7 ms·
The article didn't say they hacked routers. > The NSA calls the effort an "active defence" and has used the technology to monitor units of the Chinese and Russ
by srl 13y ago
The article didn't say they hacked routers.
> The NSA calls the effort an "active defence" and has used the technology to monitor units of the Chinese and Russian armies, drug cartels, trade institutions inside the European Union, and US allies including Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan, the Times reported.
From the viewpoint of an American: hacking the EU trade institutions, and India, bothers me. The rest is exactly what the NSA et al /should/ be doing. Saudi and Pakistan are "allies" out of necessity -- there is no history of genuine mutual trust and support.
There certainly needs to be more control of who the NSA targets, and better constraints keeping them from targeting others, but pretending that all spying is bad is silly.
- amirmc 13y ago> "... there is no history of genuine mutual trust and support." Trust is supposed to work both ways. Before dismissing countries such as these it's worth looking at the history of relations from both sides.
- RexRollman 13y agoTrust. But verify.
- loup-vaillant 13y agoNo. When you're managing someone, there is a status asymmetry that makes it okay. If on the other hand, a "mere" developer verified his manager's work, it would be perceived as rude. In the case of countries, any such asymmetry is meant with resentment. It is fine that the US spies on, say, Iran? Then it means Iran has lower status than the US. Then it means that an Irani citizen (denizen?) is worth less than an American citizen. While we're at it, why don't we show what we're made up of? Knocking down a building or two should teach them a lesson… It doesn't really matter that it is right or wrong to spy on another country. But it sure is dangerous, should you ever get caught.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- mkaziz 13y agoCool, let's bomb their women and children, blow up their weddings and funerals, and then let's hack their computers because they don't "trust" us.
- abduhl 13y agoAs long as we are appealing to emotion here, let's not forget that Saudis composed nearly 80% of the 9/11 hijackers that killed our women and children and blew up our workplaces. Saudi Arabia has done little to engender trust.
- ItendToDisagree 13y agoAnd yet we have pursued no actions against Saudi Arabia... I wonder if they have something we really need that is stopping us from declaring faceless or outright war on them?
- mkaziz 13y agoBlack gold.
- ItendToDisagree 13y agoTexas Tea.
- loup-vaillant 13y agoLet's count. On the one hand, put every non-US citizen killed by the US. On the other hand, put every US citizen killed by all other countries and terrorists combined. Guess which number is vastly bigger than the other. 5-10 thousand dead in 9/11? That's peanuts, compared to the disproportionate responses that ensued. (I'm not saying it's peanuts in an absolute sense. It's still a tragedy, of course. Any death is.)
- abduhl 13y agoYes, let's. You take care of the non-US citizen part and I'll give you a low-ball for the US citizens killed by other countries number. If we use this handy wikipedia page shown below we can see that US military casualties are at a touch over 1.3 million. Let me know when you're done being facetious and/or have an answer for your number of non-US citizens killed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualti...