DHS Warns of Russian Cyberattack On US If It Responds To Ukraine Invasion (go.com) 129
As tensions rise in the standoff over Ukraine, the Department of Homeland Security has warned that the U.S. response to a possible Russian invasion could result in a cyberattack launched against the U.S. by the Russian government or its proxies. ABC News reports: "We assess that Russia would consider initiating a cyber attack against the Homeland if it perceived a US or NATO response to a possible Russian invasion of Ukraine threatened its long-term national security," a DHS Intelligence and Analysis bulletin sent to law enforcement agencies around the country and obtained by ABC News said. The bulletin was dated Jan. 23, 2022.
Russia, DHS said, has a "range of offensive cyber tools that it could employ against US networks," and the attacks could range from a low level denial of service attack, to "destructive" attacks targeting critical infrastructure. "We assess that Russia's threshold for conducting disruptive or destructive cyber attacks in the Homeland probably remains very high and we have not observed Moscow directly employ these types of cyber attacks against US critical infrastructure -- notwithstanding cyber espionage and potential prepositioning operations in the past," the bulletin said. Last year, Russian cybercriminals launched a ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline, shutting down operations and causing widespread outages across the country. Meat supplier JBS also had its operations shutdown due to Russian based hackers.
Russia, DHS said, has a "range of offensive cyber tools that it could employ against US networks," and the attacks could range from a low level denial of service attack, to "destructive" attacks targeting critical infrastructure. "We assess that Russia's threshold for conducting disruptive or destructive cyber attacks in the Homeland probably remains very high and we have not observed Moscow directly employ these types of cyber attacks against US critical infrastructure -- notwithstanding cyber espionage and potential prepositioning operations in the past," the bulletin said. Last year, Russian cybercriminals launched a ransomware attack on Colonial Pipeline, shutting down operations and causing widespread outages across the country. Meat supplier JBS also had its operations shutdown due to Russian based hackers.
DHS warns that Russia may deploy Lite-Brights if (Score:5, Funny)
antagonized. Massachusetts calls for National Guard reinforcements.
Re:DHS warns that Russia may deploy Lite-Brights i (Score:5, Informative)
No. If it has a power source, exposed wiring, and tape, it's a bomb [wikipedia.org]. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Tit for tat? (Score:3)
I'm pretty sure the US has its own cyberattack plan in place to go after Russia as a retaliatory measure if the need arises. Of course they would never speak of it before deployment, and may not admit to it afterwards.
What concerns me in the long term is the likelihood of false-flag operations wherein a country engages in cyber warfare against its own citizens and blames foreign actors.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
> What concerns me in the long term is the likelihood of false-flag operations wherein a country engages in cyber warfare against its own citizens and blames foreign actors.
You sound like a conspiracy theorist. Next you'll tell me Fauci helped fund gain of function research on corona viruses at the very same lab the COVID-19 was suspected of coming from. I mean, these are all fanciful delusions and all you have is signed letters from the director of the NIH attesting to it. But I mean, what OTHER proo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Masters thesis about that (Score:5, Insightful)
Interesting that you mentioned that. Just yesterday I started working with someone who is doing their master's thesis on what the US response should be in the digital realm.
One of my first items of feedback is that they should remember the decisions are being made by the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party. Hurting *China* doesn't necessarily have any effect. You want to make it painful for the Communist Central Committee if they continue attacks. Actions that harm the average Chinese farmer do little good.
Re: (Score:2)
Actions that harm Chinese citizens will actually help the CCP. They position themselves as protecting the Chinese people from harm, and will spin it as evidence that the protection is needed against foreign aggression.
It certainly won't make Chinese people think that maybe the attacks are justified.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I would worry more about non-affiliated entities taking a position like the Belarus railroad attack.
I wish I understood Putin’s game plan better; it kind of seems like he has a Napolean complex, and if so something needs to be done in retaliation if he does (further) invade Ukraine.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder how well prepared Russian infrastructure is. If they plan to launch a cyberattack it would make sense to harden their own installations first.
Re: (Score:2)
Their power infrastructure is probably less networked and more primitive and therefore ironically more safe. Humans are likely in the loop in more cases, which means their grid might be slower to react, but also harder to attack.
