4 ms·

Does any one else thing the US is cashing in a hell of a lot of diplomatic good will to get one single man? Yeah, I get the US gov want Snowden, but this seems

by alan_cx 13y ago

Does any one else thing the US is cashing in a hell of a lot of diplomatic good will to get one single man? Yeah, I get the US gov want Snowden, but this seems so over the top, like it almost feels personal. Has Snowden got something on Obama personally or something? I have never seen this scale of action from the US for a mere whistle blower. Bin Laden and his ilk, fine, I understand that that. But even though IMHO, the leaks show the USA to be very badly behaving, most countries dont seem to care that much. Internationally and diplomatically, it seems very quiet. I dunno. But I do find the response strangely disproportionate.

tuxcanfly 13y ago
>Has Snowden got something on Obama personally or something? Probably yes. NSA spied on Obama in 2004 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-nsa-spied-on-barack-obama-2004-russ-tice-2013-6 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-nsa-spied-on-barack-obama...
_k 13y ago
There's more to come. And Obama wants to make sure Snowden's the last one to ever try it. So it's about a lot more than trying to stop or get one single man.
- jasonkolb 13y ago
  Exactly. This is the modern-day equivalent of a public crucifixion: a warning that you never, ever want to do something like this yourself. What's interesting--and a little disconcerting IMO--is that the public opinion of Snowden seems generally favorable. So the US .gov needs to attack him publicly while not making it TOO public because it is not generally a healthy thing for a government to move in opposition to its people. That's how "unrest" starts. Probably not with Snowden, but if it's the beginning of a trend... look out.
Amadou 13y ago
> But I do find the response strangely disproportionate. It may be that the people directly involved are "overly invested" in the situation. Making mountains out of molehills because they don't have enough metaphorical distance from the events to realize how their actions are perceived by regular on-lookers. After all there is roughly $50B/yr on the line, a lot of people have a lot of money at risk. Also, fantastic fodder for hollywood. I wouldn't blame Snowden one bit if after it all settles out, he figured out how to sell the rights to his story to hollywood for a couple of million dollars.

by alan_cx 13y ago

tuxcanfly 13y ago

>Has Snowden got something on Obama personally or something? Probably yes. NSA spied on Obama in 2004 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-nsa-spied-on-barack-obama-2004-russ-tice-2013-6 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-nsa-spied-on-barack-obama...

_k 13y ago

There's more to come. And Obama wants to make sure Snowden's the last one to ever try it. So it's about a lot more than trying to stop or get one single man.

jasonkolb 13y ago
Exactly. This is the modern-day equivalent of a public crucifixion: a warning that you never, ever want to do something like this yourself. What's interesting--and a little disconcerting IMO--is that the public opinion of Snowden seems generally favorable. So the US .gov needs to attack him publicly while not making it TOO public because it is not generally a healthy thing for a government to move in opposition to its people. That's how "unrest" starts. Probably not with Snowden, but if it's the beginning of a trend... look out.

Amadou 13y ago

> But I do find the response strangely disproportionate. It may be that the people directly involved are "overly invested" in the situation. Making mountains out of molehills because they don't have enough metaphorical distance from the events to realize how their actions are perceived by regular on-lookers. After all there is roughly $50B/yr on the line, a lot of people have a lot of money at risk. Also, fantastic fodder for hollywood. I wouldn't blame Snowden one bit if after it all settles out, he figured out how to sell the rights to his story to hollywood for a couple of million dollars.