5 ms·

It won't be, because he'd get the same intel briefs as Obama, the same advisors would tell him the same things, and they'd be generally right.

by Laaw 11y ago

yuhong 11y ago
Can you be more specific?
- flycaliguy 11y ago
  He's deploying the argument against privacy that there is a great danger which is not being revealed to the public. It always makes me roll my eyes. Sure there is no doubt an intelligence situation that has a completely different perspective of the web, but that doesn't prevent a leader from implementing some basic protection for the public, making an effort to better secure (aka not covertly cripple) American tech or at least create an improved whistle blower system.
  - Laaw 11y ago
    This has little to do with privacy, and every potential security advisor, to any president, knows this and would explain as much. It's not that there's a great threat, it's that the public is just particularly stupid about this issue.
jMyles 11y ago
If this information is so compelling and worthy of such drastic action, then, in a fair and transparent society, it's also necessary to disclose it and let the public decide. The Occam's razor explanation is that this is just politicians acting in their interests, not that there is some blockbuster intel that, if only we knew...
Zigurd 11y ago
> and they'd be generally right They might be persuasive. But there is little evidence from outcomes in Iraq, Syria, etc. that they are right in any way that matters.
dragonwriter 11y ago
> It won't be, because he'd get the same intel briefs as Obama, the same advisors would tell him the same things, and they'd be generally right. Well, first, they wouldn't be the same advisors -- even same-party administrations don't tend to carry over very many of of the President's direct advisors. Second, even with the same advisors, Sanders, while he might agree with Obama on some things, is likely to have different priorities and values, which will shape actual policy, even if he had the same advisors presenting the same facts and similar interpretations of the facts.

It won't be, because he'd get the same intel briefs as Obama, the same advisors would tell him the same things, and they'd be generally right.

by Laaw 11y ago

It won't be, because he'd get the same intel briefs as Obama, the same advisors would tell him the same things, and they'd be generally right.

yuhong 11y ago

Can you be more specific?

flycaliguy 11y ago
He's deploying the argument against privacy that there is a great danger which is not being revealed to the public. It always makes me roll my eyes. Sure there is no doubt an intelligence situation that has a completely different perspective of the web, but that doesn't prevent a leader from implementing some basic protection for the public, making an effort to better secure (aka not covertly cripple) American tech or at least create an improved whistle blower system.
- Laaw 11y ago
  This has little to do with privacy, and every potential security advisor, to any president, knows this and would explain as much. It's not that there's a great threat, it's that the public is just particularly stupid about this issue.

jMyles 11y ago

If this information is so compelling and worthy of such drastic action, then, in a fair and transparent society, it's also necessary to disclose it and let the public decide. The Occam's razor explanation is that this is just politicians acting in their interests, not that there is some blockbuster intel that, if only we knew...

Zigurd 11y ago

> and they'd be generally right They might be persuasive. But there is little evidence from outcomes in Iraq, Syria, etc. that they are right in any way that matters.

dragonwriter 11y ago

> It won't be, because he'd get the same intel briefs as Obama, the same advisors would tell him the same things, and they'd be generally right. Well, first, they wouldn't be the same advisors -- even same-party administrations don't tend to carry over very many of of the President's direct advisors. Second, even with the same advisors, Sanders, while he might agree with Obama on some things, is likely to have different priorities and values, which will shape actual policy, even if he had the same advisors presenting the same facts and similar interpretations of the facts.