Re: (Score:1)
Shhh, don't expose it until after I die, Dude.
Good if Russia Cyber attacks (Score:3, Insightful)
Some things will fail, but this will but a strong focus on computer security which is long overdue.
Good to have this happen now, before we are totally dependent on computers. They cannot yet cause cars to crash etc.
Chips are 40% of the cost of a car (Score:3)
Electronics Account for 40 Percent of the Cost of a New Car.
https://www.caranddriver.com/f... [caranddriver.com]
I have three friends whose job is to hack cars.
Hacks absolutely can crash cars, today. My friends prove that every day.
Re: (Score:2)
And they're still alive?!
Re: (Score:2)
other people's cars... duh.
Re: (Score:3)
Of all the things to worry about, Russia hacking my car is somewhere around being struck by lightning.
Right until defense production act is invoked (Score:2)
Once the best minds in Silicon Valley are busy hacking Russia interests by government order, Putin will want a ceasefire.
Re: (Score:2)
Fuck, why stop at the best minds? Just let the US Govt. declare open cyberattack season on the Russians - nobody in the US will be prosecuted for any cyberattacks against the Russians. Let some of the ethical hackers who have always wanted to try a real hack give it a shot without risking jail time, and help the country (and the world) at the same time. The massive amount of script kiddies is going to make the signal to noise ratio so high that the real US cyber response will be more likely to slip through
Re: Right until defense production act is invoked (Score:1)
Wasn't this the plot of Hackers II-'Murica Night? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The best minds in Silicon Valley are a lot more interested in making money than screwing around with guys who put Polonium in your tea.
Re: (Score:2)
Minor grammatical error, totally different meaning.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it depends on where you were brought up and how you speak colloquially. I meant it in the sense of "people who have a penchant for putting Polonium in one's tea". Your way works, too.
Bring it on, Vladimir (Score:2)
We are already surviving Facebook, Twitter, Google and Verizon. You will be a minor nuisance in comparison.
Cut all net links to Russia. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My thought as well, cut the country off at the backbone level and see how fast they backpedal once the screaming starts from the average citizen
Who are the US of A protecting? (Score:1, Interesting)
I mean, come on, why does the US of A always have to be the big brother and step up to defend anyone under the claims of liberty and freedom, when there are fights going on under our very own territory? See daily St Louis, Chicago, Baltimore news. We achieved the highest murder rates in 25 years. See SoCal cities being sacked day after day. But the US of A must go all around the world to help another country to defend itself from many of their own.
It is about time leaders of this country pretend we can affo
We signed up for it back in the 1940's and 1950's. (Score:2)
We should just go back to being arms merchants.
Re:Who are the US of A protecting? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, somebody has to do it, I think. In the modern world, the way it is, we still battle different social and economic systems. That's a tricky one to evaluate. Particularity now, when the globe got so small all of sudden and everything is so interconnected.
Today's critical (ha-ha) thinking is based on relativism. No system is "better" than other (but you better accept our system or we will cancel you!). On one hand that sounds OK - let the peoples decide what form of economy and government they want. But it seems that's not the whole picture. If you allow free travel between nations, the result is almost unanimous support for the western system. Everyone wants to live here; people flock from every continent and every society.
As an immigrant myself I can assure you that some immigrants are only after the money because their situation back home is really difficult. But when you talk with enough people you realize that the social order, the framework of the law, the relatively low corruption, the relatively high level of personal freedom, mostly working bureaucracy etc. are just as important if not more than the money. And let's face it, the money is a result of said society, not the other way around (this of course flies against the narrative of "all the riches of the west is based on slavery and colonialism" nonsense).
The original, enlightened, western values won the popular vote of planet Earth. So, do we need a global enforcer of these values? Well, do we have declaration of human rights? Do we talk endlessly about freedom and human dignity? Right to live, right to speak right for this and that..the global politics speaks about these all the time. We have the UN and plethora of conventions to ensure these rights are available to all people. So it seems that there is a framework and someone has to enforce it.
