6 ms·
Spying is a wash - what you're saying is true, but it's only half the equation. Sometimes that second guessing is what keeps the conflict from becoming hot. S
by tsotha 11y ago
Spying is a wash - what you're saying is true, but it's only half the equation. Sometimes that second guessing is what keeps the conflict from becoming hot. Spying can compromise a country's defense to the extent another country feels comfortable attacking. Also, if a weaker country can maintain the facade of strength it's less likely to be attacked.
The most obvious example is when one country manages to uncover another country's nuclear assets to such a high degree of confidence it feels (rightly or wrongly) it can make a 100% successful first strike.
- gizmo686 11y agoYou need mutual spying, but if you have that, then the week country will know that it is 100% vulnerable to first strike, and surrender before it comes to that.
- tsotha 11y agoThat never, ever happens.
- Retra 11y agoHow would you know that?
- tsotha 11y agoGive me one historical example.
- Retra 11y agoYou want me to give an example of something I'm claiming we don't know?
- tsotha 11y agoSurely if this is possible you could find one example in all of human history.
- Retra 11y agoIf I had better knowledge of military history, maybe. But I find it extremely unlikely that there has never been a situation where somebody knew some secret about their enemy that encouraged them into a concession instead of resistance. I mean, it happens in legal situations every day.
- oofabz 11y agoI'm not so sure you can count on a country to act in rational self-interest. Individual people aren't so good at that, and collectives can be less rational than individuals.