4 ms·
>> "cannot be trusted" to be free of influence from Beijing Unlike U.S. telecoms, which are totally free of influence from Washington.
by nathan_long 14y ago
>> "cannot be trusted" to be free of influence from Beijing
Unlike U.S. telecoms, which are totally free of influence from Washington.
- larrik 14y agoRight or wrong, national security has nothing to do with fairness.
- EliRivers 14y agoIf fairness is a fundamental or key part of a nation's identity or principles, then removing that fairness is an attack on the nation and is a national security matter. Securing a nation isn't just ensuring that foreign people don't steal it.
- tedunangst 14y agoEnsuring foreign people don't steal it is part of securing a nation.
- ImprovedSilence 14y agoAgreed. And while I would not be particularly happy about the US spying on me, Id rather have them than China do it.
- king_jester 14y agoYou are seriously mistaken if you believe that a violation of your privacy is better from party A than party B. Both groups of people will fuck you over, it's only a matter of time.
- ImprovedSilence 14y agoAh, but if only the world were really so black and white...
- lostlogin 14y agoHas China kidnapped or assassinated people outside of China (or within) in recent memory? Obviously the US has, but is China just better at hiding it?
- lostlogin 14y agoLess bothered about the spying than about what happens with the information obtained - which of those 2 countries has kidnapped people recently then tortured them and sometimes killed them in the process? Or alternatively, just fired off missiles, dismissing the collateral deaths. I'd far sooner be spied on by either country than have them suspect me of anything. There are no good guys to be seen in this story.
- roc 14y agoYes, well, the US government can hardly be blamed for not being concerned about its own influence.
- fforw 14y agoGiven all the bad things parts of the government were involved in, maybe it wouldn't actually be that bad of an idea to be shizophrenically suspicious of itself.. checks and balances, right?
- roc 14y agoFreedom through bureaucratic infighting? A novel thought. But history and current events suggests it doesn't often play out that way. You just wind up with multiple groups seeking influence, with infighting limited to squabbling for control over that influence rather than attempts to erode it. e.g. You get several branches of government [1] violating the fourth amendment, all for their own purposes, with occasional questions raised about who should be doing the violating, but little 'serious' talk about whether it should be done. [1] FBI, CIA, DHS, NSA -- who isn't invading the privacy of US citizens these days?
- lttlrck 14y agoI'm sure the alternative would work out really well.