.:`=-~rANdOm~`-=:. Game Servers (Read Only) > Discussion
Holy cow a fox news article that actually makes sense!
Xrain:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/10/29/righteous-indignation-over-us-spying-seen-as-naive-in-israel/
Seriously, everyone spies on everyone. It is the name of the game. But it was definitely our major screw-up for letting everyone know about it, so naturally it is their right to give us as hard a time as possible for our mistake.
Most countries are happy to take advantage of this, since happen to be better at it signals intelligence overall since the CIA and NSA both were honed to perfection with the 40 years of cold war against the soviet union. So its a rare chance to score politically a major win against us.
But people in my own country shouldn't be protesting this stuff. Spying on other countries is what the NSA is for... Otherwise what would be pay the NSA $10 billion for.
Prox:
--- Quote from: Xrain on October 29, 2013, 03:00:22 AM ---http://www.foxnews.com/world/2013/10/29/righteous-indignation-over-us-spying-seen-as-naive-in-israel/
Seriously, everyone spies on everyone. It is the name of the game. But it was definitely our major screw-up for letting everyone know about it, so naturally it is their right to give us as hard a time as possible for our mistake.
Most countries are happy to take advantage of this, since happen to be better at it signals intelligence overall since the CIA and NSA both were honed to perfection with the 40 years of cold war against the soviet union. So its a rare chance to score politically a major win against us.
But people in my own country shouldn't be protesting this stuff. Spying on other countries is what the NSA is for... Otherwise what would be pay the NSA $10 billion for.
--- End quote ---
So just because the USA and other counties have the ability to spy on other countries and their citizens then it should be allowed? That's absolutely wrong. Even if there isn't much that people can do to stop spying, it shouldn't be encouraged or ignored.
As for the article it self, well, it's no surprise that the Zionist regime would think so as I'm pretty certain that mossad does things that are much worse than that.
Xrain:
--- Quote from: Prox on October 29, 2013, 07:16:24 AM ---So just because the USA and other counties have the ability to spy on other countries and their citizens then it should be allowed? That's absolutely wrong. Even if there isn't much that people can do to stop spying, it shouldn't be encouraged or ignored.
As for the article it self, well, it's no surprise that the Zionist regime would think so as I'm pretty certain that mossad does things that are much worse than that.
--- End quote ---
On their own citizens... not without extraordinarily severe oversight.
On other countries... this is more of a grey zone.
In an ideal world, I would agree it would be terrible to spy on other nations.
However our world is far from ideal. Spying can actually be a significant benefit to mankind, as in it's why we are not a nuclear rubble pile.
In the cold war the spies that Russia had in our government and the spies we had in theirs were crucial. There were many times where we came a hairs breath away from total nuclear war. One of the large factors in each case was the spies in each respective country telling their governments, "no, that is a training mission not a preemptive attack".
When your bargaining chips are nuclear weapons having insight into each others bluff is a pretty important factor.
Governments spying on each other isn't like me putting key-loggers on your computer, that stuff is all microscale.
Governments operate on the macroscale, so spying tends to be a standard part of negotiations. EVERY GOVERNMENT DOES IT. The only ones who don't, are the ones too small to organize a program to do it.
Let me put a scenario up for you to think about. You are the representative for country X. You are about to do negotiations with country Y. Country Y has historically occasionally shafted you in negotiations, leading you on for quite a long time, arguing meaningless points, and in the end doing their best to take advantage of you. However other times, they have had negotiations with you that were relativly equal and fair.
It has so far varied depending on the views of the people in office at the time.
Before these negotiations they recently had a new president elected to office. He came from relative obscurity, and has at times during his election made derogatory remarks regarding your country, and at other times seemed supportive of working with your country.
The negotiations at hand represent a possible lasting and beneficial agreement between you. It however requires you to outlay a significant amount of funding and time to get through the negotiation process.
So what do you do?
If you had spies at this point, they could tell you either, no the president was just pandering to people during his campaign and is supportive of you. Or yes the president has no intentions of working with you.
This lets you just walk away from the negotiations since you know he isn't serious, or do your best to make them succeed because you know he is serious. In reality you probably wouldn't walk away in either case, but it would at least help you choose the level of involvement.
