Total Posts:69|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Edward Snowden is a fool

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis? If you're going to betray your contract with this federal agency, then the information you're leaking better be groundbreaking - it should be so huge, shocking, and outrageous that you will be publicly pardoned of any kind of wrongdoing, and the President among other government officials would become the subjects of our scrutiny and not you. Who on this website was shocked to learn that the government has invasive internet surveillance programs? Please tell me. And now he's making a massive arse out of himself by globetrotting in the U.S's most historically adversarial states.

His intention is noble, but his calculus is too flawed to respect. That his actions are the subjects of our discourse and not what his actions revealed is evidence that his plan is an abject failure.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
benevolent
Posts: 1,040
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 6:01:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
He made a stand dude. Better now than when the government is coming to knock down your door to carry you away.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 6:01:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis?

Ignoring the obvious moral argument that as a citizen of your nation you have a duty to promote the lives and welfare of your fellow citizens, an imperative to defend liberty and freedom from any and all threats, and that silence in the face of evil is the equivalent of allowing evil to take place:

1) The Guardian has paid him for his leaks by giving them access specifically to his leaks
2) His fame is going to net him loads of money from people like Julian Assange, who gave him a freakin' private jet flight to Ecuador (I think - don't really care about his personal life, it's not interesting and slightly intrusive). I'm sure he'll get paid more in this regard.
3) Fame is awesome.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
ZakYoungTheLibertarian
Posts: 253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 6:03:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Well said I agree with you on everything. Risk your life, your liberty and your wealth just to tell everyone what Will Smith and Gene Hackman already informed of us in Enemy of The State?
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 6:22:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 6:01:52 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis?

Ignoring the obvious moral argument that as a citizen of your nation you have a duty to promote the lives and welfare of your fellow citizens, an imperative to defend liberty and freedom from any and all threats, and that silence in the face of evil is the equivalent of allowing evil to take place:

1) The Guardian has paid him for his leaks by giving them access specifically to his leaks
2) His fame is going to net him loads of money from people like Julian Assange, who gave him a freakin' private jet flight to Ecuador (I think - don't really care about his personal life, it's not interesting and slightly intrusive). I'm sure he'll get paid more in this regard.
3) Fame is awesome.

How does he know that the Russian government will continue to continue to leave him be? How does he know his plane won't be intercepted by the U.S? He's not famous, he's controversial. This is not the public status you want if you're trying to come out of this a hero rather than an infidel. And this is a big stressful circumstance that limits his own liberties. Sounds pretty stupid to me.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 6:24:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis? If you're going to betray your contract with this federal agency, then the information you're leaking better be groundbreaking - it should be so huge, shocking, and outrageous that you will be publicly pardoned of any kind of wrongdoing, and the President among other government officials would become the subjects of our scrutiny and not you. Who on this website was shocked to learn that the government has invasive internet surveillance programs? Please tell me. And now he's making a massive arse out of himself by globetrotting in the U.S's most historically adversarial states.

Which I find hilariously ironic.... Putin, I'm sure, does too.

His intention is noble, but his calculus is too flawed to respect. That his actions are the subjects of our discourse and not what his actions revealed is evidence that his plan is an abject failure.

Let's not forget that he betrayed his country, compromised the integrity of the US intelligence community and both of those by exposing state secrets.

I fully agree with you here, Ike.
Tsar of DDO
benevolent
Posts: 1,040
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 6:59:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
000ike, you're a scared little boy. Growing up with two loving, intellectual parents might do that to you all right. Anything to protect your little world, your American world, from outside invasion. Surely nothing threatens you from within!
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 7:01:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 6:59:54 PM, benevolent wrote:
000ike, you're a scared little boy. Growing up with two loving, intellectual parents might do that to you all right. Anything to protect your little world, your American world, from outside invasion. Surely nothing threatens you from within!

wut?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 7:02:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Eh. Snowden's a rabble-rouser.

I like rabble-rousers.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 7:05:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 7:02:12 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
Eh. Snowden's a rabble-rouser.

I like rabble-rousers.

Well my critique was based on the harm/benefit from his point of view, not ours. In that regard, what he did was pretty stupid.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 8:43:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 6:22:38 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/1/2013 6:01:52 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis?

Ignoring the obvious moral argument that as a citizen of your nation you have a duty to promote the lives and welfare of your fellow citizens, an imperative to defend liberty and freedom from any and all threats, and that silence in the face of evil is the equivalent of allowing evil to take place:

1) The Guardian has paid him for his leaks by giving them access specifically to his leaks
2) His fame is going to net him loads of money from people like Julian Assange, who gave him a freakin' private jet flight to Ecuador (I think - don't really care about his personal life, it's not interesting and slightly intrusive). I'm sure he'll get paid more in this regard.
3) Fame is awesome.

How does he know that the Russian government will continue to continue to leave him be? How does he know his plane won't be intercepted by the U.S? He's not famous, he's controversial. This is not the public status you want if you're trying to come out of this a hero rather than an infidel. And this is a big stressful circumstance that limits his own liberties. Sounds pretty stupid to me.

I sincerely doubt Snowden is doing this for whatever paltry sums the Guardian will be giving him for access, if they even gave him money for access. If the Guardian did, they would be accomplices to the crime, and the US government would have already demanded recourse against the website.

What is IMHO much more plausible is that Snowden used the PRISM story as a cover to leak extremely sensitive intelligence to China, Russia, Cuba, and Ecuador, none of which will be made public. The payoff for Snowden under such a scenario will come from those countries, not the Guardian.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 11:03:22 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I suspected that the federal government was watching my phone calls to my relative in Egypt, but I didn't suspect such massive of an operation that the NSA actually is undertaking.

I think that Snowden is a hero.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/1/2013 11:35:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I think I agree with the OP, here.

I have heard that in 2004-5 the NY Times exposed this spying program. If this is the case, what did Snowden expose specifically that is to wake everyone up? Why did he have to leak classified material to simply say what was going on?
My work here is, finally, done.
ZakYoungTheLibertarian
Posts: 253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 3:00:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
First of all, leaking classified information may be a crime but it's hardly an immoral action. Let's not forget that the state is a monstrous criminal organization which preys on others through a massive program of systemic coercion- needless to say there is no obligation to keep information it has labelled classified secret. Secondly, without actual proof he's just some dude making a claim. Snowden's actions were no doubt heroic but heroism is generally retarded. Why would you sacrifice yourself for a bunch of idiots that spend their whole time watching reality TV, eating cheese burgers and talking about how great they are? It's get yours and screw everyone else; nobility is for chumps.
FrackJack
Posts: 1,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 3:15:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 11:03:22 PM, Contra wrote:
I suspected that the federal government was watching my phone calls to my relative in Egypt, but I didn't suspect such massive of an operation that the NSA actually is undertaking.

I think that Snowden is a hero.
: At 8/8/2013 6:15:09 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
: The idiots are rebelling.

http://i.imgur.com...
FrackJack
Posts: 1,392
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 3:21:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/2/2013 3:20:32 AM, benevolent wrote:
All right I'm going to sleep. Good show, sir.

kfc.
: At 8/8/2013 6:15:09 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
: The idiots are rebelling.

http://i.imgur.com...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 5:12:03 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 6:22:38 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/1/2013 6:01:52 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis?

Ignoring the obvious moral argument that as a citizen of your nation you have a duty to promote the lives and welfare of your fellow citizens, an imperative to defend liberty and freedom from any and all threats, and that silence in the face of evil is the equivalent of allowing evil to take place:

1) The Guardian has paid him for his leaks by giving them access specifically to his leaks
2) His fame is going to net him loads of money from people like Julian Assange, who gave him a freakin' private jet flight to Ecuador (I think - don't really care about his personal life, it's not interesting and slightly intrusive). I'm sure he'll get paid more in this regard.
3) Fame is awesome.

How does he know that the Russian government will continue to continue to leave him be?

Because Putin is a rational guy. He's authoritarian like mad, but he understands the effectiveness of Snowden.

