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.
I mean... if it was the US's agents doing the coordination and planning, then yes. This makes perfect sense.
Espionage is kinda shady in nature.
Do you think they should have outed their spies, dooming them to a certain death?
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".
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
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.
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!
They already sacrificed lives when they decided that even just a few of their spies were worth 140 people murdered and many more to spend their lifetime with medical issues and permanent mental scars.
Thanks :)
On a seperate note, brain size does not relate to intelligence.
- Spies who signed up to die if necessary
- Civilians
Pretty sure my morals are just fine if I pick 2 when push comes to shove
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.
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?
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.
No, but the statement we are discussing
I don't care about impossible thought experiments
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.
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.
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.
I think they shouldn't be funding the groups committing these acts in the first place.
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.
I stay with "fear of exposing intelligence". There is no need to fear something that does not exist
more like exposing involvement. both daesh and the ukraine are obviously us puppets which no decent person should support.
Mr. Bortnikov, the F.S.B. director, said on Tuesday that Islamist extremists alone couldn’t possibly have carried out the attack. He blamed, among others, the United States.
Gee, I dunno how three or four lunatics could acquire guns.
They had an extraction plan that crossed multiple international borders.
