If there is no singular will then you can't identify the government as a discrete identity.
What you are left with are the wills of thousands and thousands of people... if not hundreds of thousands.
As to confusing government and people... I don't really care what you think of either. Your opinions are your own. If you like the color yellow or enjoy hop scotch that is your business. However, you cannot say the government is not made up of people.
You keep trying to abstract the government off as a non-human entity with its own decrete identity that is independent of any originating agency. Its not logically possible. The government is not a living thing. It is an organization which is itself a collaborative entity made up of many individuals which collectively effect its policy. Those members are Americans and most of the actions taken by the entity are supported or not objected to by the majority of the American people. As a result, it is OUR government.
The very nature of a republican democracy is that the system work in this fashion.
As to grounding a president's flight... read how diplomatic immunity works please. You can't just randomally grant someone diplomatically immune when they're not your own citizen and they're not even in your country.
For example, could Sweden grant diplomatic immunity to every singe prisoner in French jails? No. Why is that?
What would happen if a known french felon were put onto a Swedish diplomatic plane. Would the french allow the plane to take off? No they would not.
The plane was stopped because rules were being broken. Doubtless some feathers were ruffled but all insults were self inflicted. Don't break the rules and don't get your privileges checked.
The people are just individuals as well. There is no singular public will. And neither is there a singular governmental will unless its a dictatorship or a monarchy. Governments like the US are a composite will made up of the tens of thousands of people in the US government that have opinions that effect day to day policy.
If that group of people likes you then the government likes you. If they don't then it does not.
The US government has gone out of its way to help europe.
But the snarky attitude makes us think we're not appreciated. And even if you like someone, it does hurt your feelings when they don't share the friendship. Sadly, for our own self respect if nothing else... we should probably find allies that can return the friendship.
Its okay. You don't have to like us. But we should probably stop deluding ourselves that we're friends if you really just don't like us.
The US gets very little for its friendship with europe. European powers have very poor military resources. Little political will or resolve. And economically most of the core EU powers have been treading water to flatlining for a generation.
Even if we were to be crass and materialistic about it. Why would the US sacrifice for such worthless allies?
So by either evaluation... the US should distance itself from Europe.
He didn't need to put himself in the cross hairs. It was a mistake. You don't come out until the heat has blown over or there's someone powerful in the government protecting you.
Without either... you broke the law... and there are very serious diplomatic and geopolitical reasons to crucify this kid. So coming out is basically suicide.
I feel for the kid. It too bad. But he played with high voltage wires and I don't see how he comes out of this alive/free. He's screwed.
You can say that's wrong or right but morality doesn't come into it. The kid made a mistake and is likely going to pay for it.
The lesson to future leakers is be more careful. If you can't be careful then either accept the consequences or keep silent. Those are the options. Pick one.
Why did he reveal his name at all? If he had stayed anonymous he could have remained in the US.
And china/russia/etc are not brave to oppose US extradition. They don't extradite because they're not allies. He is being sheltered by rivals, frienemies, and outright enemies. That is going to trigger a counter reaction from the American public.
He screwed up in that he revealed himself and then made it impossible for any but hostile powers to shelter him.
That was foolish of him and it might cost him his freedom.
He did run to the Chinese first. He did run to the Russians second. He is now running to various south american countries known for their hatred of the US.
If you're trying to help the American people against their own government you might pick a better hiding place.
For one thing... he could have leaked anonymously. For another, he could have found better places to run that wouldn't have triggered a fear reaction from the American public.
He made some pretty big mistakes and he is playing with high voltage lines. You can't make mistakes when you touch those.
That is the question Americans are asking. He started out running the Chinese. Americans are anxious about the Chinese.
His next stop was Russia... Our old Cold War enemy. So... more anxiety.
Then off to various countries in South America that hate the US... Why would Americans have any problem with that?
I understand what he's doing. But he's done it the wrong way.
If the point was to make Americans aware of NSA oversteps there was a way to do that without threatening to give away national security secrets to the Chinese and Russians.
Snowden is clearly a bit of a fool. I feel for the guy and don't think he did this with malice. But he's basically playing with high voltage wiring and should surprise no one if he gets badly burned by this move. First rule of playing with high voltage wiring... Be careful. Failing that... make a good will.
Governments are made up of people. You can't abstract away the human element. It always exists.
As to aid turning EU members into pets... it isn't in the EU's interest to undermine a powerful ally or weaken their own governments by providing aid and comfort to a leaker that could have just as easily come from their own governments.
Imagine if Snowden were French or German or English... and fled to the US.
What would the US do in response? Provide him amnesty? No. We'd return him to his home government. Its what friends and allies do for each other.
Do you see? If the EU are pets then the US is no less the pet in that example. Provide a better one. I think you'll find that you do not have anything to base your argument on.
Apparently it needs to be connected for hte xbox to work. But can't you just put a sock over it? Congrats MS.. you get a first hand look at what the inside of my sock looks like... 24/7.
The Orwellian parallel is the TVs in 1984 which couldn't be turned off and could spy on you. People in the book used to put curtains over the TVs when they weren't using them. But they couldn't turn them off. They'd just sit there all day and all night... and you had to put a curtain over them if you wanted any sleep. Do the same with this stupid connect device. Put a sock over it.
Or do the really bright thing and don't buy it. MS is not providing what the consumer wants. This is not an honest product.
1. The US had no conflict with the Russians until we defended europe from the communists. Had we shown no interest in defending the cold war wouldn't have happened. We could left Europe twisting in the wind.
And were you the sort of ally you think we were then... you would have left the Europeans to rot. We didn't. Europe got US charity. And if you want to delude yourself into thinking it all can be explained as enlightened self interest... so be it. The fact remains we risked our blood for another. How many of your own petty powers can make the same claim? Precisely.
3. In response to your sum up... I did not say that when the US gets help it only because there is some sinister movitivation. I said instead it isn't helped. Or if it is helped you expect to be paid. The Europeans always want to know what they get for it. Never mind they've been given many things in the past without having to give anything in return. And continue to get things for which they do not pay. But when the US wants something we have to pay for it every time.
We are not your slaves and you are not our masters. You do not dictate our resources or have any claim to our power. We do what we do because we wish to do it. Not because you wave your hands in our direction. Any cooperation or aid we extend is a choice on our part which can be ended at our will.
If you truly think there is no friendship between our powers then either your elders failed to educate you or your elders successfully fooled my elders. The generations that came before mine believed they did you a service and that they earned your good will. Either you were not made aware of that or my elders were naive enough to think gratitude was something of which you would be capable.
Regardless... this merely strengthens my conviction that the US should distance itself from western Europe in its state craft. We have friends in eastern europe, Asia, and elsewhere. You can make your own alliances without us.
This is not a declaration of hostility so much as my disappointment that you count our strategic friendship as being so dispensable.
I read and understood what you said. I think you're wrong.
1. Nations can be friends. The US has been more generous then would be justified merely by its strategic interests to its european allies. We didn't need to rebuild europe and we didn't need to even ally with europe.
2. We fought communism mostly to help you because the Communists were breathing down your necks. They were not a threat to the US itself but to our allies.
3. As to France helping the American colonies to weaken England... we know. Which is why that friendship didn't last. They didn't care about us and would not sacrifice on our behalf unless it suited them. We have already done that for some other allies which means we're either stupid or showing friendship. You decide.
4. The gift has very limited strings. You don't really have to do much for it.
5. As to nuclear powers having no benefit from being in such alliances, that is naive. If nuclear forces were all that was required then there are a dozen conventional ways you could be crushed. And beyond that you assume the nuclear weapons held by France and England will be competitive in the 21st century with advances in anti ICBM technology. Furthermore, against an enemy that is willing to call your bluff what defense do you really have? Nuclear weapons are a deterrent but they are not a total defense.
6. The eastern EU is only less safe because they haven't come under full US protection. That is literally the only difference. Roll back the clock a few decades and Germany, France, Greece, etc could have all been in the same position.
You want to pretend like the US does nothing and is really a sinister enemy of the EU? I cannot stop you from deluding yourself. But you have no evidence for it besides your own paranoia and cynicism which frankly reflects more upon yourself then upon us.
Never mind we kept the Soviets out of Western Europe.
Never mind we gave Europe money to rebuild after WW2.
Never mind we've given you power and political legitmacy you wouldn't credit without our support.
Never mind we have given you the benefit of our military deterrence allowing European nations to atrophy their defense.
We have acted as friends for generations. My grand father's generation were your friends. My father's generation were your friends.
What are you telling me? That we're not friends anymore? You might just break my heart.
Gratitude might be the weakest of human emotions but stupidity is one of the greater sins. If you truly think you get nothing from us it is because you've grown to take our security for granted. Which means even if we remain your friends we shouldn't protect you... because it merely makes us co-dependent enablers in your self delusion.
For your own good... we should really let you fend for yourselves a bit more. It would be enlightening.
As to the uboats... the convoys and sea plane patrols also shut them down. You forget that those subs couldn't stay under water for very long. They had to surface.
The supply line for the subs were the "milk cow" refueling subs which we hunted mercilessly. Without the milk cows the subs had no range and couldn't operate much beyond german waters.
As to the US government being a friend of european countries. You have a naive grasp of what friendship between nations means. It does not mean we don't spy on you. It means we protect your strategic interests.
Do we or do we not protect your strategic interests? That is rhetorical. We do. Were we not friends we would not.
You're getting upset about something small and missing the bigger picture. You're further not grasping that the spying is required. We must do it. And we are not alone. Everyone does it to everyone.
In fact, much of our spying on you is for you. That is to say, it is politically problematic for many EU countries to spy on EU countries. So we do it for you. It is also problematic for the US to spy on its own people. So we contract some EU nations to do that for us as well. MI6 for example does some spying on americans. And sometimes they do it for the US government. It is illegal for the NSA or the CIA to spy on Americans. But it isn't illegal for the NSA to contract MI6 to spy on Americans and then collect their intelligence.
Its some legal and moral slight of hand but its pretty typical in large government bureaus.
Regardless, the US government is the best friend Europe has... if you don't understand that then you don't know what friendship looks like in the first place.
As to the US entry into WW2, you don't attack an enemy where they are strong. You attack them where they are weak.Cutting them off in Africa isolated the germans into europe and cut them off from resources. It also gave time for the US to move forces across the Atlantic which was the great struggle of that war for the US. Everything the US brought to the fight had to be shipped across the Atlantic ocean. It was an intercontinental invasion for the US. Neither the Russians nor the English had the same problem since their forces could literally walk to battle in the case of the Russians and the English were only a channel ferry away from the mainland.
What that meant for the US was time. Everything took time. What's more there was a great deal of waste with lost shipments, destroyed ships, etc.
As to what friend would spy on his friends?... Nations spy on other nations. Even friends. The English, Japanese, and Israelis spy on the US for example and we consider them all friends.
Getting upset about this is simply naive. We all spy on each other. We are friends. But because we're friends doesn't mean we trust you. No one trusts anyone. But you can be friends with someone you don't trust. You can like someone you don't trust. You can love someone you don't trust.
Stop for a moment and ask yourself if a parent that spies on his children cannot love his children? This is not to imply europe is a US child... merely that there is no implicit hostility in spying.
The US was engaged before the soviets became a credible conqueror.
And remember, we supplied the Russians as well. The US was the arsenal of the allies WW2 effort. The guns, the food, the metal, the fuel... much of it came from our factories and farms. On a simple tonnage basis the US out produced the axises war effort by a ratio of ten to one. That is how one sided US production was towards the end of the war. Much of that was because the axis factories and farms were laid to ruin. But one cannot deny that the US was also producing far more goods then any other war power by a magnitude.
We were not the only ones to use that material. Much of it was to fund the allied effort.
Which is where we come today. Europe getting the benefit of US resources. In this case, our intelligence network. The war is over but the alliance remains. The US is a friend to Europe. A friend to Germany, France, England, Sweden, Spain, Italy, etc. And part of that friendship is sharing intelligence. We spy on the EU because we spy on everyone just as everyone else spies on everyone else. But what is more, we share our intelligence with EU members on a quid pro quo basis. Basically... honor your end of the alliance and we'll honor ours. Its entirely normal and reasonable. Furthermore, as with much of this... were the EU member states not to take advantage of the intelligence and other aid provided by the US they'd have to provide it themselves which would be expensive. And not only that but they'd have to get their hands dirtier then they're accustomed.
As to AMGOT and the FFI and de Gaulle... All I am saying is that the man did not liberate france and that left to its own devices the FFI would not have liberated France. And without either de Gaulle or the FFI, the allied powers would have liberated France.
