Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why exactly do we still need nuclear subs? I'm not trying to be a troll, or funny. What threat is currently best dealt with by deploying ICBMs in nuclear subs? And why is the money better spent on that than on any other alternative use?
China and Russia.
NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
181–190 of 359 posts
Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#182Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#183We don't need an NSA or CIA or any other spy agency. I know I'm an extremist on government secrets, but I think there should be none. Nothing should be outside the reach of a FOIA request. In my ideal world all government officials' documents and emails would be made publicly accesible in real time, they're working for us. Any exception or loophole to transparency gets abused, every time. If that makes it harder to c…
It might well be that the current approach to domestic surveillance is out of balance and these agencies (and contractors!) need to be better controlled, but this pseudo-libertarian nihilism about government betrays an ignorance of realities that are much more fundamental than who is tracking phone call metadata.
Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#184Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right. But the work of the CSIS is not that accessible. There isn't one blanket rule you can apply to "government".
Agree, but it should be applied to as much of the government as makes sense, right now.
Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately we don't live in a world of ideals. With complete transparency comes little ability for security. Terrorist attempts become more frequent. Crime becomes more rampant and life become more unstable. If you ask a typical American if they are willing to die for their freedom, very few would. They'd rather the security. I'm not saying that's right or wrong, it's just true.
Sounds like the "security through obscurity" argument that gets flogged by the geek crowd.
Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why exactly do we still need nuclear subs? I'm not trying to be a troll, or funny. What threat is currently best dealt with by deploying ICBMs in nuclear subs? And why is the money better spent on that than on any other alternative use?
Nuclear submarines typically refer to submarines that are nuclear powered, not submarines that carry nuclear missiles. Although some submarines do carry ICBMs.
Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#187I find this kind of thing particularly interesting because I am the same age as Snowden. For reference, 9/11 is one of the defining events of my adult life. It happened during freshman physics lecture on my second week of classes at MIT. I considered joining the military, I protested in the streets against the war in Iraq. I remember the Patriot act being passed very well, and remember wishing people could see how sh…
I feel like people who are much younger than me don't have any frame of reference for a time when surveillance wasn't the assumed state of affairs. It's mind blowing to realize there are people who are too young to have experienced how different the pre-9/11 world was.
Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#188I love the government's response here. "Sure, we can have a debate about state surveillance, but the guy that forced this debate IS A NO GOOD DIRTY TRAITOR!"
and we could not catch this traitor with those 80 billions
Re: NSA leaker is a patriot, not a traitor
#189Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are an absurd number of things that it makes sense for the government to keep from the public and not divesting that information but keeping the people who have that information accountable is what elections are for. You want to know what officers are working under cover in the police force? Who are informants on terrorist organizations working against the state? The home phone numbers and addresses of all publ…
How about a middle ground where information private to the government is allowed but there is no NSA or CIA, or at least no intelligence operations beyond keeping an eye on the military movements of other countries? Honest question: What danger would that put us in? My instinct says a moderate amount, but I guess none of us know for sure, which makes it a little scary to imagine.
What if what they're not telling us is that FISA collection orders and analysis has kept people from nuking Manhattan a half-dozen times?