12 ms·

It's absolutely ridiculous to state that it's not a breach of trust for a country to spy on its ally.

by rijoja 3y ago

_8j50 3y ago
It is diplomatically when they are found and it is made public. But when they are not made public, usually the counterintel spies keep an eye on them. Of course the US spies on the UK to make sure their gov is doing ok, and the UK spies on the US to make sure their interests are kept even though they are as close of an ally as you can imagine. But spies act on behalf of the president/prime minister ultimately, if there is no political interest the spies won't actually do much. But if marie lepenn (or whatever her name is) becomes the leader of france for example, the US would want to know if anything crazy that affects US interests is being decided by her. When trump was elected, are EU countries supposed to hope he doesn't leak their critical intel the US already has to putin? Of course they'll need to collect intel. But usually it just means paying an asset to leak info, when it becomes permanently installed spying infrastructure it becomes to embarassing for the target when discovered.
- rijoja 3y ago
  Aha and if a bad guy becomes president in the US, and a good guy becomes president in France, should we be happy about the supposedly benevolent CIA interfering in the French democracy then as well or what?
  - _8j50 3y ago
    No, you should be happy the CIA did nothing because even if they did you would not know about it. But if it so happens they did and you find out, you should feel angry but you should not pretend it is business unusual. Of course espionage is not election interfernece neccesarily unless you consider things like leaking info to french or US media interference (legit info not disinformation). Friendly countries spy on each other to protect each other not to harm. Like anything intent, context and relationship is important. It's not ok for people to touch your butt for example unless people are your chosen sexual partner. It's not ok to kill a person, unless your intent is to defend yourself from mortal peril. It's not ok to spy on your friend, unless you are concerned your friend might commit suicide. In some cases it makes the act excusable and in others it makes the anger less inflamed.
    - rijoja 3y ago
      > No, you should be happy the CIA did nothing because even if they did you would not know about it. Doing research on the CIA has made me expect them to be up to absolutely no good, and frankly this is something that makes me sad and not happy. > But if it so happens they did and you find out, you should feel angry but you should not pretend it is business unusual. I'm glad that you understand that this makes me upset, but you are mistaken in believing that I do not think that this isn't "business as usual", in fact I've come to expect far far worse acts from the CIA. > Of course espionage is not election interfernece neccesarily unless you consider things like leaking info to french or US media interference (legit info not disinformation). No espionage isn't necessarily election interference, but if there is something that the CIA is known for then it's election interference. Well it turns out that public opinion can be shaped not by telling lies, which is easily combated, but rather by not telling the whole truth. > It's not ok for people to touch your butt for example unless people are your chosen sexual partner. Really? > It's not ok to kill a person, unless your intent is to defend yourself from mortal peril. It's not ok to spy on your friend, unless you are concerned your friend might commit suicide. Are you saying that the CIA was afraid that Angela Merkel was about to kill someone, commit suicide and or was being sexually aroused by having people watching her? Would it be okay for someone to spy on their friends, to see if they are trying to make a deal with somebody they don't like, so that they can put a spanner in the wheels on that deal? I mean if you doesn't like somebody then it's probably for the best for your friend not to have anything to do with that person. Is it okay for you to put spyware on your girlfriends phone to make sure that she doesn't cheat on you? You could always argue that cheating is immoral, and you are only trying to make sure that she doesn't become a bad person (according to you). Would you agree with me installing cameras in your home, for your personal protection. I mean you can totally trust a random person on the internet with your personal life, especially since I might be in a different legal jurisdiction so that you can practice your faith in strangers without having to worry about getting protection from your local law enforcement. > In some cases it makes the act excusable and in others it makes the anger less inflamed. Yeah and in a lot of cases making excuses instead of apologies, after getting caught red handed makes the anger along with the contempt more inflamed.
- rijoja 3y ago
  > When trump was elected, are EU countries supposed to hope he doesn't leak their critical intel the US already has to putin? Yeah so people in Europe are really upset of US wiretapping because they don't trust the US government with that information, is it really that difficult to wrap your head around that concept? A lot of people in Europe believe that the US hardly ever have had a good candidate, and that Trump is just another addition of a long list of despicable presidents. So if you imagine how it would feel like if you tought every US government is as shocking as the Trump administration, you might start to understand how people outside of the US feels about this, if that is of any interest to you of course. > But usually it just means paying an asset to leak info, Which some people would consider manipulating someone to commit high treason.
  - _8j50 3y ago
    > Yeah so people in Europe are really upset of US wiretapping because they don't trust the US government with that information, is it really that difficult to wrap your head around that concept? No, that was never in dispute though, strawman argument? > A lot of people in Europe believe that the US hardly ever have had a good candidate, and that Trump is just another addition of a long list of despicable presidents. So if you imagine how it would feel like if you tought every US government is as shocking as the Trump administration, you might start to understand how people outside of the US feels about this, if that is of any interest to you of course Are you saying if the US president was nicer, US spying would be acceptable? Or are you making my argument for me that precisely for the reasons you mentioned, european intel agencies are spying in/against the US? > Which some people would consider manipulating someone to commit high treason. Treason is betrayal as it applies to aiding an enemy, not a trusted ally. And almost never in times of peace. The specific term is espionage not treason. But still a betrayal of trust. Usually assets are just waiting to be bought, it's better for an ally to buy them instead of a hostile country/agent. Lookup the CIA MICE acronym on how to develop assets. Think about it this way, not much has changed between EU and US relations even after snowden reveals and trump. Ultimately the interests of both parties are largely aligned and intertwined and embarassments like the US spying solved diplomatically. But what concerns me is much of both US and EU is too many generarions removed from the chaos of the old world. They are not aware of the treasure of peace and friendly relations we all enjoy. We are debating over a website instead of with bullets from foxholes and the current state of spying is largely a reaction to WW2 and the cold war. It can change both for better and worse, so vote for foreign ministers that will relfect your views and priorities so they can solve this stuff.

