7 ms·
Sounds like a legitimate grievance if they're going out and recruiting people to steal secrets. In fact if they can prove a money link, they just look like a br
by scoot_718 6y ago
Sounds like a legitimate grievance if they're going out and recruiting people to steal secrets. In fact if they can prove a money link, they just look like a branch of the FSB.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y agofor anyone who disagrees with US policy and considers it hostile, abusive, hypocritical (and hence a threat to their own values) ... their view could be: the enemy of my enemy is my friend. And so it doesn't matter where the money comes from as long as they work on the same goal (e.g. stopping the war mongering hypocrisy that is US foreign policy). The current (dire) state of Russia after all is a failure in US foreign policy (the biggest tragedy and a massive lost opportunity in how the US handled the crumbling USSR). In Europe we have a refugee-crisis and constant debates about what to do with them. In that debate we forget that it was the US that invaded Iraq, Lybia - they are responsible for it. Sure the Wagner group is there now as well profiting the same way as US contractors. But Africom, Blackwater and every yank in a uniform are a much larger threat to peace than Russia & China combined. (regardless what nutter occupies the whitehouse)
- raxxorrax 6y agoI blame Libya on Europe, but the point still stands.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y agoEurope is far from blameless in any of this. Frontex and their deal with Turkey and everything surrounding the management of the crisis is absolutely infuriating. "We" are as bad as the US for not making a stand and even enabling them.
- the-dude 6y agoI have commented this here earlier this week : the EU is a trade-bloc, the rest is posturing.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y agoI hope EU stays a trade-bloc and everyone else considers de-escalating. I also don't trust the EU with too much power. the solution (imho) has to be peaceful - not forcing parties to spend more on defense and grandstanding.
- marcus_holmes 6y agoNow that the UK is not throwing spanners into the works every time the subject comes up, we can expect a Federal Europe to appear much quicker.
- the-dude 6y agoYou make it appear as if that would be a good thing. I disagree.
- metiscus 6y agoWhich thing are you saying is good, the Uk stopping a federal europe or the creation of the same?
- the-dude 6y agoAhhh, yes, very fair. I disagree with the notion that a federal Europe would be a good thing. Human language, still a challenge after all these years.
- marcus_holmes 6y agoAs a UK citizen, I agree with you (a Federal Europe would be a bad thing). As a resident of Germany, I disagree with you (a Federal Europe would be a good thing). Perspective matters.
- notaround1111 6y agoWhen is Europe going to finally recognize it has agency? Blaming the US for waves vaguely things while being mostly stagnant for decades isn't a good look, especially when you've been either an active participant or wholly complicit in those things.
- mengibar10 6y agoLibya has an elected government that is recognized by UN. The coup attempt by Hafter is supported by France, Russia, UAE, and Egypt. Rule of (international) law is broken by these countries blatantly.
- Dylan16807 6y agoLet's not place UN recognition on too high of a pedestal. See also Taiwan.
- mengibar10 6y agoI second this, and specifically France started it.
- csommers 6y ago“Much larger threat than Russia & China combined” I want some of what you’re smoking. Actually, on second thought, you can keep it.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y agopersonal attacks aside ... My claim is based on what nuclear defense experts have been warning for many years: US nuclear strategy is entirely based on a pre-emptive surprise strike: How US nuclear force modernization is undermining strategic stability: The burst-height compensating super-fuze: https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-modernization-is-undermining-strategic-stability-the-burst-height-compensating-super-fuze/ https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-force-moderni... anyone who thinks current (even combined) Chinese / Russian military capability would stand a chance against US power in a kinetic war is deluding themselves. (List of United States military bases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military...)
