Iran sent emails intimidating American voters, US intelligence says

yeah but it was a fake email account...likely created by the Iranians in a effort to spread some sort of conspiracy that it was actually the Proud Boys, who propagandist have suggest are somehow linked to the President

 

That’s absurd. We had 8 years of a very Iran friendly US government and they could not have pulled off normalization.

 

They could come from the same source. That wouldn't surprise me.

 

Thanks for the explanation. But the part that you didn't address was that this wasn't just, "general chaos," they were intending, though you may think the result of their interference was irrelevant to them. It seems to me, though, that would be part of the Iranians' calculus.

The next step for any analysis would be ascertaining what that expected result was. As you have seen in this thread, there are numerous theories of that case. Some have held that this was an attempt to smear Trump, through association, by demonizing, "The Proud Boys." Others have maintained they would have expected their ruse to be discovered, & that this might generate sympathy for Trump's being set-up, or an expectation that Democrats must be involved. And so forth.

My own interpretation is more straight forward. The intent of targeting Democratic voters' email accounts & sending them personalized emails, i.e., that mention the person by name, state the person's party affiliation, & physical ADDRESS, then make a threat in the name of an American group that is known to both be a strong supporter of Pres. Trump's and to be WELL-ARMED, seems a clear attempt to intimidate these voters, which would help Trump. But no matter which way one lands on their intent-- much as if their was one foreign candidate which our elected Republicans would prefer to deal with but whose opponent was the preferred winner of our Democratic politicians (hypothetically speaking)-- there is a philosophical group w/ political power in Iran, to match one's believed intent of the cyber-action.

 

Not to me. I don't think they can actually forge ballots effectively.

They may want to smear Trump but this isn't the way to do it.

Since voting is done in secret, there is no way for the Iranians to know how someone voted. It is just spam. I get hundreds of them every day. Sending spam isn't an effective way to do anything I can think of.

 

So it is your position, then, that

And yet, they did this believing that it wouldn't have any effect, & therefore would NOT hurt the U.S.:

In your own words,

 

No it isn't. I said nothing like that. You made it up.

Are you planning to refute my words?

 

I already did. You can say I, "made up," that you said that these emails are, "just spam," and that you believe that, "sending spam isn't an effective way to do anything," as much as you want, but those are your very words, from post #80 (which I quoted in #81). So, logically, you can't both answer my argument that Iranians did this to have an effect on our election, by calling their emails ineffectual spam, and at the same time disclaim your view that they sent these emails believing they would not hurt us (because they are only ineffectual spam). That is called a hypocritical argument. Either the emails did have the potential to affect our election, validating my assertion in post #79, or

-- which would mean, if they saw it as you say, the Iranian perpetrators would NOT expect their act to in any way affect our election results (your quoted protestations, at the top of this post, notwithstanding).

Do you not remember posting these things? Maybe Iranians hacked your account.

 

Whatever you are saying has to be taken out of context but I'm too lazy to reconstruct the whole interchange and, frankly, don't even care. Spamming emails is not a good political tactic for anyone.

 

Well it doesn't say much for either your arguments, or your mental powers of organizing your thoughts, if you cannot, "reconstuct," your own argument In post #73 you said that Iran was our bitter enemy & so would do anything to hurt us (I am repeating this from memory & so not using quotation marks in case there is a slight discrepency in wording-- because the blue, "quote-boxes," seem to be confusing to you). You & anyone else can check post #73 to see that my paraphrase is a very accurate representation of your point; the post numbers are at the bottom of every post, though I have to turn my phone to get the long, "landscape," view in order to see them, so you may need to, as well). I'll let this suffice for the 1st of your 2 assertions which you claim to be an overtaxing chore, due to your own lassitude, to find yourself (unless you return to charging me with making things up, in which case it's a simple enough matter for me to quote your post #73).

So this contention of yours supports the position I was stipulating, though you seemed to be disagreeing w/ me, that this was done either by hard-liners in Iran, to help Trump (which appears far more logical to me) or, in the view of other posters here, that it was done by moderates, in order to help Biden (who, from the polls, would not seem in need if this sort of help).

 

@fmw
I know this will make it too difficult for you to follow my argument, your needing to look in the next box to read the concluding 3 sentences; but I unfortunately touched the area to, "post," instead of the spot I'd intended, half-way through, & my typing on my phone is an incredibly slow process, so here we are. To finish:

But you then go on to make the claim, as you repeated above (post #84), that this was just spam which is an ineffectual way to do anything, contradicting your assertion that Iran was trying to hurt us with this very same, ineffective spam. Just to be clear for you, it makes no sense, if one party intends to do harm to another, for it to choose a method it deems ineffective. So which is it?