It's absolutely ridiculous to state that it's not a breach of trust for a country to spy on its ally.

by rijoja 3y ago

It's absolutely ridiculous to state that it's not a breach of trust for a country to spy on its ally.

It is diplomatically when they are found and it is made public. But when they are not made public, usually the counterintel spies keep an eye on them. Of course the US spies on the UK to make sure their gov is doing ok, and the UK spies on the US to make sure their interests are kept even though they are as close of an ally as you can imagine. But spies act on behalf of the president/prime minister ultimately, if there is no political interest the spies won't actually do much. But if marie lepenn (or whatever her name is) becomes the leader of france for example, the US would want to know if anything crazy that affects US interests is being decided by her. When trump was elected, are EU countries supposed to hope he doesn't leak their critical intel the US already has to putin? Of course they'll need to collect intel. But usually it just means paying an asset to leak info, when it becomes permanently installed spying infrastructure it becomes to embarassing for the target when discovered.

rijoja 3y ago
Aha and if a bad guy becomes president in the US, and a good guy becomes president in France, should we be happy about the supposedly benevolent CIA interfering in the French democracy then as well or what?
- _8j50 3y ago
  No, you should be happy the CIA did nothing because even if they did you would not know about it. But if it so happens they did and you find out, you should feel angry but you should not pretend it is business unusual. Of course espionage is not election interfernece neccesarily unless you consider things like leaking info to french or US media interference (legit info not disinformation). Friendly countries spy on each other to protect each other not to harm. Like anything intent, context and relationship is important. It's not ok for people to touch your butt for example unless people are your chosen sexual partner. It's not ok to kill a person, unless your intent is to defend yourself from mortal peril. It's not ok to spy on your friend, unless you are concerned your friend might commit suicide. In some cases it makes the act excusable and in others it makes the anger less inflamed.
  - rijoja 3y ago
    > No, you should be happy the CIA did nothing because even if they did you would not know about it. Doing research on the CIA has made me expect them to be up to absolutely no good, and frankly this is something that makes me sad and not happy. > But if it so happens they did and you find out, you should feel angry but you should not pretend it is business unusual. I'm glad that you understand that this makes me upset, but you are mistaken in believing that I do not think that this isn't "business as usual", in fact I've come to expect far far worse acts from the CIA. > Of course espionage is not election interfernece neccesarily unless you consider things like leaking info to french or US media interference (legit info not disinformation). No espionage isn't necessarily election interference, but if there is something that the CIA is known for then it's election interference. Well it turns out that public opinion can be shaped not by telling lies, which is easily combated, but rather by not telling the whole truth. > It's not ok for people to touch your butt for example unless people are your chosen sexual partner. Really? > It's not ok to kill a person, unless your intent is to defend yourself from mortal peril. It's not ok to spy on your friend, unless you are concerned your friend might commit suicide. Are you saying that the CIA was afraid that Angela Merkel was about to kill someone, commit suicide and or was being sexually aroused by having people watching her? Would it be okay for someone to spy on their friends, to see if they are trying to make a deal with somebody they