4 ms·
Sure he was more traditional and self interested. But his actions were nonetheless essentially "good" in the same way He informed people that they were having
by Hondor 10y ago
Sure he was more traditional and self interested. But his actions were nonetheless essentially "good" in the same way He informed people that they were having their telecommunications secretly listened to. Just because it was for the benefit of Russians instead of Americans doesn't make it wrong. They're people too.
- marcoperaza 10y agoYou've got to be kidding me. The Soviet Union was a totalitarian/authoritarian expansionist empire that carried out pervasive surveillance of all of its people, and used gathered information to identify and silence dissenters by shipping them off to gulags or executing them. And you're here praising a guy who was helping them because you think he was concerned about their privacy.
- gozur88 10y ago>But his actions were nonetheless essentially "good" in the same way... No. He gave US security information to the government USSR, not to the Russian people. By your definition any spy anywhere is "good". Just because moral distinctions can be difficult to make doesn't mean we throw up our hands and say all actions are equally moral.