4 ms·

Is it wise for reporters that discover a covert program to disrupt North Korean missile launches to disclose the information? Seems like they want the credit fo

Is it wise for reporters that discover a covert program to disrupt North Korean missile launches to disclose the information? Seems like they want the credit for breaking a significant story more than they care about the delicate and dangerous situation with a rogue country that has nuclear weapons. I suggest they STFU.

dwringer 10y ago
Yeah, North Korea was just waiting for the NYT reporters to give them up-to-date intel on why their launches were failing. That's really the only reporting Kim Jong Un trusts, so I hear.
- PhilWright 10y ago
  They may have all sorts of suspicions at the high failure rate. Having it confirmed gives them information it would be better they didn't have.
  - mulmen 10y ago
    The article discusses this, they did meet with the CIA before publishing. The CIA will of course issue the standard Glomar response (or simply remain silent) and NK will have no more or less concrete information than they had before.
    - rapsacnz 10y ago
      They don't need concrete information - it's not a criminal trail. Simply the knowledge of the existence of a program is easily enough to derail it.
- wahern 10y ago
  On a less sarcastic note, the fact that Western governments have such a difficult time gathering credible intelligence in North Korea is evidence that the North Koreans have a robust intelligence apparatus. What the whole Abdul Khan episode brought to light some years back was how Western agencies underestimated the technological and political skill and motivation of many so-called "third world" countries. Arguably that blind spot was caused by the deep-seated racism and cultural elitism of Western countries. There were plenty of opportunities to discover the illicit trade; we just weren't convinced they were capable of it, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Our leaders never took it seriously because their expectations were that these countries were still too backwards. Yet another example of why we really need to face prejudice head on. We simply can't accurately assess the state of things if we're blinded by so many poor assumptions, particularly the ones girded by racist attitudes. If American culture continues casting Asians as uncreative copycats; Muslims as radical fundamentalists; Africans as irredeemably corrupt; and South Americans as hopelessly socialist; then we're in for decades of more wild and very much unwelcome surprise.
  - mulmen 10y ago
    That's a lot of assumptions. You could say that the lack of another 9/11 type attack in recent history and the high failure rate of these missiles shows that the US Intelligence community has already overcome this prejudice.
    - wahern 10y ago
      I think technocrats do a better job of overcoming it, if only because it's harder to ignore what's staring you in the face, and they're the ones with their noses to the ground. But priorities are set by the elites. We rarely encounter "slam dunks" that force leaders' hands. And so our strategic direction relies heavily on the higher-ups making decisions that are still highly susceptible to bias. Heck, we elect leaders precisely because of their bias--Obama because we thought he had an inside-line on the Muslim thing, Trump because we hate Muslims. I exaggerate but it's not far from the truth. That's why popular culture can be so critical to foreign policy. Two decades into peak globalization, there's no way to hide these things. This isn't the Cold War. Leaders can't do the smart thing while paying lip service to the electorates' prejudices. Even if we could stop all the leaks in the U.S. government, you can't hide the consequences of policy.
    - wahern 10y ago
      Also, I think it was only in the past few years that everybody finally accepted that North Korea has the bomb. As late as, what, 2013, we were still half-way convinced they were blowing up boxes of high-explosives to fool us. Even in 2016 some outlets were still hedging. Now, maybe the intelligence community came around much earlier. But certainly Congress was still having trouble coming to terms with the reality. Why? Because it was just so difficult to believe (and still difficult to believe) that such a repressive society could achieve such a feat. It is, admittedly, difficult to believe for me. But I understand part of that difficulty is because Westerner's believe that such feats aren't possible without a culture of individualism that unleashes individual initiative. Maybe such a culture is superior. But it clearly isn't necessary. And that should make us question much about what we think other countries are capable of, and when they'll be capable of it.
vpribish 10y ago
unless it really is just bad welds and this is a great way to sow discord and paranoia. psy war > cyber war > actual war.
- mulmen 10y ago
  So then the NY Times is in bed with the CIA?
  - vpribish 10y ago
    That's just what they want you to think. Wheels within wheels, man.
  - sampo 10y ago
    > So then the NY Times is in bed with the CIA? Or perhaps CIA totally fooled NY times?
  - 1001101 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird and its successors. Yes. You may find Noam Chomsky's views on the subject enlightening. Will go into more detail after Kim Fatty III gets his.
mulmen 10y ago
The article includes their justification for publishing this, in fact that is about the last third of the text. The NY Times seems to be consistent with their handling of these types of stories so then the question becomes when has harm been done by this type of investigative journalism?
trhway 10y ago
>to disclose the information such information is disclosed by several of the missile program involved personnel every time a launch fails. They disclose it after NK security service applies their enhanced interrogation techniques so that it can be reported to the Great Beloved Leader that the spies&saboteurs who caused the failure were caught, pleaded guilty and were punished.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

dwringer 10y ago

Yeah, North Korea was just waiting for the NYT reporters to give them up-to-date intel on why their launches were failing. That's really the only reporting Kim Jong Un trusts, so I hear.

