(External Content) Cyber Deterrence Theory

Abstract: This study endeavors to identify the shortfalls of the United States current utilization of deterrence theory in light of a growing amount of asymmetric warfare, warfare from afar, and cyber warfare that may rise to the level of weapons of mass destruction level. It proposes that this deterrence theory should be modernized to less developing a strategic common practice where some aggression is tolerated, and intolerable acts of aggression are retaliated with through diplomatic and economic tools against individuals involved within the organization perpetuating the aggression.

Citation: Hallock, Danial (2018).  "Modernizing Deterrence Theory." AMU. Accessed at:

Related Articles: Paradox of ProgressRedefining the Cold War; Syria, North Korea, and Trump

Abstract: This study identifies prior authoritative research into attribution assessments, their shortfalls, and recommends several potential avenues of improvement, namely the targeting of individual persons within non-state actors and advanced persistent threat actors conducting cyber attacks against the U.S. and her allies utilizing prior research into pyschology and motivational theories. 

Citation: Hallock, Danial (2018).  "Solving the Issue of Attribution, Targeting, and Retaliation." AMU. Accessed at:

Related Articles: When Bots Become Bombs, Paradox of Progress, The Accidental World War

Bush, Xi, and McCain walk into an Auditorium

Bush, Xi, and McCain walk into an Auditorium

The face of conflict is changing.  While leaders like Kim Jong Un and Donald Trump still see conflict in the traditional light, many of their peers - and certainly the next generation - see conflict differently:  Cultural, Economical, and Ecological. The kinetic warfare of the 19th and 20th century is a relic of past generations, a fact never more poignant than after recent speeches by three prominent politicians across two countries.

When Bots Become Bombs

When Bots Become Bombs

Ambiguity in cyberspace and the legality of hacking and manipulating sovereign nations; does it benefit the attacker, or the victim?  We've all but survived the potential catastrophe of the 2016 election, and the Russian interference within it, but what does that mean for the future of cyber and psychological warfare throughout the world?