4 ms·

>At the risk of being proven wrong in the (near) future I challenge your statement. I doubt the German government or an intelligence agency would dare to bug an

by cube13 13y ago

>At the risk of being proven wrong in the (near) future I challenge your statement. I doubt the German government or an intelligence agency would dare to bug an US embassy, the headquarter of one of your parties or whatever comes closest to the EU buildings supposed to be bugged. Equally I doubt they are in the business of mass surveillance. All intelligence services are in the business of mass surveillance, period. If they're not, they aren't a good intelligence service. The simple fact is that with the way the world is today, it's foolish to blindly assume that your allies are always acting in your best interest. They are, obviously, going to act in their own best interests, but it's important to know when your interests coincide, and when they don't. And it's more important to know that now than any other time. The difference between today and 30 years ago is that there isn't a Warsaw Pact for NATO to oppose. Keep in mind, every major player in the Warsaw Pact is now either a member of NATO, or in a "partnership for peace" with NATO. The current major "adversary"(and I use that term very, very lightly) is China, who enjoys good trade relations with the entire world, to the point where open conflict with China would be so disastrous to everyone involved(including China), that it's completely off the table. That's why this kind of spycraft is even more important now than ever. Large scale military movements are easy to see. But knowing things like what the EU as a whole is going to do with trade agreements, or if the Chinese are talking to the Russians about a new oil pipeline, is hugely important.

danbruc 13y ago
All intelligence services are in the business of mass surveillance, period. If they're not, they aren't a good intelligence service. Isn't it the other way round? You fail at targeted surveillance and have to resort to mass surveillance? The simple fact is that with the way the world is today, it's foolish to blindly assume that your allies are always acting in your best interest. They are, obviously, going to act in their own best interests, but it's important to know when your interests coincide, and when they don't. And it's more important to know that now than any other time. I mostly agree - usually the best you can expect is that someone is acting in common best interest. But there are also some exception like help after a natural disaster where states might indeed act in your best interest. The difference between today and 30 years ago is that there isn't a Warsaw Pact for NATO to oppose. Keep in mind, every major player in the Warsaw Pact is now either a member of NATO, or in a "partnership for peace" with NATO. The current major "adversary"(and I use that term very, very lightly) is China, who enjoys good trade relations with the entire world, to the point where open conflict with China would be so disastrous to everyone involved(including China), that it's completely off the table. For Germany China is an important trade partner with between 5 % and 10 % of the total import and export volume. Stopping all trading relationships will without doubt have a noticeable effect but I don't know if it will be our if I would call it disastrous. That's why this kind of spycraft is even more important now than ever. Large scale military movements are easy to see. But knowing things like what the EU as a whole is going to do with trade agreements, or if the Chinese are talking to the Russians about a new oil pipeline, is hugely important. Yes, it might be interesting to know, but obtaining this information by spying at others is not legal. In this world it is also important to have some money at hand but that makes a really bad justification for robbing a bank. Just because you want something does not mean you can have it or are even entitled to have it. If law and justice means something to you, deal with it, otherwise you are just opportunistic.

by cube13 13y ago

danbruc 13y ago

All intelligence services are in the business of mass surveillance, period. If they're not, they aren't a good intelligence service. Isn't it the other way round? You fail at targeted surveillance and have to resort to mass surveillance? The simple fact is that with the way the world is today, it's foolish to blindly assume that your allies are always acting in your best interest. They are, obviously, going to act in their own best interests, but it's important to know when your interests coincide, and when they don't. And it's more important to know that now than any other time. I mostly agree - usually the best you can expect is that someone is acting in common best interest. But there are also some exception like help after a natural disaster where states might indeed act in your best interest. The difference between today and 30 years ago is that there isn't a Warsaw Pact for NATO to oppose. Keep in mind, every major player in the Warsaw Pact is now either a member of NATO, or in a "partnership for peace" with NATO. The current major "adversary"(and I use that term very, very lightly) is China, who enjoys good trade relations with the entire world, to the point where open conflict with China would be so disastrous to everyone involved(including China), that it's completely off the table. For Germany China is an important trade partner with between 5 % and 10 % of the total import and export volume. Stopping all trading relationships will without doubt have a noticeable effect but I don't know if it will be our if I would call it disastrous. That's why this kind of spycraft is even more important now than ever. Large scale military movements are easy to see. But knowing things like what the EU as a whole is going to do with trade agreements, or if the Chinese are talking to the Russians about a new oil pipeline, is hugely important. Yes, it might be interesting to know, but obtaining this information by spying at others is not legal. In this world it is also important to have some money at hand but that makes a really bad justification for robbing a bank. Just because you want something does not mean you can have it or are even entitled to have it. If law and justice means something to you, deal with it, otherwise you are just opportunistic.