5 ms·

You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they've exhausted all other options.

by Hikikomori 5y ago

mc32 5y ago
What about everyone else, goody two shoes?
- psadauskas 5y ago
  Its a quote, usually incorrectly attributed to Winston Churchill. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/11/11/exhaust-alternatives/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/11/11/exhaust-alternative...
- buran77 5y ago
  The snark is unwarranted. The US has far more political, economic, and military power than any other country. Stands to reason that more is expected from them especially when "morality", "freedom", "rights", "doing the right thing" etc. seem to be the publicly stated cornerstones of most US initiatives. Do you think Denmark putting something on a blacklist will have anywhere near the same effect? Also your question is rarely asked when the US is doing something... questionable but certainly to their advantage when the rest of the world didn't do. It seems unfair to bring up the "whatabout" argument only when you feel insulted especially since it's not a strong defense to begin with, it's even weaker in this particular case. If you can do the right thing but decide to put your morals to sleep for as long as it's advantageous to you, then any positive spin (like protecting "the rules-based international order") is just a spin.
  - LogonType10 5y ago
    America prosecutes American hackers who hack foreign nationals. This already gives them the moral high ground over their peers. See: Russian ransomware gangs that are de facto state sponsored. Cyberspace is a new frontier that wasn't built to conform to your sense of right and wrong. >questionable but certainly to their advantage when the rest of the world didn't do They would if they could.
    - trasz 5y ago
      >America prosecutes American hackers who hack foreign nationals America prosecutes the NSA? :-D
      - LogonType10 5y ago
        I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Was this supposed to be a funny joke?
        buran77 5y ago
        You're being intentionally obtuse. The only country which actively spies on pretty much everyone in the world is the US, via the NSA. And the NSA is the very definition of "state sponsored". In effect the US is running the largest state sponsored hacking programme that the world has ever seen. So who did the US prosecute for that? > America prosecutes American hackers who hack foreign nationals To this day the only person connected to US state sponsored hacking who was prosecuted is Edward Snowden, the guy who blew the whistle on said program. That says everything about the situation. The US is hacking everything that can be hacked, then floods western media with reports of Russian, Iranian, Chinese, and North Korean state sponsored hacks. > They would if they could. "Solid" defense there. The kind of argument the Mafia would use as a defense, which just happens to be really unprovable.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        LogonType10 5y ago
        >The only country which actively spies on pretty much everyone in the world is the US Why are you sure about that? I think Sunburst burned everyone. There might be a subtle difference here not captured by just labelling all this under the umbrella term "hacking". The American government typically exploits devices for gathering information for authorized espionage, which is something that every country on earth conducts. Russian gangs infect hospitals and water treatment facilities with ransomware. The latter has something we might call "kinetic effects" and is closer to all out cyber war.
- shlurpy 5y ago
  On the subject at hand, Israeli misdeeds in international law, I think the USA has been and continues to be uniquely dedicated to doing the wrong thing at all costs.
  - mc32 5y ago
    Unique compared to? Costa Rica? Ok. Compared to Iran, Russia, China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, etc…
    - buran77 5y ago
      It's telling that you have to pick Iran, Russia, China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia to show that the US is not unique in their actions. Especially since 2 of those countries are close US allies. That's a very interesting bar to set, and very unflattering company. I mean you're correct, all superpowers will eventually resort to the same tactics to get, maintain, or increase their power, even if some are able to give them that fresh, clean smell. But having those countries as a moral baseline doesn't paint the bright picture you're looking for.
      - mc32 5y ago
        It’s telling but not in the way you think it’s telling. Anyone who has power wilds it: colonial France, Spain, Japan, etc.
        buran77 5y ago
        You should also learn when to stop digging, especially when you're in the hole. Again it's really telling that you had to move to comparing today's US to decades or centuries ago France, Spain, or that country on which you had to drop 2 atomic bombs to get it to stop. Is everything acceptable today because it was done in the past? And if it's not acceptable than what point are you trying to make? That it's abysmal but at least that totalitarian regime is also doing it? Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, or Jeffrey Dahmer had power and wielded it. But whenever you are desperate enough to make yourself look good by comparing to them you lost the battle before it began.

