5 ms·

If they're lying, they have a moral obligation to declassify everything they know. If they're telling the truth, they have a moral obligation to declassify eve

If they're lying, they have a moral obligation to declassify everything they know. If they're telling the truth, they have a moral obligation to declassify everything they know. Official secrecy is fundamentally incompatible with the needs of an informed public capable of voting intelligently within a democratic republic.

eganist 3y ago
So are hostile countries using declassified nuclear blueprints to bomb our homeland. Alas, if you want the democratic experiment to succeed, you need to account for those who stand to lose everything from your success.
- taraharris 3y ago
  Official secrecy clearly failed to stop the very scenario you're talking about! We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine countries. North Korea has them, for God's sake. Nuclear weapons are simply a function of having a large enough industrial base to support their development. The "secret sauce" is officially secret, but it isn't actually secret.
  - eganist 3y ago
    > We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine countries. North Korea has them, for God's sake Nine countries as opposed to...
    - kasey_junk 3y ago
      It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Treaties, sanctions etc. Not to mention the cost of a nuclear program.
      - dragonwriter 3y ago
        > It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Secrecy increases the cost, so it is, in effect, part of the “stick” end of the carrots and sticks. If there hadn’t been secrecy, would the return to sanity that stopped the South American nuclear arms race been too late? Secrecy should not be dismissed.
        vdqtp3 3y ago
        There is essentially no secrecy. Research the Nth Country Experiment
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > There is essentially no secrecy. There is secrecy, which is why the countries that haven’t found a shortcut around it (as in the nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil) have a harder road than those that do (like South Africa via Israel). > Research the Nth Country Experiment The Nth Country Experiment focused on paper design of a device, which, while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor.
        mrguyorama 3y ago
        >while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor. Nukes are not a physics challenge, but an engineering challenge. That's why an experiment showing a bunch of physicists understand simple particle physics isn't a useful demonstration that building nukes doesn't require insane amounts of help from a willing sponsor. People "knew" how to build the A bomb before World War 2 even started, yet even when several countries put energy into it to aid their war effort, only the US succeeded, and only because they dedicated around one tenth of the entire GDP to the process. Merely getting enough enriched material is enough of a problem to stop most countries.
        marcosdumay 3y ago
        > nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil Yeah, lol, the what now? Anyway, Brazil has a working uranium enrichment facility, with public numbers, and as efficient as any modern one (what is way more efficient than anything from the time nuclear bombs were created). What kind of secrecy are you stating that is stopping Brazil?
  - brookst 3y ago
    “Policy X is useless because it did not stop every single instance of the thing it was trying to reduce” is a fallacious argument. Seat belts did not halt deaths in auto accidents, etc. Secrecy may or may not be warranted, but this is not a good argument against it.
    - calvinmorrison 3y ago
      we should ban all Chinese people from the country because we certainly cannot stop all exhilaration of secrets, but better to stop some than none.
      - brookst 3y ago
        What a strange non sequitur. Are you OK?
dgrin91 3y ago
Should they also disclose the location of all the nuclear missile silos in the US? I'm generally in agreement with a transparent government, but there must be some limits.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Should they also disclose the location of all the nuclear missile silos in the US We do [1][2]. Better analogy might be disclosing the present location of all nuclear submarines. [1] https://uploads.fas.org/sites/4/NotebookMap.pdf https://uploads.fas.org/sites/4/NotebookMap.pdf [2] https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/location/a-u-s-nuclear-weapons-complex-map/ https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/location/a-u-s-nuclear-wea...
  - nickelcitymario 3y ago
    I see your points, but the difference is we know about the existence of the silos and subs. They're protecting information about them, but not trying to mislead us into thinking submarines aren't a thing.
  - dgrin91 3y ago
    We don't. The first file is only very high level details (not specific locations). You still have no idea where the silos actually are The second does not show any silo locations at all, it shows support infra for the silos (e.g. uranium mines)
- RetpolineDrama 3y ago
  >Should they also disclose the location of all the nuclear missile silos in the US? Yes. If the deterrent/protection factor of our nuclear weapons platforms are nullified by their location being exposed, then they are already useless.
subsubzero 3y ago
But.. The US Govt. has zero reasons to acknowledge existence of a non-human superior technology spacecraft. It would undermine their position as world super power and destabilize trust and security in the country and could lead to mass instability and a slow down of technological progress. And if they are running a massive psyops deception campaign it would make the public lose the last vestige of trust left in the govt. Its a lose lose situation on both scenarios and I expect the US govt. to keep things of this nature locked down to a extreme state as it has been doing since WW2. Also interesting note, the flood of credible pentagon UFO info is being brought up by a bunch of individuals who worked in(or currently for) the US intelligence community. This is 2017 and after when the NYtimes(Leslie Kean reporter) released the bombshell pentagon UFO tapes. These individuals are: Christoper Mellon(ex high ranking intelligence director), Luis Elizondo(Intelligence officer on and off), and currently David Grusch NGA, & NRO - the person who states that non human craft have been retrieved(OP article).
- throwaway743 3y ago
  The allegations aren't that it's only the US.
- botro 3y ago
  Would a US President have the necessary clearance to know of the existence of non-human superior technology spacecraft? A former US President is recorded on tape boasting about knowledge of US military plans to invade Iran. I don't mean to make this political at all, just trying to reason on the basis of a personality and knowing that a president would boast about having knowledge of such trivial classified information - in comparison to the existence of non-human spacecraft; makes me believe that if he was briefed on it he likely would have boasted about it. (and so would I, just imagine what earth shaking news that is.)
  - tomschlick 3y ago
    The president would have the clearance, but the issue is knowing who to even ask who would have knowledge. Top Secret SCI is compartmentalized, so only the people who need to know get read in. One great example of this is during the Bin Laden raid planning, after all plans were exhausted on how they could put boots on the ground, only then did a high ranking officer let the president and the rest of the team in the room know about the stealth helicopters that even the SEALs had never seen before.
mustacheemperor 3y ago
And, regardless, these need to be included as an enemy and plot point in the next major installment of Call of Duty.

