[tripzilch]

> Isn't this the explicit purpose of the NSA, to spy on the communications of foreign governments?

In what deranged world-view does being "the explicit purpose" of something make it right?

(and it's not even their explicit purpose, otherwise they'd be called the International Spying Agency ...)

> And aren't EU members' governments doing the same thing against the US?

That's a childish argument. Frankly I don't care if Germany or France or whoever are spying on eachother too. An example from my work with kids, "but he's doing it tooooooo!" doesn't really fly with me, it doesn't matter, they shouldn't be doing it either, but I caught you, now clean that up.

While two EU states spying on eachother is an internal EU matter, I do wonder to what extent EU states are spying on the US. It sounds risky, though. I mean, if we catch a US spy snooping on our diplomats, we can't really throw them in Guantanamo, or anything ...

[dsl]

> In what deranged world-view does being "the explicit purpose" of something make it right?

That is like being shocked and horrified that animal control puts down stray dogs. People don't like to talk about it, a small number of people might be upset by it, but it is a necessary part of civilized society.

We give them our tax dollars for this explicit reason. Please go spy on other countries so that we know what is going on in the world. Congress has been approving their budget every year to continue doing it for the last 62 years.

Call it childish all you want, but every other country in the world has an intelligence service. The EU itself has INTCEN, the UN has UNIT, heck even the Vatican has SRS, that all have the same basic functions as our CIA and NSA.

[zxcdw]

> That is like being shocked and horrified that animal control puts down stray dogs. People don't like to talk about it, a small number of people might be upset by it, but it is a necessary part of civilized society.

In Finland we don't have stray dogs. No animal control putting them down either. I guess we aren't a civilized society by your standards, assuming your claim is true.

Now that I have shown why your example is not true(or that you are an idiot for thinking Finland is not civilized society, your choice), I have to admit that I still can't think why foreign intelligence during peacetime would be "a necessary part of civilized society". I have never heard any arguments for this, so feel free to be the first. I'm waiting.

[jodrellblank]

In Finland we don't have stray dogs. No animal control putting them down either.

So what do you have?

(I'm assuming 'unsurvivably cold weather' isn't your answer, either).

[md224]

> it is a necessary part of civilized society

I haven't spent enough time thinking about the complex global dynamics of intelligence and counter-intelligence to judge the truthfulness of this statement, but I'm also not sure the necessity of spying is something we should blindly accept without carefully considering the rationale and consequences.

And by the way, it's actually important for people to be shocked and horrified that animal control puts down stray dogs, because there are ways that society can lessen the frequency of such acts (neutering pets, etc.), and knowing about the consequences provides motivation to take preventative steps.

[pcrh]

You are likely correct in what you say. However, there has always been the fiction that allies do not spy upon each other, after all, why should they, they're allies.

So, when it emerges that one part of the alliance has been less than forthcoming with another part, it stresses the alliance. Even if this is a normal, though rarely spoken of, aspect of international relations.

So.. the recent events mentioned here have the effect of making the US adopt an apologetic role. As such, it weakens their "soft" power, since their moral authority is weakened. This weakens their influence in a wide number of always-ongoing international negotiations.

The wider effect on commercial activity and how it relates to surveillance is discussed by others here. Personally, I hope it leads to commercial providers of internet communication facilities adopting stringent privacy measures by default, in the manner that certain banks may (or used to) protect your financial information.

[brianpgordon]

The EU is a staunch ally. We have nothing to fear from them, and spying on them can only serve to provoke an embarrassing international incident when we get caught.

My opinion is that if they want to keep something secret, then they have that right, and we shouldn't be prying. If the rest of the world thinks that's crazy, well we can be a good example.

[gnaffle]

Well, it _is_ their explicit purpose, or how else do you interpret their mission statement?

Other governments doing the same is exactly why the NSA and the CIA can be justified. Not having them would put the US at a serious information disadvantage.

A completely different issue is _what_ and _how much_ information gathering they should be doing. For instance, the US has been complaining about Chinese computer attacks for a long time, and it now seems that the US is at least as guilty in doing this. So the US certainly don't seem to have the moral high ground anymore.

[calibraxis]

That's not how nation-states work. The US would spy even if no one else spied, just like the US invades other countries despite no serious risk of being invaded and overthrown itself. (Such an invasion would be suicidal; the invader's nation would be vaporized within minutes.)

We could go on: the US incarcerates its populace far more than other nations, even though its populace isn't more genetically predisposed to criminality.

Nation-states are artificial institutions which make war and control their subjects. They're remarkably similar to the mafia model. "Defending its populace" is akin to a protection racket. (For example, the US's actions clearly have the effect of increasing risks, not reducing them.) Dispute resolution (courts, etc) and top-down "democratic" forms are the result of needing to demonstrate some legitimacy lest they be overthrown by their subjects. Even in a rich country like the US, most people still have little ability to participate meaningfully in the legal/political/economic systems; and in presidential elections, very few votes actually count (due to the electoral system).

Since the US is the most powerful nation-state, it's the most violent; that's a correlation that runs through history. In particular, its capacity for violence (military) has no competitors. (It also has the most advanced economy, but it's no longer so advanced in this dimension as it was after WWII.)

[gnaffle]

I never claimed wouldn't spy is no one else spied. Of course they would. Of course the US isn't concerned with invasion, it's concerned with having an influence, and having democratic or at lest US-friendly trading partners. Just like the USSR had their interests.

What do you think would be a good alternative to nation states? For instance, I think using the US electoral system is a bad example of how people can particilate in their government, so I think it's a bad example if you try to discredit the idea of nations.

[mpyne]

> Since the US is the most powerful nation-state, it's the most violent;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Chechen_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_South_Ossetia_war (blame whichever side(s) you like)

This is not to say that the U.S. has always acted in a way that reduces the risk of war. And obviously there's nothing positive to say about the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But the military itself does not inevitably lead to massive violence. Even in Iraq most of the casualties have come from Muslims killing Muslims.

[tetrep]

I believe it was more of a comment on why we shouldn't surprised rather than a justification of the actions.

[lukifer]

Those two end up amounting to the same thing, in practice. The learned helplessness of the populace is what allows abuse of power to persist.

[skrebbel]

[offtopic] Cool, you work with kids? You are teaching them Pascal, too, right? And inline asm.

[tripzilch]

Hahaha, I try (okay, not) but Minecraft mods and a tiiiny bit of Unity is as far as they got, so far.

Soon I'll get some kids older than 11, they can read English, that helps a lot ... maybe the old Aphyxia tuts, so who knows :)

[Daniel_Newby]

Spying promotes stability. Having too many secrets promotes accidental armageddon. In fact, Germany is a signatory of the open skies treaty that allows military surveillance overflights.

[mpyne]

That is one of the most annoying damn treaties ever. I wish I could relate some stories...