I would still agree, partially, with "leave them alone" sentiment but only if the totalitarian countries would stop invading and annexing others. Also, being born and raised under Marxism, we would have welcomed a military intervention form the west to rid us of the communist dictatorship, which was installed by the occupying Russian army after heavily rigged "free elections". Many East Europeans still hold a grudge against the west for "leaving us for dead to the murderous savage Stalin". Only now, to our shock and disgust, we learn that many "thinkers" in your society were perfectly kosher with the millions being killed. I guess millions of corpses is nothing when it happens to someone else! Moreover, these "thinkers" agree that the communist ideal was worth the price!! The same thinking that cancels people who speak today about the horrors of authoritarian regimes (see NK defectors). They also believe these "elections" I mentioned earlier were fair and it was the will of the people to live under genocidal despots.
I remember my shock and indignation when I went first time to a Western country (France) in 1998 and saw graffiti of the hammer and sickle on a few walls in town. I actually asked the French if we should call the police, since that symbol has killed almost an order of magnitude more people than the swastika, and that one is forbidden to display, no? I really could not believe my eyes. Little did I know that it was mostly the French so-called "philosophers" who were watching the genocide in our lands with an approving smile, while concocting cognitive diarrhea aimed to usher that bright future in the west as well. If not today, then certainly when we successfully brainwash the new generation (they succeeded marvelously) to overthrow the bourgeoisie order.
I see not much hope for the future, because the West, and particularly the US seems to like authoritarianism more and more. I don't trust you anymore to protect human rights and freedoms. You cancelled them.
Re: Who are the US of A protecting? (Score:2)
Meh (Score:1, Insightful)
Fortunately... (Score:5, Funny)
Need rules of cyber war (Score:4, Interesting)
If Russia melts down a US nuclear reactor, or wipes out then national power grid, or ransomwares the entire US banking system, or simply wipes every windows PC in the country, what is an appropriate response?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
> or simply wipes every windows PC in the country
The Year of the Linux Desktop may finally arrive ... and then wiped by Xi.
Re: (Score:1)
Large scale cyber attacks between US and USSR could escalate quickly. At what level of damage and cost from a cyber attack, is a conventional or even nuclear response warranted? We need agreed upon rules of cyber war with clear red lines. If Russia melts down a US nuclear reactor, or wipes out then national power grid, or ransomwares the entire US banking system, or simply wipes every windows PC in the country, what is an appropriate response?
They'd have to be utterly stupid to do cyberattacks on USA. If they invade Ukraine they do *NOT* want USA, NATO, etc. involved. Why give them (another) pretext? Especially now that Bidet pretty much gave them green light, by saying that if they invade he will impose uhhh, what was it? "terrible sanctions"? I'm sure they are all shaking, especially since they spent the last 15 years reorienting toward China. It should have been "if you invade you will meet us on the field of battle", but that's what you get
Re: (Score:2)
It should have been "if you invade you will meet us on the field of battle", but that's what you get when you start the shitshow called "democrat in White House".
Oh right, because the orange guy would have declared war on his handler.
Re: (Score:2)
It should have been "if you invade you will meet us on the field of battle", but that's what you get when you start the shitshow called "democrat in White House".
Oh right, because the orange guy would have declared war on his handler.
Don't you think the situation has become too serious to just repeat the democrat talking points that even you don't believe in anyway? Or do you think it's a coincidence Putin is doing this shit now and not two years ago?
Re: (Score:2)
Don't you think the situation has become too serious to just repeat the democrat talking points that even you don't believe in anyway?
They are not just democrap talking points, and I do believe in them. 45 ran out of places to borrow money after it came out that he had defrauded Deutsche Bank into lending to him with his phone call in which he pretended to be someone else and claimed that he was in control of his father's assets quite some years before that was true, and Deutsche Bank stopped loaning him money (which they were doing for years only to avoid the appearance that they had been idiots for loaning him money.) So he had to go to
Re: (Score:1)
Or do you think it's a coincidence Putin is doing this shit now and not two years ago?
No, I don't think it's a coincidence. He did it on purpose to make Democratic leadership look weak, because it serves his purpose to put Republicans in power because they will shit all over the country and also not go to war with him directly. They will fight proxy wars in the desert for the enrichment of the MIC and their various buddies like Halliburton (which was awarded several lucrative no-bid contracts the last time we were bombing brown people in the sand) but they aren't going to go to war with Russia any more than anyone else who can avoid it.
