this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
181 points (88.8% liked)

World News

32321 readers
1427 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The adversarial relationship between Washington and Moscow prevented U.S. officials from sharing any information about the plot beyond what was necessary, out of fear Russian authorities might learn their intelligence sources or methods.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 48 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

Espionage is kinda shady in nature.

Do you think they should have outed their spies, dooming them to a certain death?

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 15 points 7 months ago

America? Yes, that would be the moral choice.

[–] Hestia@hexbear.net 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think they shouldn't be funding the groups committing these acts in the first place.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 13 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] Kumikommunism@hexbear.net 28 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The US has funded and trained ISIS through the CIA since its inception, and is responsible for its creation in the first place.

The US is also directly responsible for the creation of Al Qaeda. Unfortunately another country's citizens are paying the price this time.

[–] Flyberius@hexbear.net 13 points 7 months ago
[–] Kumikommunism@hexbear.net 12 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Yes. In fact, I would happily sacrifice the life of every single American spy abroad for a single innocent life. And you are a bad person if you wouldn't.

And this is ignoring the fact that you are completely making up that a better warning would have "doomed them to certain death".

[–] GenderIsOpSec@hexbear.net 22 points 7 months ago

imagine talking about american spies like they're people. you have to be a bloodless skin-wearing demon to actively keep making the world worse every day of your existance after you join up, i hope they all suffer from nightmares at the very fucking least

[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 10 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Presumably there's 100s of spies you would kill all of them to spare one life?

Thats 100s of families torn apart 1000s of people for one person.

So trolly problems a no brainer for you?

[–] Nythos@sh.itjust.works 10 points 7 months ago (2 children)

They’re from Hexbear, what do you expect.

[–] Aussiemandeus@aussie.zone 0 points 7 months ago

I use connect for lemmy so i don't see that without looking into it

[–] Kumikommunism@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 7 months ago

It's the life of someone going about their existence, trying to enjoy a performance vs the lives of people who willingly signed up for a dangerous job to serve the world's bloodiest empire.

Thinking you can do morality with numbers is sociopath behavior.

[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I would happily sacrifice the life of every single [...] And you are a bad person if you wouldn't.

...says everything one needs to know about your morals and your attempts at manipulation.

[–] WashedAnus@hexbear.net 21 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Awww the poor widdle spies! They were just innocently torturing innocent people at bwack sites, then destroying all evidence of torture! How dare they sacrifice these benevolent angels to save some RuZZian orc!

[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 7 months ago

How about not sacrificing anyone's life?

[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 16 points 7 months ago (1 children)
  1. Spies who signed up to die if necessary
  2. Civilians

Pretty sure my morals are just fine if I pick 2 when push comes to shove

[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I would not "happily" sacrifice anyone's life. How about that? Anyway, Russia obviously didnt take the threat seriously and that was the actual issue.

But even in your case of letting all the spies be killed to save one civilian, it would in the end result in more dead civilians because if a country does that to its own spies, nobody will want to be a spy for them anymore, thus less "protection" overall.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Lol you think American spies are for "protection"

[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 7 months ago

In this case yeah

[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

But even in your case of letting all the spies be killed to save one civilian, it would in the end result in more dead civilians because if a country does that to its own spies, nobody will want to be a spy for them anymore

Ridiculous from top to bottom.

First, you're taking the U.S. at its word that there was anyone on its side in real danger. There is no reason to trust the U.S., and many reasons to think they're lying -- they're fighting a proxy war against Russia, after all.

Second, it's laughable to take the premise of additional intelligence possibly endangering some spy and turning that into "this would kill all U.S. spies."

Finally, the U.S. has fucked over countless lackeys in the past and will continue to do so. Dying for your country is what these people already signed up for, and there will be more meat for the grinder whatever happens to a spy here or there, because of a million reasons, but mostly because who the hell is telling recruits about some active spy that gets burned?

[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

First, you're taking the U.S. at its word that there was anyone on its side in real danger.

No, but the statement we are discussing assumes this from the start: "I would happily sacrifice the life of every single American spy abroad for a single innocent life."

Second, it's laughable to take the premise of additional intelligence possibly endangering some spy and turning that into "this would kill all U.S. spies."

Yeah but we're discussing the case where it would kill all spies. My statement was in response to (I repeat): "I would happily sacrifice the life of every single American spy abroad for a single innocent life."

Finally, the U.S. has fucked over countless lackeys in the past and will continue to do so. Dying for your country is what these people already signed up for

Yeah but this is not "dying for your country" (it wouldnt benefit the USA in any way) but rather "dying for a single civilian of an adversary country". They didnt sign up for that.

[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No, but the statement we are discussing

I don't care about impossible thought experiments

[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't care about impossible thought experiments

Then don't comment on one and don't waste my time telling me that my answer to a morality question is "ridicolous" because it didn't happen.

[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Lmao waste your time? You're on a shitposting forum, you're doing that yourself.

I didn't pose any hypotheticals, I pointed out that your weepy moralizing over the idea of endangering spies is ludicrous.

[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 7 months ago

No, you tried shifting the discussion and when I told you what was being discussed, you simply said you're uninterested.

First, you're taking the U.S. at its word that there was anyone on its side in real danger.

No I'm not. I never claimed anyone was in danger.

Second, it's laughable to take the premise of additional intelligence possibly endangering some spy and turning that into "this would kill all U.S. spies."

Yeah it is and nobody did. I certainly didnt.

[–] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 7 months ago

Thanks :)

On a seperate note, brain size does not relate to intelligence.