You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they've exhausted all other options.

mc32 5y ago

What about everyone else, goody two shoes?

psadauskas 5y ago
Its a quote, usually incorrectly attributed to Winston Churchill. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/11/11/exhaust-alternatives/ https://quoteinvestigator.com/2012/11/11/exhaust-alternative...
buran77 5y ago
The snark is unwarranted. The US has far more political, economic, and military power than any other country. Stands to reason that more is expected from them especially when "morality", "freedom", "rights", "doing the right thing" etc. seem to be the publicly stated cornerstones of most US initiatives. Do you think Denmark putting something on a blacklist will have anywhere near the same effect? Also your question is rarely asked when the US is doing something... questionable but certainly to their advantage when the rest of the world didn't do. It seems unfair to bring up the "whatabout" argument only when you feel insulted especially since it's not a strong defense to begin with, it's even weaker in this particular case. If you can do the right thing but decide to put your morals to sleep for as long as it's advantageous to you, then any positive spin (like protecting "the rules-based international order") is just a spin.
- LogonType10 5y ago
  America prosecutes American hackers who hack foreign nationals. This already gives them the moral high ground over their peers. See: Russian ransomware gangs that are de facto state sponsored. Cyberspace is a new frontier that wasn't built to conform to your sense of right and wrong. >questionable but certainly to their advantage when the rest of the world didn't do They would if they could.
  - trasz 5y ago
    >America prosecutes American hackers who hack foreign nationals America prosecutes the NSA? :-D
    - LogonType10 5y ago
      I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Was this supposed to be a funny joke?
      - buran77 5y ago
        You're being intentionally obtuse. The only country which actively spies on pretty much everyone in the world is the US, via the NSA. And the NSA is the very definition of "state sponsored". In effect the US is running the largest state sponsored hacking programme that the world has ever seen. So who did the US prosecute for that? > America prosecutes American hackers who hack foreign nationals To this day the only person connected to US state sponsored hacking who was prosecuted is Edward Snowden, the guy who blew the whistle on said program. That says everything about the situation. The US is hacking everything that can be hacked, then floods western media with reports of Russian, Iranian, Chinese, and North Korean state sponsored hacks. > They would if they could. "Solid" defense there. The kind of argument the Mafia would use as a defense, which just happens to be really unprovable.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        LogonType10 5y ago
        >The only country which actively spies on pretty much everyone in the world is the US Why are you sure about that? I think Sunburst burned everyone. There might be a subtle difference here not captured by just labelling all this under the umbrella term "hacking". The American government typically exploits devices for gathering information for authorized espionage, which is something that every country on earth conducts. Russian gangs infect hospitals and water treatment facilities with ransomware. The latter has something we might call "kinetic effects" and is closer to all out cyber war.
shlurpy 5y ago
On the subject at hand, Israeli misdeeds in international law, I think the USA has been and continues to be uniquely dedicated to doing the wrong thing at all costs.
- mc32 5y ago
  Unique compared to? Costa Rica? Ok. Compared to Iran, Russia, China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, etc…
  - buran77 5y ago
    It's telling that you have to pick Iran, Russia, China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia to show that the US is not unique in their actions. Especially since 2 of those countries are close US allies. That's a very interesting bar to set, and very unflattering company. I mean you're correct, all superpowers will eventually resort to the same tactics to get, maintain, or increase their power, even if some are able to give them that fresh, clean smell. But having those countries as a moral baseline doesn't paint the bright picture you're looking for.
    - mc32 5y ago
      It’s telling but not in the way you think it’s telling. Anyone who has power wilds it: colonial France, Spain, Japan, etc.
      - buran77 5y ago
        You should also learn when to stop digging, especially when you're in the hole. Again it's really telling that you had to move to comparing today's US to decades or centuries ago France, Spain, or that country on which you had to drop 2 atomic bombs to get it to stop. Is everything acceptable today because it was done in the past? And if it's not acceptable than what point are you trying to make? That it's abysmal but at least that totalitarian regime is also doing it? Ted Bundy, John Wayne Gacy, or Jeffrey Dahmer had power and wielded it. But whenever you are desperate enough to make yourself look good by comparing to them you lost the battle before it began.