Okay. Obama looses Crimea and offers pretty much "thoughts and prayers" and that's all (and also immediately stops military exports to Ukraine), but he's the enemy of russkies. Trump stabilizes the war in Donbass, restores military exports to Ukraine and is the only world leader that puts sanctions on Nord Stream that actually have teeth and slow it down by two years - aaand he's "friend" of russkies because some democrat-run investigation "couldn't prove he didn't collude" with russkies. Bidet again stops
Re: (Score:2)
Tell us you've never heard of misdirection without telling us you've never heard of misdirection
Re: Need rules of cyber war (Score:2)
Let's be clear, Cheeto Mussolini's actions amounted to very little actual impediment to putin and absolutely no long term consequences. He "stopped" him from doing things he was winding down anyway. Whoop de shit.
Re: (Score:2)
How do you even identify the real source of an attack? Just because it comes from a compromised server in Russia doesn't mean that it's a Russian attack.
You want to be really, really sure before starting a hot war or melting down a nuclear reactor.
Re: (Score:2)
"Hurray! The Linux desktop is upon us!"
The reality of this no one wants to hear: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
We (and NATO, and I imagine most of the EU) are not going to just let Russia waltz into Ukraine and take over. So hang on to your hats, kids, shit's about to get real.
LOL. You remember you have a democrat in White House? Bidet already announced what the response will be if Russia invades: sanctions (and *not* military action - for those who need to have things explained). Might as well have been "thoughts and prayers" for all the fear this is going to strike into russkies.
And EU is too weak to do anything without US backing, and that's even provided you could somehow magically convince Germans to finally stop being gas-friends with Putin.
Re: (Score:2)
/. reverse threshold filter (Score:2)
In threads like this you want to filter out what has been upmodded and only want to see downmodded stuff, but the filter does not support that. Feature request!
Already happened in Canada (Score:2)
Easy solution. (Score:2)
Remotely audit all mission-critical* networks in the US for security and resilience.
*When attending ISO 9000 seminars at NASA, I was informed the US government considers anything that could result in fatalities, OR the damage/destruction of property or outage of services where net cost is in excess of, IIRC, $15 million to be mission-critical. The DoD and DoJ would probably include risks to national security in that definition, that hospitals/CDC would include anything that endangers public health on a larg
A country that is crap at... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Biggest US fear? (Score:2)
I'd have to think that this is likely the biggest worry for US policymakers, more so than runaway military conflict. It's "easy" to avoid that, just don't directly challenge Russian military forces in Ukraine with US/NATO military forces.
Cyberattacks are an obvious Russian retaliation -- they impose real economic costs, have plausible deniability, and are low cost to implement. You don't even have to go after specific strategic targets, either -- hammering e-commerce or small business at scale delivers th
this is very worrying (Score:2)
Given that they compromised the presidential election with $40,000 worth of facebook memes, I shudder to think what they could do if they went all out.
What, more cyber attacks? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:There's A LOT of BS on the NATO side here (Score:5, Informative)
Go home, Boris. The chill air of St. Petersburg will snap you back to reality.
Funny how you never mentioned the Budapest Memorandum [pircenter.org] which explicitly states Russia will respect Ukraine's sovereignty and terrirtorial integrity and will not use arms against Ukraine.
Re:There's A LOT of BS on the NATO side here (Score:5, Insightful)
Much of that region and the contested regions are **heavily** ethnically Russian and not Ukrainian. Those people there don't want to be ruled by Kiev anymore than West Virginia wanted to be under the thumb of Richmond in the Civil War.
Ok, this sort of thing should be solved by elections, not military conquests.
If Russia starts conquering countries, they are trash.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Texas voted to leave the Union, and the USA didn't recognize that one either. You don't get to hold a vote whenever you want regardless of the authority you are under. And if there should be a revolution, why is Russia involving itself in fomenting a civil war? The US gets away with that kind of crap because well, they're rich and powerful. But I don't think this game can play out quite the same for anyone else.
Re: (Score:3)
The US gets away with that kind of crap because well
The US should not do that either.
