5 ms·

It's impossible to know what would have happened if they hadn't, but if Julius and Ethel Rosenberg helping the Soviets achieve nuclear parity prevented the US f

It's impossible to know what would have happened if they hadn't, but if Julius and Ethel Rosenberg helping the Soviets achieve nuclear parity prevented the US from "using them when the opponent couldn't retaliate in kind" then they should be thought of like Snowdens or Assanges. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg#Soviet_nuclear_program https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg#Sov...

tablespoon 5y ago
> It's impossible to know what would have happened if they hadn't, but if Julius and Ethel Rosenberg helping the Soviets achieve nuclear parity prevented the US from "using them when the opponent couldn't retaliate in kind" then they should be thought of like Snowdens or Assanges. Eh, no. The Rosenbergs were consciously acting as spies for a foreign power, which is treasonous conduct no matter how you look at it. Putting them next to Snowden makes Snowden look bad. At least publicly, he made every effort to avoid doing anything like what they did. Also, IIRC, MacArthur was relieved of command in Korea because he wanted to nuke the Chinese, and that was decades before they even had an atomic weapon to retaliate with. That means you can't point to nuclear parity as the only reason the US didn't use them after the end of WWII.
- genericuser314 5y ago
  The degree to which our ethics should be consequentialist, or they should evaluate intent is worth discussing, but as consequences become more significant intent becomes more insignificant. I don't care if someone 'looks bad', or breaks any law if they prevent nuclear war. Stanislav Petrov disobeyed orders in the face of "30 layers of verification" telling him to report 5 incoming nuclear missiles.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > I don't care if someone 'looks bad', or breaks any law if they prevent nuclear war. The idea that the Rosenbergs prevented a nuclear war is wild speculation on top of wild speculation. However, comparing Snowden to the Rosenbergs is exactly the kind of thing that people do to smear Snowden.
- pasabagi 5y ago
  Eh, they sent the USSR a couple of drawings of circles, and Ethel Rosenberg apparently did some typing. They were, loosely, spies for a foreign power, but their impact was absolutely negligible and their execution was essentially a lynching.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    > Eh, they sent the USSR a couple of drawings of circles, and Ethel Rosenberg apparently did some typing. And all Snowden did was copy some files to some flash drives. Describing significant acts in a mundane way doesn't make them less significant, it just omits all the important facts. > They were, loosely, spies for a foreign power, but their impact was absolutely negligible This doesn't sound like "loosely": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semyon_Semyonov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semyon_Semyonov > In 1942 Semyonov persuaded Vasily Zarubin to transfer Julius Rosenberg and his contacts from the CPUSA-Jacob Golos channel to the direct control of the Rezidentura, with himself as the assigned case officer. The actual transfer occurred on Labor Day weekend, 7 September 1942, at a meeting in Central Park. Bernard Schuster brought Rosenberg to the meeting. Rosenberg was then subjected to a thorough vetting and recruitment process to include training in tradecraft and a probationary period. Alexander Feklisov was assigned to assist in managing Rosenberg. Once the formal recruitment of Rosenberg was completed Semyonov used Rosenberg to conduct formal recruitments of two of Rosenberg's friends from City College of New York, Joel Barr and William Perl. Impact is also irrelevant. If someone robs a bank, but does it incompetently and only makes off with $50, they're still guilty of robbery.
    - pasabagi 5y ago
      They were a young couple with infant children and they were both electrocuted to death, in Ethel's case, for typing out her husband's letters. There's no collection of acronyms and russian names you can add to that that makes it any less of a crime. Prison would have been extreme. The electric chair was pure barbarism.
      - tablespoon 5y ago
        > They were a young couple with infant children and they were both electrocuted to death, The appropriateness of the punishment is an entirely separate issue. > in Ethel's case, for typing out her husband's letters. You're describing things in a misleadingly mundane way again. The relevant question there is "did she know what was participating in?" If Julius robbed a bank and Ethel knew about the plan, willingly drove the getaway car, and went to jail for it; then it's misleading to say she went to jail for "driving her husband around." She went to jail for being an accomplice to a crime.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

tablespoon 5y ago

> It's impossible to know what would have happened if they hadn't, but if Julius and Ethel Rosenberg helping the Soviets achieve nuclear parity prevented the US from "using them when the opponent couldn't retaliate in kind" then they should be thought of like Snowdens or Assanges. Eh, no. The Rosenbergs were consciously acting as spies for a foreign power, which is treasonous conduct no matter how you look at it. Putting them next to Snowden makes Snowden look bad. At least publicly, he made every effort to avoid doing anything like what they did. Also, IIRC, MacArthur was relieved of command in Korea because he wanted to nuke the Chinese, and that was decades before they even had an atomic weapon to retaliate with. That means you can't point to nuclear parity as the only reason the US didn't use them after the end of WWII.

genericuser314 5y ago
The degree to which our ethics should be consequentialist, or they should evaluate intent is worth discussing, but as consequences become more significant intent becomes more insignificant. I don't care if someone 'looks bad', or breaks any law if they prevent nuclear war. Stanislav Petrov disobeyed orders in the face of "30 layers of verification" telling him to report 5 incoming nuclear missiles.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > I don't care if someone 'looks bad', or breaks any law if they prevent nuclear war. The idea that the Rosenbergs prevented a nuclear war is wild speculation on top of wild speculation. However, comparing Snowden to the Rosenbergs is exactly the kind of thing that people do to smear Snowden.
pasabagi 5y ago
Eh, they sent the USSR a couple of drawings of circles, and Ethel Rosenberg apparently did some typing. They were, loosely, spies for a foreign power, but their impact was absolutely negligible and their execution was essentially a lynching.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > Eh, they sent the USSR a couple of drawings of circles, and Ethel Rosenberg apparently did some typing. And all Snowden did was copy some files to some flash drives. Describing significant acts in a mundane way doesn't make them less significant, it just omits all the important facts. > They were, loosely, spies for a foreign power, but their impact was absolutely negligible This doesn't sound like "loosely": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semyon_Semyonov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semyon_Semyonov > In 1942 Semyonov persuaded Vasily Zarubin to transfer Julius Rosenberg and his contacts from the CPUSA-Jacob Golos channel to the direct control of the Rezidentura, with himself as the assigned case officer. The actual transfer occurred on Labor Day weekend, 7 September 1942, at a meeting in Central Park. Bernard Schuster brought Rosenberg to the meeting. Rosenberg was then subjected to a thorough vetting and recruitment process to include training in tradecraft and a probationary period. Alexander Feklisov was assigned to assist in managing Rosenberg. Once the formal recruitment of Rosenberg was completed Semyonov used Rosenberg to conduct formal recruitments of two of Rosenberg's friends from City College of New York, Joel Barr and William Perl. Impact is also irrelevant. If someone robs a bank, but does it incompetently and only makes off with $50, they're still guilty of robbery.
  - pasabagi 5y ago
    They were a young couple with infant children and they were both electrocuted to death, in Ethel's case, for typing out her husband's letters. There's no collection of acronyms and russian names you can add to that that makes it any less of a crime. Prison would have been extreme. The electric chair was pure barbarism.
    - tablespoon 5y ago
      > They were a young couple with infant children and they were both electrocuted to death, The appropriateness of the punishment is an entirely separate issue. > in Ethel's case, for typing out her husband's letters. You're describing things in a misleadingly mundane way again. The relevant question there is "did she know what was participating in?" If Julius robbed a bank and Ethel knew about the plan, willingly drove the getaway car, and went to jail for it; then it's misleading to say she went to jail for "driving her husband around." She went to jail for being an accomplice to a crime.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]