eganist 3y ago

So are hostile countries using declassified nuclear blueprints to bomb our homeland. Alas, if you want the democratic experiment to succeed, you need to account for those who stand to lose everything from your success.

taraharris 3y ago
Official secrecy clearly failed to stop the very scenario you're talking about! We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine countries. North Korea has them, for God's sake. Nuclear weapons are simply a function of having a large enough industrial base to support their development. The "secret sauce" is officially secret, but it isn't actually secret.
- eganist 3y ago
  > We have had nuclear secrecy for nearly 80 years. In that time, nuclear weapons have proliferated to nine countries. North Korea has them, for God's sake Nine countries as opposed to...
  - kasey_junk 3y ago
    It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Treaties, sanctions etc. Not to mention the cost of a nuclear program.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > It’s not secrecy that has prevented proliferation, it’s carrots and sticks that has. Secrecy increases the cost, so it is, in effect, part of the “stick” end of the carrots and sticks. If there hadn’t been secrecy, would the return to sanity that stopped the South American nuclear arms race been too late? Secrecy should not be dismissed.
      - vdqtp3 3y ago
        There is essentially no secrecy. Research the Nth Country Experiment
        dragonwriter 3y ago
        > There is essentially no secrecy. There is secrecy, which is why the countries that haven’t found a shortcut around it (as in the nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil) have a harder road than those that do (like South Africa via Israel). > Research the Nth Country Experiment The Nth Country Experiment focused on paper design of a device, which, while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor.
        mrguyorama 3y ago
        >while a requirement to getting to functional nuclear weapons, isn’t the whole or, in practice, the limiting factor. Nukes are not a physics challenge, but an engineering challenge. That's why an experiment showing a bunch of physicists understand simple particle physics isn't a useful demonstration that building nukes doesn't require insane amounts of help from a willing sponsor. People "knew" how to build the A bomb before World War 2 even started, yet even when several countries put energy into it to aid their war effort, only the US succeeded, and only because they dedicated around one tenth of the entire GDP to the process. Merely getting enough enriched material is enough of a problem to stop most countries.
        marcosdumay 3y ago
        > nuclear arms race between Argentina and Brazil Yeah, lol, the what now? Anyway, Brazil has a working uranium enrichment facility, with public numbers, and as efficient as any modern one (what is way more efficient than anything from the time nuclear bombs were created). What kind of secrecy are you stating that is stopping Brazil?
- brookst 3y ago
  “Policy X is useless because it did not stop every single instance of the thing it was trying to reduce” is a fallacious argument. Seat belts did not halt deaths in auto accidents, etc. Secrecy may or may not be warranted, but this is not a good argument against it.
  - calvinmorrison 3y ago
    we should ban all Chinese people from the country because we certainly cannot stop all exhilaration of secrets, but better to stop some than none.
    - brookst 3y ago
      What a strange non sequitur. Are you OK?