Re: (Score:2)
What's fair and what's reality are sadly very far apart. The US has a big advantage in having the largest military, a significant economic market, key players world finance, and many multinational corporations. Much of the world's money moves through American hands, and that money plays a significant role in domestic politics and in turn American foreign policy.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe this is part of the beef that China and Russia have with the US. They consider themselves peers, but seriously disrespected.
Ironically, the populists in the US who cry for America first and isolationism don't realise, or don't care, that this is where their prosperity came from in the first place.
Re:There's A LOT of BS on the NATO side here (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's start with...
No, let's instead start with not trying to white wash the Russian invasion of a sovereign nation.
After that we can talk about how there is zero evidence to support the claim that the US overthrew the Ukrainian government. I mean, if we did overthrow the Ukrainian government and it wasnt a revolution based on the will of the people then why on earth would the Ukrainians have voted the same government that was installed back into power a few years later instead of a pro Russian government?
Re: (Score:1)
Dude... seriously, Nuland was walking around handing out cookies to protesters in Kiev Ukraine during the coup/riots. Equivalent would be Lavrov or Medvedev cheering on protesters and handing out cheeseburgers during Jan 6 capitol insurrection/riot/protest whatever you want to call it.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Dude... seriously, Nuland was walking around handing out cookies to protesters in Kiev Ukraine during the coup/riots. Equivalent would be Lavrov or Medvedev cheering on protesters and handing out cheeseburgers during Jan 6 capitol insurrection/riot/protest whatever you want to call it.
You seriously think one guy handing out cookies or even cheeseburgers justifies military invasion?!
Re: (Score:2)
The concept of the US installing/overthrowing governments in other countries really isn't that far fetched. Actually. It's as close fetched as your dog sitting on your face with a ball...
So I can see why that argument is made. It's probably wrong, but it's not like it hasn't happened before. Many times.
Re: (Score:2)
Absolutely we have a history. The people of the countries whose governments we've overthrown are never so thrilled that there would be the numbers to vote the government back in though.
I mean, if you were going to overthrow an elected government why would anyone replace it with a democracy?
Re: (Score:2)
No need to imagine, there is Cuba and Venezuela around. Yes, US tried to mess with Latin America. But that was at the height of cold war and in the end agreements were made to not invade neighbors for going communist. If Putin wants to go back on that, he should prepare for consequences of a full scale cold war with entire developed world.
Re:There's A LOT of BS on the NATO side here (Score:5, Insightful)
Much of that region and the contested regions are **heavily** ethnically Russian and not Ukrainian. Those people there don't want to be ruled by Kiev anymore than West Virginia wanted to be under the thumb of Richmond in the Civil War.
I find it crazy people are trying to legitimize the forcible military conquest of other sovereign states who have taken no aggressive action against the invading state. This ethnic Russian crap is basically the same pretextual bullshit Hitler used to justify his invasions to protect "German speaking" populations.
Then you factor in the color revolution the US carried out around 2007-2009 (forgot exact year) that replaced a duly elected pro-Russian government with an anti-Russian government that wants NATO membership, and it's no wonder the Russians are having none of it.
Whatever superpower Ukrainians internal politics favors alignment with is not a valid justification for military conquest.
Personally if I were US president I wouldn't stand for it. We've seen the fruits of appeasement throughout history and resulting suffering and war bought about by normalizing and excusing it. ANY country engaged in military conquest should be prevented by force if necessary with no exceptions.
Re: There's A LOT of BS on the NATO side here (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that the guiding philosophy of the US military (especially the Navy) since WW2 has been to be able to fight a two front war don't you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, for starters I'm not buying the right wing "political correctness is killing our military" Fox news shtick. You can peddle that elsewhere. I find it far more likely that our military readiness has been degraded by us fighting two wars that went on for far too long, one of which we definitely should never have been involved with in the first place and neither of them ending in any truly satisfactory fashion https://www.gao.gov/products/g... [gao.gov] .
Even still, our military is not in a shambles and you're going
Re: (Score:2)
As far as political correctness, its way out of balance now. Its one thing to have a periodic session on sexual harassment or sensitivity training, its entirely another for all these trainings to dominate all other fo
Re: (Score:2)
> This ethnic Russian crap is basically the same pretextual bullshit Hitler used to justify his invasions to protect "German speaking" populations.