Between the United States, the British Empire, and the Soviet Union... the Nazis were going down. One way or another.
Without those powers the French would have remained a subject power to the Reich. Just reality.
I know I'm going to get legions of frothing "AGW is the doom of humanity" nitwits drooling all over me for this... but its really not a big deal. At worst this is something we have to watch for the next couple generations and possibly remedy it with some light geo-engineering. Short of that... its irrelevant.
I don't want an electric car because its good for the environment. I want an electric car so I can have energy freedom with my automobile. So I can fill it up with coal, nuclear, hydro, or even solar. But where the power comes from is less important to me then that it can come from anywhere. Where as my gasoline powered car is pretty intolerant on the subject. It will run on gasoline or nothing.
Claiming de Gaulle was required for a french resistance is as silly as claiming that Eisenhower was required for an effective allied command.
Gaulle was simply the man conveniently at hand that could do the job. The war was bigger then any one man. Had we not had Gaulle, we would have found another.
You know that.
Nothing on the allied side hinged on any one man. Not one. Not Roosevelt. Not Churchill. Not Eisenhower. Not any one of the scientists, generals, industrialists, or politicians...
Kill Hitler and that might have had an impact. But on the allied side... Our war was a reaction to the Nazi aggression and not the ego trip of any one man. If any of our leaders or bright lights had fallen... they would have been replaced. Possibly not as effectively but then again possibly even more effectively.
Can we say de Gaulle was the absolute best man for the job? We didn't try everyone. He was sufficient to our ends. That is all we needed. And after the war we set him up as a hero to stabilize his country and do something to heal their national pride.
And that is in the end what Gaulle has come to mean... Pride. Pride is fine so long as you keep it under control. Let it run wild and its a menace.
1. The NSA doesn't only hold their secrets by terror. In fact, that is the least of their tools. They're not actually very good at terror.
2. The leak was an aberration and similar leaks have occurred elsewhere in other organizations all over the world. Its just rarely wikileaked. Do you know how many times the US received a Russian or Chinese agent that revealed all? Be realistic.
3. That union would have happened regardless. He was their leader but as with most things had they not had him they would have found another and it would have worked out much the same. The man was deified so the french could recover from the shame of falling to the Nazis. He did nothing that was especially brilliant or pivotal.
After WW2, the Allies needed stability in Europe. Gaulle secured France. That box was checked and we moved on to other things. He unfortunately let the power go to his head and turned into something of an egomaniac. But happily there was no lasting damage from it.
Don't count on it. Not many women wear those shirts... the guys playing dress up form whole communities around it.
Show me any collection of women doing the same thing in such numbers that they can do the same thing.
Men are more varied. It is their gift and curse. More varied with the pros and cons. Men are the mutants. They succeed or fail but they don't play it safe. They are risk takers even down to their genetics. You see it with the health disorders. Men are much more likely to die in child birth. Much more likely to not survive to adulthood due to genetic disorders.
Men are expendable. And so they tend to be "different" because they can be different. Women generally are more consistent. Less varied. More reliable.
Don't get political or ideological about it. Its biology. Arguing about it is like arguing with the Sun.
You assume the system was healthy under de Gaulle? Just because something was preferable by him or not doesn't mean it was working or not.
The reality is that a robust military and intelligence network is not cheap. Cut too many corners and you have NOTHING. That is how competition works. There are winners and losers. Binary. And if your assets are substandard you're going to lose practically every time. Thus rendering the whole fact that you have any military or intelligence network at all pretty much irrelevant.
Who thinks the French intel network in world class? That is why countries contract with the US NSA. Say what you like, its a world class intelligence agency. And they're willing to share with allies in return for cooperation. Its a good deal. Smart nations accept it. Even if you have a world class intelligence agency like the British, you'd still contract with the NSA because why not? There's no downside.
I agree that de Gaulle had ego issues. More is the pity. We actually catered to the man's ego when we let him enter liberated Paris first. As if he had anything meaningful to do with its liberation.
Try talking on your phone or annoying texting in a play and see what happens. They will kick you out and not refund your money. And if you're obnoxious about it, you'll get banned.
That is the solution right there. The problem is not that people are texting and talking on the phone. The problem is that the theater's aren't stopping it. And they can very easily.