Allies or not, negotiations go on like this between every country. They are all looking to their own advantage, which is why they all try to spy on each other.
Prox:
--- Quote from: Xrain on October 29, 2013, 08:05:31 AM ---On their own citizens... not without extraordinarily severe oversight.
On other countries... this is more of a grey zone.
In an ideal world, I would agree it would be terrible to spy on other nations.
However our world is far from ideal. Spying can actually be a significant benefit to mankind, as in it's why we are not a nuclear rubble pile.
In the cold war the spies that Russia had in our government and the spies we had in theirs were crucial. There were many times where we came a hairs breath away from total nuclear war. One of the large factors in each case was the spies in each respective country telling their governments, "no, that is a training mission not a preemptive attack".
When your bargaining chips are nuclear weapons having insight into each others bluff is a pretty important factor.
Governments spying on each other isn't like me putting key-loggers on your computer, that stuff is all microscale.
Governments operate on the macroscale, so spying tends to be a standard part of negotiations. EVERY GOVERNMENT DOES IT. The only ones who don't, are the ones too small to organize a program to do it.
Let me put a scenario up for you to think about. You are the representative for country X. You are about to do negotiations with country Y. Country Y has historically occasionally shafted you in negotiations, leading you on for quite a long time, arguing meaningless points, and in the end doing their best to take advantage of you. However other times, they have had negotiations with you that were relativly equal and fair.
It has so far varied depending on the views of the people in office at the time.
Before these negotiations they recently had a new president elected to office. He came from relative obscurity, and has at times during his election made derogatory remarks regarding your country, and at other times seemed supportive of working with your country.
The negotiations at hand represent a possible lasting and beneficial agreement between you. It however requires you to outlay a significant amount of funding and time to get through the negotiation process.
So what do you do?
If you had spies at this point, they could tell you either, no the president was just pandering to people during his campaign and is supportive of you. Or yes the president has no intentions of working with you.
This lets you just walk away from the negotiations since you know he isn't serious, or do your best to make them succeed because you know he is serious. In reality you probably wouldn't walk away in either case, but it would at least help you choose the level of involvement.
Allies or not, negotiations go on like this between every country. They are all looking to their own advantage, which is why they all try to spy on each other.
--- End quote ---
Spying has downsides too and it can easily be abused by the government to deal with any kind of opposition. There's many examples throughout history when governments had spies/secret police go after people that worked against their oppressive regimes.
I do understand that this is not an ideal world we live in but I think people should try their best to get as close as possible to that, saying that "it's not an ideal world, governments spy, deal with it" isn't very beneficial. In today's world I don't really see how spying brings much benefits to the people, you also have to keep in mind that there are all kinds of rules set for all countries so your proposed scenario would not require spies, if that country wouldn't stick to it's obligations then it would face legal action against it from the international community. That being said I do not believe that governments will stop spying anytime soon probably never, but I think that it is good that there are people who are openly opposing it, to say that they should stop isn't a good idea in my opinion.
Tezuni:
--- Quote from: Xrain on October 29, 2013, 08:05:31 AM ---However our world is far from ideal. Spying can actually be a significant benefit to mankind, as in it's why we are not a nuclear rubble pile.
Governments operate on the macroscale, so spying tends to be a standard part of negotiations. EVERY GOVERNMENT DOES IT. The only ones who don't, are the ones too small to organize a program to do it.
--- End quote ---
I agree spying is essential. The world is still in a state of nature, just on a country sized "macro" scale. Meaning, force is used to get what people want.
--- Quote from: Prox on October 29, 2013, 11:56:05 AM ---I think people should try their best to get as close as possible to that, saying that "it's not an ideal world, governments spy, deal with it"
--- End quote ---
In the context of my reply to xrain, the world used to be in a state of nature on an individual scale. Cavemen vs Caveman to kill and eat that single animal left in the field, or sleep knowing you are safe from the other guy. It was kill or be killed, and anyone that bent a knee in peace first would die first. It's the same thing in the modern day, except on that larger scale. A country can't adopt a philosophy, like "be the change you want to see in the world" and give up spying in the hopes others follow suit. It won't happen and they will pay a price for their wishful thinking because they will be at a severe disadvantage and others will take further advantage of that.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version