PhilWright 10y ago
They may have all sorts of suspicions at the high failure rate. Having it confirmed gives them information it would be better they didn't have.
- mulmen 10y ago
  The article discusses this, they did meet with the CIA before publishing. The CIA will of course issue the standard Glomar response (or simply remain silent) and NK will have no more or less concrete information than they had before.
  - rapsacnz 10y ago
    They don't need concrete information - it's not a criminal trail. Simply the knowledge of the existence of a program is easily enough to derail it.
wahern 10y ago
On a less sarcastic note, the fact that Western governments have such a difficult time gathering credible intelligence in North Korea is evidence that the North Koreans have a robust intelligence apparatus. What the whole Abdul Khan episode brought to light some years back was how Western agencies underestimated the technological and political skill and motivation of many so-called "third world" countries. Arguably that blind spot was caused by the deep-seated racism and cultural elitism of Western countries. There were plenty of opportunities to discover the illicit trade; we just weren't convinced they were capable of it, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Our leaders never took it seriously because their expectations were that these countries were still too backwards. Yet another example of why we really need to face prejudice head on. We simply can't accurately assess the state of things if we're blinded by so many poor assumptions, particularly the ones girded by racist attitudes. If American culture continues casting Asians as uncreative copycats; Muslims as radical fundamentalists; Africans as irredeemably corrupt; and South Americans as hopelessly socialist; then we're in for decades of more wild and very much unwelcome surprise.
- mulmen 10y ago
  That's a lot of assumptions. You could say that the lack of another 9/11 type attack in recent history and the high failure rate of these missiles shows that the US Intelligence community has already overcome this prejudice.
  - wahern 10y ago
    I think technocrats do a better job of overcoming it, if only because it's harder to ignore what's staring you in the face, and they're the ones with their noses to the ground. But priorities are set by the elites. We rarely encounter "slam dunks" that force leaders' hands. And so our strategic direction relies heavily on the higher-ups making decisions that are still highly susceptible to bias. Heck, we elect leaders precisely because of their bias--Obama because we thought he had an inside-line on the Muslim thing, Trump because we hate Muslims. I exaggerate but it's not far from the truth. That's why popular culture can be so critical to foreign policy. Two decades into peak globalization, there's no way to hide these things. This isn't the Cold War. Leaders can't do the smart thing while paying lip service to the electorates' prejudices. Even if we could stop all the leaks in the U.S. government, you can't hide the consequences of policy.
  - wahern 10y ago
    Also, I think it was only in the past few years that everybody finally accepted that North Korea has the bomb. As late as, what, 2013, we were still half-way convinced they were blowing up boxes of high-explosives to fool us. Even in 2016 some outlets were still hedging. Now, maybe the intelligence community came around much earlier. But certainly Congress was still having trouble coming to terms with the reality. Why? Because it was just so difficult to believe (and still difficult to believe) that such a repressive society could achieve such a feat. It is, admittedly, difficult to believe for me. But I understand part of that difficulty is because Westerner's believe that such feats aren't possible without a culture of individualism that unleashes individual initiative. Maybe such a culture is superior. But it clearly isn't necessary. And that should make us question much about what we think other countries are capable of, and when they'll be capable of it.

vpribish 10y ago

unless it really is just bad welds and this is a great way to sow discord and paranoia. psy war > cyber war > actual war.

mulmen 10y ago
So then the NY Times is in bed with the CIA?
- vpribish 10y ago
  That's just what they want you to think. Wheels within wheels, man.
- sampo 10y ago
  > So then the NY Times is in bed with the CIA? Or perhaps CIA totally fooled NY times?
- 1001101 10y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird and its successors. Yes. You may find Noam Chomsky's views on the subject enlightening. Will go into more detail after Kim Fatty III gets his.

mulmen 10y ago

The article includes their justification for publishing this, in fact that is about the last third of the text. The NY Times seems to be consistent with their handling of these types of stories so then the question becomes when has harm been done by this type of investigative journalism?

trhway 10y ago

>to disclose the information such information is disclosed by several of the missile program involved personnel every time a launch fails. They disclose it after NK security service applies their enhanced interrogation techniques so that it can be reported to the Great Beloved Leader that the spies&saboteurs who caused the failure were caught, pleaded guilty and were punished.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]