Theaters have become disgusting. The seats are gross. The food is gross. The movies are gross. The people that go to see the movies are gross. Its a disgusting experience. And on top of that, the price has well exceeded the rate of inflation by a factor of three or four. So you know what... I don't need to go to the movie theater.
maybe that's what we're really seeing here. The death of the movie theater. I've got a 60 inch flat screen at home. Explain why I should go to the theater and deal with their garbage? I don't see the attraction.
Slashdot Mirror
If there is no singular will then you can't identify the government as a discrete identity.
What you are left with are the wills of thousands and thousands of people... if not hundreds of thousands.
As to confusing government and people... I don't really care what you think of either. Your opinions are your own. If you like the color yellow or enjoy hop scotch that is your business. However, you cannot say the government is not made up of people.
You keep trying to abstract the government off as a non-human entity with its own decrete identity that is independent of any originating agency. Its not logically possible. The government is not a living thing. It is an organization which is itself a collaborative entity made up of many individuals which collectively effect its policy. Those members are Americans and most of the actions taken by the entity are supported or not objected to by the majority of the American people. As a result, it is OUR government.
The very nature of a republican democracy is that the system work in this fashion.
As to grounding a president's flight... read how diplomatic immunity works please. You can't just randomally grant someone diplomatically immune when they're not your own citizen and they're not even in your country.
For example, could Sweden grant diplomatic immunity to every singe prisoner in French jails? No. Why is that?
What would happen if a known french felon were put onto a Swedish diplomatic plane. Would the french allow the plane to take off? No they would not.
The plane was stopped because rules were being broken. Doubtless some feathers were ruffled but all insults were self inflicted. Don't break the rules and don't get your privileges checked.
The people are just individuals as well. There is no singular public will. And neither is there a singular governmental will unless its a dictatorship or a monarchy. Governments like the US are a composite will made up of the tens of thousands of people in the US government that have opinions that effect day to day policy.
If that group of people likes you then the government likes you. If they don't then it does not.
The US government has gone out of its way to help europe.
But the snarky attitude makes us think we're not appreciated. And even if you like someone, it does hurt your feelings when they don't share the friendship. Sadly, for our own self respect if nothing else... we should probably find allies that can return the friendship.
Its okay. You don't have to like us. But we should probably stop deluding ourselves that we're friends if you really just don't like us.
The US gets very little for its friendship with europe. European powers have very poor military resources. Little political will or resolve. And economically most of the core EU powers have been treading water to flatlining for a generation.
Even if we were to be crass and materialistic about it. Why would the US sacrifice for such worthless allies?
So by either evaluation... the US should distance itself from Europe.
As to diplomatic immunity:
http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1120886/diplomatic-immunity-granted-11-times-hong-kong
It doesn't work the way you think it works.
He didn't need to put himself in the cross hairs. It was a mistake. You don't come out until the heat has blown over or there's someone powerful in the government protecting you.
Without either... you broke the law... and there are very serious diplomatic and geopolitical reasons to crucify this kid. So coming out is basically suicide.
I feel for the kid. It too bad. But he played with high voltage wires and I don't see how he comes out of this alive/free. He's screwed.
You can say that's wrong or right but morality doesn't come into it. The kid made a mistake and is likely going to pay for it.
The lesson to future leakers is be more careful. If you can't be careful then either accept the consequences or keep silent. Those are the options. Pick one.
Nonsense. People leak without revealing their identity all the time.`
Why did he reveal his name at all? If he had stayed anonymous he could have remained in the US.
And china/russia/etc are not brave to oppose US extradition. They don't extradite because they're not allies. He is being sheltered by rivals, frienemies, and outright enemies. That is going to trigger a counter reaction from the American public.
He screwed up in that he revealed himself and then made it impossible for any but hostile powers to shelter him.
That was foolish of him and it might cost him his freedom.
Just explaining his mistake.
He did run to the Chinese first. He did run to the Russians second. He is now running to various south american countries known for their hatred of the US.
If you're trying to help the American people against their own government you might pick a better hiding place.
For one thing... he could have leaked anonymously. For another, he could have found better places to run that wouldn't have triggered a fear reaction from the American public.
He made some pretty big mistakes and he is playing with high voltage lines. You can't make mistakes when you touch those.
That is the question Americans are asking. He started out running the Chinese. Americans are anxious about the Chinese.
