3 ms·

We can only gain by spying on you. We have a military base with defense systems in your country. Your political decisions therefore will have an impact on the e

We can only gain by spying on you. We have a military base with defense systems in your country. Your political decisions therefore will have an impact on the effectiveness of our military system to defend our country.

danbruc 13y ago
By robbing strangers in dark backstreets I can only gain, too. Because a country can gain something is not a good reason at all. And how do German decisions affect the United States' ability to defend themselves? We are thousands of kilometers away. We could maybe decided that we no longer want US military bases on German ground - quite unlikely if you ask me - but even if so, how does that impact the ability of the United States to protect their borders?
- jessedhillon 13y ago
  By robbing strangers in the dark you can lose your life! I don't think you understand the argument here. I sincerely think you are confusing strongly the way you think the world should work with what decision-makers can do under the limits of bounded rationality. Because something is to be gained is almost the only justification for everything that happens. If you want to figure out a world where people aren't self-interested and risk-averse, maybe a church would be a better place for you to have that discussion.
  - danbruc 13y ago
    If people are purely selfish, then everything is lost anyway - selfishness is not able to sustain a human society. And while people have to be selfish to some degree to sustain their lives, I see no reasons why they can not act altruistically after they secured basic human needs like food and shelter. And I agree that most if not all decisions are based or should be based on the expected gain, but the question is then of course how you define or measure that gain. There may actually be a real gain for a country if you spy on other countries, but I argue that this is the wrong standard for gain in that situation, a selfish definition of gain. I would strongly prefer to consider the gain or loss for the whole world when evaluating decisions like whether or not to spy on other countries.
  - andersonvom 13y ago
    Everything you do has pros and cons. By spying on other countries, you may create enemies and eventually lose many lives in a war, for instance. The point seemed to be: "just because it has a pro, doesn't mean I should do it". I could use the same logic to state that I can only gain by spying on my friends as well. Does that mean I should? Does that mean it has no downsides?
danieldk 13y ago
We can only gain by spying on you. Except for a lot of damage to goodwill, which can have an economic impact. Lots of European citizens dislike the US heavily now and that comes with disliking US products. Your political decisions therefore will have an impact on the effectiveness of our military system to defend our country. First, the US and Germany are allies. Allies talk and don't spy. Second, by now it's clear that a lot of the espionage is economical. The US/NSA mistreated their allies. It will take many years to rebuild trust.
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 13y ago
So, you also spy on your personal best friend then?

danbruc 13y ago

By robbing strangers in dark backstreets I can only gain, too. Because a country can gain something is not a good reason at all. And how do German decisions affect the United States' ability to defend themselves? We are thousands of kilometers away. We could maybe decided that we no longer want US military bases on German ground - quite unlikely if you ask me - but even if so, how does that impact the ability of the United States to protect their borders?

jessedhillon 13y ago
By robbing strangers in the dark you can lose your life! I don't think you understand the argument here. I sincerely think you are confusing strongly the way you think the world should work with what decision-makers can do under the limits of bounded rationality. Because something is to be gained is almost the only justification for everything that happens. If you want to figure out a world where people aren't self-interested and risk-averse, maybe a church would be a better place for you to have that discussion.
- danbruc 13y ago
  If people are purely selfish, then everything is lost anyway - selfishness is not able to sustain a human society. And while people have to be selfish to some degree to sustain their lives, I see no reasons why they can not act altruistically after they secured basic human needs like food and shelter. And I agree that most if not all decisions are based or should be based on the expected gain, but the question is then of course how you define or measure that gain. There may actually be a real gain for a country if you spy on other countries, but I argue that this is the wrong standard for gain in that situation, a selfish definition of gain. I would strongly prefer to consider the gain or loss for the whole world when evaluating decisions like whether or not to spy on other countries.
- andersonvom 13y ago
  Everything you do has pros and cons. By spying on other countries, you may create enemies and eventually lose many lives in a war, for instance. The point seemed to be: "just because it has a pro, doesn't mean I should do it". I could use the same logic to state that I can only gain by spying on my friends as well. Does that mean I should? Does that mean it has no downsides?

danieldk 13y ago

We can only gain by spying on you. Except for a lot of damage to goodwill, which can have an economic impact. Lots of European citizens dislike the US heavily now and that comes with disliking US products. Your political decisions therefore will have an impact on the effectiveness of our military system to defend our country. First, the US and Germany are allies. Allies talk and don't spy. Second, by now it's clear that a lot of the espionage is economical. The US/NSA mistreated their allies. It will take many years to rebuild trust.

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC 13y ago

So, you also spy on your personal best friend then?