dgrin91 3y ago

Should they also disclose the location of all the nuclear missile silos in the US? I'm generally in agreement with a transparent government, but there must be some limits.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> Should they also disclose the location of all the nuclear missile silos in the US We do [1][2]. Better analogy might be disclosing the present location of all nuclear submarines. [1] https://uploads.fas.org/sites/4/NotebookMap.pdf https://uploads.fas.org/sites/4/NotebookMap.pdf [2] https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/location/a-u-s-nuclear-weapons-complex-map/ https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/location/a-u-s-nuclear-wea...
- nickelcitymario 3y ago
  I see your points, but the difference is we know about the existence of the silos and subs. They're protecting information about them, but not trying to mislead us into thinking submarines aren't a thing.
- dgrin91 3y ago
  We don't. The first file is only very high level details (not specific locations). You still have no idea where the silos actually are The second does not show any silo locations at all, it shows support infra for the silos (e.g. uranium mines)
RetpolineDrama 3y ago
>Should they also disclose the location of all the nuclear missile silos in the US? Yes. If the deterrent/protection factor of our nuclear weapons platforms are nullified by their location being exposed, then they are already useless.

subsubzero 3y ago

But.. The US Govt. has zero reasons to acknowledge existence of a non-human superior technology spacecraft. It would undermine their position as world super power and destabilize trust and security in the country and could lead to mass instability and a slow down of technological progress. And if they are running a massive psyops deception campaign it would make the public lose the last vestige of trust left in the govt. Its a lose lose situation on both scenarios and I expect the US govt. to keep things of this nature locked down to a extreme state as it has been doing since WW2. Also interesting note, the flood of credible pentagon UFO info is being brought up by a bunch of individuals who worked in(or currently for) the US intelligence community. This is 2017 and after when the NYtimes(Leslie Kean reporter) released the bombshell pentagon UFO tapes. These individuals are: Christoper Mellon(ex high ranking intelligence director), Luis Elizondo(Intelligence officer on and off), and currently David Grusch NGA, & NRO - the person who states that non human craft have been retrieved(OP article).

throwaway743 3y ago
The allegations aren't that it's only the US.
botro 3y ago
Would a US President have the necessary clearance to know of the existence of non-human superior technology spacecraft? A former US President is recorded on tape boasting about knowledge of US military plans to invade Iran. I don't mean to make this political at all, just trying to reason on the basis of a personality and knowing that a president would boast about having knowledge of such trivial classified information - in comparison to the existence of non-human spacecraft; makes me believe that if he was briefed on it he likely would have boasted about it. (and so would I, just imagine what earth shaking news that is.)
- tomschlick 3y ago
  The president would have the clearance, but the issue is knowing who to even ask who would have knowledge. Top Secret SCI is compartmentalized, so only the people who need to know get read in. One great example of this is during the Bin Laden raid planning, after all plans were exhausted on how they could put boots on the ground, only then did a high ranking officer let the president and the rest of the team in the room know about the stealth helicopters that even the SEALs had never seen before.

mustacheemperor 3y ago

And, regardless, these need to be included as an enemy and plot point in the next major installment of Call of Duty.