How does he know his plane won't be intercepted by the U.S?

Other than the more effective journalists failing to do so themselves, and the U.S officially saying they're not going after him, if the U.S intercepted in MOSCOW they would get so much sh!t from almost every government in the world (much more than now) you'd be forced to take xenophobic policies because your foreign policy wouldn't adjust fast enough to the gale seven sh!tstorm passing through Washington.

He's not famous, he's controversial.

What crazy definition of "famous" do you have, where being constantly on TV for 3 weeks straight in the US isn't "famous"?

This is not the public status you want if you're trying to come out of this a hero rather than an infidel. And this is a big stressful circumstance that limits his own liberties. Sounds pretty stupid to me.

Well fine: your selfish viewpoint justifies you not playing high-risk high-reward.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 5:14:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 8:43:55 PM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 7/1/2013 6:22:38 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 7/1/2013 6:01:52 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis?

Ignoring the obvious moral argument that as a citizen of your nation you have a duty to promote the lives and welfare of your fellow citizens, an imperative to defend liberty and freedom from any and all threats, and that silence in the face of evil is the equivalent of allowing evil to take place:

1) The Guardian has paid him for his leaks by giving them access specifically to his leaks
2) His fame is going to net him loads of money from people like Julian Assange, who gave him a freakin' private jet flight to Ecuador (I think - don't really care about his personal life, it's not interesting and slightly intrusive). I'm sure he'll get paid more in this regard.
3) Fame is awesome.

How does he know that the Russian government will continue to continue to leave him be? How does he know his plane won't be intercepted by the U.S? He's not famous, he's controversial. This is not the public status you want if you're trying to come out of this a hero rather than an infidel. And this is a big stressful circumstance that limits his own liberties. Sounds pretty stupid to me.

I sincerely doubt Snowden is doing this for whatever paltry sums the Guardian will be giving him for access, if they even gave him money for access. If the Guardian did, they would be accomplices to the crime, and the US government would have already demanded recourse against the website.

Oh let them try. Let them try.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 6:56:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis? If you're going to betray your contract with this federal agency, then the information you're leaking better be groundbreaking - it should be so huge, shocking, and outrageous that you will be publicly pardoned of any kind of wrongdoing, and the President among other government officials would become the subjects of our scrutiny and not you. Who on this website was shocked to learn that the government has invasive internet surveillance programs? Please tell me. And now he's making a massive arse out of himself by globetrotting in the U.S's most historically adversarial states.

His intention is noble, but his calculus is too flawed to respect. That his actions are the subjects of our discourse and not what his actions revealed is evidence that his plan is an abject failure.

Think Daniel Ellsberg, was he justified fir what he did? Yes because h released important documents.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
slo1
Posts: 4,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/2/2013 7:46:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 7/1/2013 5:58:43 PM, 000ike wrote:
I can't understand the kind of reasoning that would impel someone to leave a very good government job, a girlfriend, $200k salary and become an international fugitive running from the most militaristic nation on the planet. Where was the cost-benefit analysis? If you're going to betray your contract with this federal agency, then the information you're leaking better be groundbreaking - it should be so huge, shocking, and outrageous that you will be publicly pardoned of any kind of wrongdoing, and the President among other government officials would become the subjects of our scrutiny and not you. Who on this website was shocked to learn that the government has invasive internet surveillance programs? Please tell me. And now he's making a massive arse out of himself by globetrotting in the U.S's most historically adversarial states.

His intention is noble, but his calculus is too flawed to respect. That his actions are the subjects of our discourse and not what his actions revealed is evidence that his plan is an abject failure.

If life's decisions were all about the practical elements of what one might loose, the well off leadership of the English colonies would have never rallied the nation and lead the war to gain Independence.

Our nations forefathers could have easily remained in powerful positions and made plenty of money despite higher taxation and being under the king's thumb.

Not to mention the value you place on a girl friend, high paying job, etc is obviously not the same value he places on them. Is it possible his values are brilliant and our values are petty and foolish?