don't like, so that they can put a spanner in the wheels on that deal? I mean if you doesn't like somebody then it's probably for the best for your friend not to have anything to do with that person. Is it okay for you to put spyware on your girlfriends phone to make sure that she doesn't cheat on you? You could always argue that cheating is immoral, and you are only trying to make sure that she doesn't become a bad person (according to you). Would you agree with me installing cameras in your home, for your personal protection. I mean you can totally trust a random person on the internet with your personal life, especially since I might be in a different legal jurisdiction so that you can practice your faith in strangers without having to worry about getting protection from your local law enforcement. > In some cases it makes the act excusable and in others it makes the anger less inflamed. Yeah and in a lot of cases making excuses instead of apologies, after getting caught red handed makes the anger along with the contempt more inflamed.
rijoja 3y ago
> When trump was elected, are EU countries supposed to hope he doesn't leak their critical intel the US already has to putin? Yeah so people in Europe are really upset of US wiretapping because they don't trust the US government with that information, is it really that difficult to wrap your head around that concept? A lot of people in Europe believe that the US hardly ever have had a good candidate, and that Trump is just another addition of a long list of despicable presidents. So if you imagine how it would feel like if you tought every US government is as shocking as the Trump administration, you might start to understand how people outside of the US feels about this, if that is of any interest to you of course. > But usually it just means paying an asset to leak info, Which some people would consider manipulating someone to commit high treason.
- _8j50 3y ago
  > Yeah so people in Europe are really upset of US wiretapping because they don't trust the US government with that information, is it really that difficult to wrap your head around that concept? No, that was never in dispute though, strawman argument? > A lot of people in Europe believe that the US hardly ever have had a good candidate, and that Trump is just another addition of a long list of despicable presidents. So if you imagine how it would feel like if you tought every US government is as shocking as the Trump administration, you might start to understand how people outside of the US feels about this, if that is of any interest to you of course Are you saying if the US president was nicer, US spying would be acceptable? Or are you making my argument for me that precisely for the reasons you mentioned, european intel agencies are spying in/against the US? > Which some people would consider manipulating someone to commit high treason. Treason is betrayal as it applies to aiding an enemy, not a trusted ally. And almost never in times of peace. The specific term is espionage not treason. But still a betrayal of trust. Usually assets are just waiting to be bought, it's better for an ally to buy them instead of a hostile country/agent. Lookup the CIA MICE acronym on how to develop assets. Think about it this way, not much has changed between EU and US relations even after snowden reveals and trump. Ultimately the interests of both parties are largely aligned and intertwined and embarassments like the US spying solved diplomatically. But what concerns me is much of both US and EU is too many generarions removed from the chaos of the old world. They are not aware of the treasure of peace and friendly relations we all enjoy. We are debating over a website instead of with bullets from foxholes and the current state of spying is largely a reaction to WW2 and the cold war. It can change both for better and worse, so vote for foreign ministers that will relfect your views and priorities so they can solve this stuff.