His next stop was Russia... Our old Cold War enemy. So... more anxiety.
Then off to various countries in South America that hate the US... Why would Americans have any problem with that?
I understand what he's doing. But he's done it the wrong way.
If the point was to make Americans aware of NSA oversteps there was a way to do that without threatening to give away national security secrets to the Chinese and Russians.
Snowden is clearly a bit of a fool. I feel for the guy and don't think he did this with malice. But he's basically playing with high voltage wiring and should surprise no one if he gets badly burned by this move. First rule of playing with high voltage wiring... Be careful. Failing that... make a good will.
Governments are made up of people. You can't abstract away the human element. It always exists.
As to aid turning EU members into pets... it isn't in the EU's interest to undermine a powerful ally or weaken their own governments by providing aid and comfort to a leaker that could have just as easily come from their own governments.
Imagine if Snowden were French or German or English... and fled to the US.
What would the US do in response? Provide him amnesty? No. We'd return him to his home government. Its what friends and allies do for each other.
Do you see? If the EU are pets then the US is no less the pet in that example. Provide a better one. I think you'll find that you do not have anything to base your argument on.
Sounds like MS wants me to put it in a shoe box. :D
There is something you can do that will render its snooping capability irrelevant. Well... aside from not buying one.
Its a goofy bit of tech. It doesn't scare me.
Apparently it needs to be connected for hte xbox to work. But can't you just put a sock over it? Congrats MS.. you get a first hand look at what the inside of my sock looks like... 24/7.
The Orwellian parallel is the TVs in 1984 which couldn't be turned off and could spy on you. People in the book used to put curtains over the TVs when they weren't using them. But they couldn't turn them off. They'd just sit there all day and all night... and you had to put a curtain over them if you wanted any sleep. Do the same with this stupid connect device. Put a sock over it.
Or do the really bright thing and don't buy it. MS is not providing what the consumer wants. This is not an honest product.
1. The US had no conflict with the Russians until we defended europe from the communists. Had we shown no interest in defending the cold war wouldn't have happened. We could left Europe twisting in the wind.
And were you the sort of ally you think we were then... you would have left the Europeans to rot. We didn't. Europe got US charity. And if you want to delude yourself into thinking it all can be explained as enlightened self interest... so be it. The fact remains we risked our blood for another. How many of your own petty powers can make the same claim? Precisely.
3. In response to your sum up... I did not say that when the US gets help it only because there is some sinister movitivation. I said instead it isn't helped. Or if it is helped you expect to be paid. The Europeans always want to know what they get for it. Never mind they've been given many things in the past without having to give anything in return. And continue to get things for which they do not pay. But when the US wants something we have to pay for it every time.
We are not your slaves and you are not our masters. You do not dictate our resources or have any claim to our power. We do what we do because we wish to do it. Not because you wave your hands in our direction. Any cooperation or aid we extend is a choice on our part which can be ended at our will.
If you truly think there is no friendship between our powers then either your elders failed to educate you or your elders successfully fooled my elders. The generations that came before mine believed they did you a service and that they earned your good will. Either you were not made aware of that or my elders were naive enough to think gratitude was something of which you would be capable.
Regardless... this merely strengthens my conviction that the US should distance itself from western Europe in its state craft. We have friends in eastern europe, Asia, and elsewhere. You can make your own alliances without us.
This is not a declaration of hostility so much as my disappointment that you count our strategic friendship as being so dispensable.
I read and understood what you said. I think you're wrong.
1. Nations can be friends. The US has been more generous then would be justified merely by its strategic interests to its european allies. We didn't need to rebuild europe and we didn't need to even ally with europe.
2. We fought communism mostly to help you because the Communists were breathing down your necks. They were not a threat to the US itself but to our allies.
3. As to France helping the American colonies to weaken England... we know. Which is why that friendship didn't last. They didn't care about us and would not sacrifice on our behalf unless it suited them. We have already done that for some other allies which means we're either stupid or showing friendship. You decide.
4. The gift has very limited strings. You don't really have to do much for it.
5. As to nuclear powers having no benefit from being in such alliances, that is naive. If nuclear forces were all that was required then there are a dozen conventional ways you could be crushed. And beyond that you assume the nuclear weapons held by France and England will be competitive in the 21st century with advances in anti ICBM technology. Furthermore, against an enemy that is willing to call your bluff what defense do you really have? Nuclear weapons are a deterrent but they are not a total defense.
