump told reporters, referring to the annual exercises as “provocative.” “At some point, I have to be honest — I used to say this during my campaign … I want to get our soldiers [in South Korea] out. I want to bring our soldiers back home.”

As was the case when Trump fulfilled other controversial campaign pledges in the foreign policy arena — including scuttling the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement, the Paris climate accord and the Iran nuclear agreement, his comments sent shudders through the already shaky architecture of military alliances that undergird U.S. global power. Abandoning joint military exercises will immediately begin to degrade the readiness and deterrent posture of the 32,000 U.S. troops in South Korea, military experts say.

Retired Adm. Harry Harris, the former head of U.S. Pacific Command and the Trump administration’s chosen ambassador to South Korea, explained the logic behind the military exercises in congressional testimony last year. “We are obliged to defend South Korea by treaty. They have a strong and capable military, as we do. But if we’re going to defend or if we’re going to fight with them on the peninsula then we have to be able to integrate with their military,” Harris told the House Armed Services Committee. “We have to maintain our degree of readiness, not only unilateral readiness, but also our combined and joint readiness with our brothers and sisters in the ROK [Republic of Korea] military.”

Equally surprising as Trump’s military announcement was the fact that he reportedly took this unilateral step without notifying South Korean and Japanese allies, or the Pentagon. The cancellation of the exercises has been a North Korean priority for decades, and in calling them “war games” and “provocative,” Trump adopted the rhetoric of Pyongyang.

“What’s really disconcerting is that Trump announced unilaterally to the leader of North Korea that the United States is going to stop military exercises with our allies, without first telling our allies or even the Pentagon. That’s astonishing,” said Michael Green, a senior vice president for Asia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and a former senior director for Asia on the National Security Council. “Then Trump says he’d like to pull U.S. troops out of Asia, which is a real heart-warming development for Beijing and Moscow, who want nothing more than to weaken and eventually unravel our alliances. So this is a pretty stunning development.”

Before the summit Trump suggested that Kim’s two meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping in the run-up to talks had hardened Pyongyang’s positions. Some China experts believe that Xi specifically asked Kim to bring up the military exercises as a major issue for discussion. Trump’s subsequent remarks about wanting to withdraw forward-deployed U.S. troops from Asia was a further boon to China’s strategic aspirations. As former BBC bureau chief Paul Danahar noted in a tweet, the Chinese Foreign Ministry announced that Trump would suspend military exercises with South Korea even before Trump announced it at his own press briefing. “That suggests Kim’s people were on the phone to Beijing straight after the meeting cos they recognized how big a concession it was,” Danahar tweeted.

“Beijing was unhappy when Kim announced that he was unilaterally freezing his missile and nuclear weapons tests, and I believe the Chinese encouraged him to put the issue of also freezing the U.S.-ROK military exercises on the table in their discussions,” said Bonnie Glaser, director of the China Power Project at CSIS. “Certainly it was astonishing to hear President Trump talk about these exercises as ‘war games’ and ‘provocative,’ which is language taken right out of Pyongyang’s playbook. Trump’s message that he wants to pull U.S. troops out was just further music to China’s ears.”

Even in the unlikely event that North Korea actually surrenders its nuclear weapons, it will still possess large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, a 1.2 million man army, and enough conventional firepower to raze the South Korean capital of Seoul in the opening days of any conflict. Meanwhile, the U.S.-ROK deterrent posture against those formidable forces will continue to degrade as long as the freeze of joint exercises lasts, and will deteriorate even faster with continued talk of a withdrawal of U.S. troops.

Retired four-star Gen. Barry McCaffrey is the former chief of U.S. Southern Command. “I believe it was entirely inappropriate for President Trump — who has no understanding of nuclear weapons and strategic alliances and was completely unprepared — to meet alone with the North Korean dictator without so much as a note-taker present,” he told Yahoo News in an interview. “I’m very concerned that Trump signaled that if Kim gives up his nuclear weapons, then the United States will withdraw our troops from South Korea. Once you start that process it’s a one-way street of retreat from the Pacific Rim, which would leave our allies to confront a belligerent North Korea and an aggressive and massively armed China alone.”