+100
By the same logic Russia is using, the UK should be arguing that any english speaking region is better ruled by them.
It's insane the logic going on right now.
"If you retaliate to us invading a neighboring country we'll also attack you!"
Uhhh, no.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Whatever superpower Ukrainians internal politics favors alignment with is not a valid justification for military conquest. Personally if I were US president I wouldn't stand for it. We've seen the fruits of appeasement throughout history and resulting suffering and war bought about by normalizing and excusing it. ANY country engaged in military conquest should be prevented by force if necessary with no exceptions.
Unfortunately the US president is too busy deciding which governments to overthrow and how many people should be assassinated today to stand up to aggression.
... and whoose tea to lace with Polonium or Novichok?
Re: (Score:2)
Let's start with Crimea. In living memory, Crimea was part of Russia and given over by the Soviet Union to Ukraine.
Much of that region and the contested regions are **heavily** ethnically Russian and not Ukrainian. Those people there don't want to be ruled by Kiev anymore
It's funny how these are basically the same arguments used by Hitler to justify the invasions of Austria and the Sudetenland. That worked out well as I recall.
Re: (Score:2)
You weren't even a wet spot on the back seat of the Lada yet, during the Vietnam War.
Re: (Score:1)
There is nothing like a good war to unite the US [sic].
Yeah, it's political shtick.. And it sure is uniting the war mongers around here. This is weirder than the lies that put us into those other wars. Americans really want war, not Russia or NATO, just the US, trying to drive up the price of natural gas to make it profitable to ship on tankers
Funny how the most likely scenario of the war that "Americans, not russkies, want" starts with russian invasion of Ukraine.
Re:russian hacking? that old chestnut? (Score:5, Insightful)
Funny. You don't look Russian.
Things would be better if Putin was a commie (Score:4, Insightful)
At least he'd be following some kind of ideology however wrong headed. But he's nothing more than your standard issue banana republic dictator - all he cares about is money and power and he'll cling on to them no matter what the collateral damage.
Re: (Score:1)
How do you profit from not wanting hostile nukes on your border? That's his goal. Not to be surrounded by missiles (Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia, even Belarus and now Kazakhstan, coincidentally EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM had a revolution or a coup attempt, Ukraine only one succeeded though). And then you have people in high positions within NATO saying things like Russia should be destroyed or broken apart....Coincidentally NATO = Anti Russia alliance, like seriously it has not purpose to exist outside of trying
Re:Things would be better if Putin was a commie (Score:5, Insightful)
How do you profit from not wanting hostile nukes on your border? That's his goal. Not to be surrounded by missiles (Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia, even Belarus and now Kazakhstan, coincidentally EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM had a revolution or a coup attempt
You have that shit ass backwards. Putin got elected by assassinating his rivals, it's Russia that has the nukes and had a coup. Everyone else is worried about Russia on their border, not the other way around. Nobody is going to invade Russia, but Russia invades its neighbors at any opportunity.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Russia could easily wipe all of those places off the map with nukes. Russia doesn't like when surrounding places do better and wants to drag them back down.
Re: (Score:2)
Ukraine gave up its entire nuclear arsenal under the Budapest Agreement, an agreement Russia signed and which says Russia will respect Ukraine's sovereignty and independence. That's your first lie.
(Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia, even Belarus and now Kazakhstan, coincidentally EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM had a revolution or a coup attempt, Ukraine only one succeeded though).
No, they didn't and no, Ukraine did not have
Re: (Score:2)
No, they didn't and no, Ukraine did not have "coup". The people voted to have closer ties to the West because they saw the ongoing corruption endemic to Russia
When did they vote? There was no referendum on having closer ties to the West in Ukraine before the coup (and even after that)
Re: Things would be better if Putin was a commie (Score:2)
Re: Things would be better if Putin was a commie (Score:3)
British twit? (Score:2)
Would be the same type of british "twits" a lot of whom gave their lives in iraq war 2 in order for Bush to look like a tough guy and pretend he was doing something about 9/11 even though saddam had fuck all to do with it?
Screw you yankie.
Re: British twit? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Things would be better if Putin was a commie (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Seek help (Score:2)