- jjoonathan 6y agoHow on earth do minor effective yield updates from burst timing tweaks indicate that US nuclear strategy is "entirely based on a pre-emptive surprise strike"? Anything involving nukes could be framed as "undermining strategic stability." Even disarming them. Also: the doomsday clock group has a credibility problem from their metaphor holding them accountable for prior alarmism.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y agoThe target will not see it as a "friendly attack with only a low-yield device" (and the US can't count on a measured response). If my country gets nuked what would justify my _trust_ that the next attack won't be a big one? > "Hey all you nuclear powers out there. We’re just going to trust that you recognize this is “just a little nuclear weapon” and won’t retaliate with all you’ve got. Remember! The US only intends to nuke you “a little bit.”" -- https://twitter.com/mhanham/status/1089648491616448514 https://twitter.com/mhanham/status/1089648491616448514 It doesn't matter the yield when the target is also a nuclear power - it was still the first strike and the correct response would be escalating (in case your adversary is many times stronger your only move would be to inflict max damage on your enemy in as little time as possible - you might not have much, or risk losing it all - that means very high chance of nuclear escalation). edit: for those interested, some further reading on why this is a problem: The Role of U.S. Nuclear Weapons: New Doctrine Falls Short of Bush Pledge https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2005-09/features/role-us-nuclear-weapons-new-doctrine-falls-short-bush-pledge https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2005-09/features/role-us-nuc... THE NEW U.S. DOCTRINE OF PREEMPTIVE WARFARE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR NUCLEAR DETERRENCE AND DISARMAMENT (pdf) https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1071&context=politicalsciencepub https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1071&conte...
- here4U 6y ago"The current (dire) state of Russia after all is a failure in US foreign policy" I don't want what you are smoking.
- DyslexicAtheist 6y agopersonal attacks aside ... don't take _my_ word for it, ask people with skin in the game: Vladimir Pozner: How the United States Created Vladimir Putin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X7Ng75e5gQ > On September 27, 2018, Yale's Program in Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies, and the Poynter Fellowship for Journalism hosted Vladimir Pozner, the acclaimed Russian-American journalist and broadcaster. Pozner spoke on the impact of US foreign policy towards Russia after the Soviet Union has been disbanded, and shared his opinions on a range of issues raised by the audience, from the alleged Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential elections, to Skripal poisoning, to the state of independent media in Russia and the US. Vladimir Pozner Jr.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Pozner_Jr https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Pozner_Jr.
- scoot_718 6y agoWould you argue that if a hostile foreign power hired mercenaries that US soldiers shouldn't shoot to kill? You arrest and capture spies. Here he has become a contractual spy.
- dexterdog 6y agoCaa you steal a secret if that secret is illegal?
- naringas 6y agoyes, however saying "learn (a secret)" is more precise
- mlthoughts2018 6y agoWhistleblowing is not stealing (literally, in the legal sense, you’d have to prove it’s not whistleblowing in order for it to be possible to be stealing). Jumping straight to a phrase like “stealing secrets” completely skips past due process to determine if it’s whistleblowing and presumes guilt instead of innocence.
- scoot_718 6y agoIf you're paying other people to turn, and hack to achieve access, that's not whistleblowing.
- megous 6y agoEven if true, why would it not be?
- mlthoughts2018 6y agoYes, in fact, it absolutely can be. It completely depends on the criminality of the information obtained.
- hackinthebochs 6y agoNonsense. Stealing is stealing regardless of whether a crime is discovered in the stolen content. The two are not mutually exclusive.
- mlthoughts2018 6y agoNonsense. The law is extremely complex on these points and you’re trying to play semantic games with the terms “theft” and “stealing” to pretend like it’s black and white. Taking evidence due to a statutory duty to your government (reporting crimes) is not theft. You can’t just magically invoke the term “theft” and invoke tautologies like “stealing is stealing” - that’s not how any of this works. It literally does depend on whether the taken documents reveal a crime, along with other factors about how your job or normal access would bring you in contact with the materials and also if the materials taken are over broad (i.e. you wanted documents to show a pattern of sexual harassment but also took a bunch of unrelated private client data). https://www.whistleblowerllc.com/you-call-it-theft-i-call-it-evidence/ https://www.whistleblowerllc.com/you-call-it-theft-i-call-it... Given that in the case of Manning & Wikileaks, the crimes being reported (which were proven beyond all doubt) included criminal murder perpetrated systematically by US military and federal agents, as well as grand scale deception and rigging of the Democratic Primary in 2016, and shitloads of illegal torture and illegal imprisonment across Europe, the Middle East and Guantanamo, it’s also beyond dispute that the moral duty (and statutory duty for Americans involved like Manning) to release the materials was undeniable and the crimes were so sweeping and severe that no part of the taking or publishing of the documents can be considered over broad.