 

Since I feel fmw may simply be looking for a graceful exit from an argument in which his foot has been inserted into his mouth, & may perhaps lack the self-assuredness to merely admit any flaw in his reasoning (therefore alleging that I must be taking him out of context); and since I have no interest in discussing something w/ a person who puts forth an argument that so insincerely changes in whatever way is required, solely to maintain its paramount contention, that they are right & I am wrong; I will continue for whoever else may be reading, with 2 additional notes.

First, based on the fact that there IS so much spam, this long after its advent, speaks to its effectiveness. I think the only point fmw could credibly assert was that spam is ineffective on him. Extending that to all people is clearly w/o basis, unless one contends that the innumerable spammers of the past have all found it ineffective & yet, still, a new generation is constantly replacing the last, ever-needing to prove to itself what has been proven countless times over: that it doesn't work. Finding a single spammer who has been in business for any significant length of time knocks the legs from beneath this argument. And for those who aren't aware of the fact: Iran is one of the world's premier cyber actors, in terms of sophistication.

A new possibility has occurred to me, however, beyond hard-liners in Iran (which includes their SUPREME LEADER, Ayatolla Whoever) wanting to help Trump in order to maintain the belligerent stance from us that serves their purpose (or, according to a perspective others here have expressed: the current, moderate elected leadership of Iran wanting to smear Trump/help Biden in order to re-establish Obama's nuclear deal). This new option to consider is that Iran's primary motive could be cash, if Russia had wanted to interfere in a way that would keep their fingerprints off it, this time, & so paid Iran to do their dirty work.

I, of course, have no proof of this, nor of my other speculation. I am merely trying to suggest logical arguments that may explain the Iranian rationale. With this, as with my original hypothesis, it makes more sense to me that, if Russia were so involved, their objective & intention would be to make more likely Trump's re-election. However, I know there are others in the Forum who feel that Vladimir Putin, who has such an admitted distaste for Hillary Rodham Clinton, is actually a fan of Joe Biden's. So the mystery, & the debate, continues.

 

I agree it makes no sense for Iran to do that. I didn't say anything about parties so I have no response to that. Do you consider spam to be an effective method to accomplish anything at all?

 

Who do you think Iran wants to win?

 

See the very next post (from the one you answered here), #87. It's the one immediately preceding your reply.

 

OK, if you read your spam then that's fine with me. It surprises me that anyone would read it.

 

They are trying to give Trump a bad name and anger Democrat voters.

 

There's not a simple answer to that because it depends on who in Iran you are asking about (see my post #11). But I'll admit the current top elected leadership should prefer Biden, if they want to return to their nuclear deal & end our sanctions. But I think it's less sure w/ Iran than w/ us that they speak w/ ONE VOICE (& there are times when WE don't speak in one voice, either, e.g., when Reagan's people were communicating w/ Iranians during the hostage crisis, before the election against Carter, or when Flynn was speaking to his Russian counterpart prior to the inauguration-- note: I am not condemning these things, nor do I wish to re-litigate them, but only giving them as examples of what I believe is a more pronounced separation in Iran; another example was the Iran-Contra affair, when arms were sent to Iran, through the Reagan administration, despite an arms embargo enacted by Congress, & then those funds were secretly funneled to the Nicaraguan Contras, w/o Congressional approval). In Iran, which it's interesting to note is often involved in our own, "off the books," deals, they have a Supreme religious leader who is more powerful than anyone in the elected government, & he is more hard-line than the those currently at the head of that elected government. Of course, there are also hard-line, elected leaders, who I think are more willing to act independently from the elected leadership, largely because of the Supreme (unelected) Leader situation.

So there are factions in Iran, capable of this action, who favor both of our Presidential candidates. There is also the possibility that their incentive was purely monetary (see post #87).

I address the idea that this was done in support of Biden in post #12. Though that is not my belief, I still included the possibility in two overviews of the issue, in posts #79 & #69. So I'll say, once more, it's impossible to know for sure, but if you're curious about my thinking on it, there's hopefully a sufficient number of my posts to to read for you get your answer.

 

Nothing complicated about it.
State sponsored election interference by Iran will obviously favor Biden.

 

It's not a matter of whether you or I read them. Have you not wondered why they are so prolific, if they don't work?

Secondly, I don't know that official-looking election-related emails, or threats directed at you, by name, which list your physical address ("we know where you live") could be thought of as being viewed, at any rate, as merely, "spam." Come on, I think you're smarter than this. But instead of using your reasoning ability, you must be allowing pre-conceived ideas to cloud your judgement.

 

I have wondered that for sure. My guess is that, since, emails are free to send, one can send millions of them with little cost. One response in a million may be all the spammer needs.

I reason just fine, thank you.

 

I don't know how to delete a post.

 

So, by your model I, as a spammer, would send out an email to every pc in America, get about 300 customers or so, & then have to wait for a million new prospects for my next sale. Doesn't sound too profitable.