6. The eastern EU is only less safe because they haven't come under full US protection. That is literally the only difference. Roll back the clock a few decades and Germany, France, Greece, etc could have all been in the same position.
You want to pretend like the US does nothing and is really a sinister enemy of the EU? I cannot stop you from deluding yourself. But you have no evidence for it besides your own paranoia and cynicism which frankly reflects more upon yourself then upon us.
Good day.
Never mind we kept the Soviets out of Western Europe.
Never mind we gave Europe money to rebuild after WW2.
Never mind we've given you power and political legitmacy you wouldn't credit without our support.
Never mind we have given you the benefit of our military deterrence allowing European nations to atrophy their defense.
We have acted as friends for generations. My grand father's generation were your friends. My father's generation were your friends.
What are you telling me? That we're not friends anymore? You might just break my heart.
Gratitude might be the weakest of human emotions but stupidity is one of the greater sins. If you truly think you get nothing from us it is because you've grown to take our security for granted. Which means even if we remain your friends we shouldn't protect you... because it merely makes us co-dependent enablers in your self delusion.
For your own good... we should really let you fend for yourselves a bit more. It would be enlightening.
As to the uboats... the convoys and sea plane patrols also shut them down. You forget that those subs couldn't stay under water for very long. They had to surface.
The supply line for the subs were the "milk cow" refueling subs which we hunted mercilessly. Without the milk cows the subs had no range and couldn't operate much beyond german waters.
As to the US government being a friend of european countries. You have a naive grasp of what friendship between nations means. It does not mean we don't spy on you. It means we protect your strategic interests.
Do we or do we not protect your strategic interests? That is rhetorical. We do. Were we not friends we would not.
You're getting upset about something small and missing the bigger picture. You're further not grasping that the spying is required. We must do it. And we are not alone. Everyone does it to everyone.
In fact, much of our spying on you is for you. That is to say, it is politically problematic for many EU countries to spy on EU countries. So we do it for you. It is also problematic for the US to spy on its own people. So we contract some EU nations to do that for us as well. MI6 for example does some spying on americans. And sometimes they do it for the US government. It is illegal for the NSA or the CIA to spy on Americans. But it isn't illegal for the NSA to contract MI6 to spy on Americans and then collect their intelligence.
Its some legal and moral slight of hand but its pretty typical in large government bureaus.
Regardless, the US government is the best friend Europe has... if you don't understand that then you don't know what friendship looks like in the first place.
As to the US entry into WW2, you don't attack an enemy where they are strong. You attack them where they are weak.Cutting them off in Africa isolated the germans into europe and cut them off from resources. It also gave time for the US to move forces across the Atlantic which was the great struggle of that war for the US. Everything the US brought to the fight had to be shipped across the Atlantic ocean. It was an intercontinental invasion for the US. Neither the Russians nor the English had the same problem since their forces could literally walk to battle in the case of the Russians and the English were only a channel ferry away from the mainland.
What that meant for the US was time. Everything took time. What's more there was a great deal of waste with lost shipments, destroyed ships, etc.
As to what friend would spy on his friends?... Nations spy on other nations. Even friends. The English, Japanese, and Israelis spy on the US for example and we consider them all friends.
Getting upset about this is simply naive. We all spy on each other. We are friends. But because we're friends doesn't mean we trust you. No one trusts anyone. But you can be friends with someone you don't trust. You can like someone you don't trust. You can love someone you don't trust.
Stop for a moment and ask yourself if a parent that spies on his children cannot love his children? This is not to imply europe is a US child... merely that there is no implicit hostility in spying.
The US was engaged before the soviets became a credible conqueror.
And remember, we supplied the Russians as well. The US was the arsenal of the allies WW2 effort. The guns, the food, the metal, the fuel... much of it came from our factories and farms. On a simple tonnage basis the US out produced the axises war effort by a ratio of ten to one. That is how one sided US production was towards the end of the war. Much of that was because the axis factories and farms were laid to ruin. But one cannot deny that the US was also producing far more goods then any other war power by a magnitude.
We were not the only ones to use that material. Much of it was to fund the allied effort.
Which is where we come today. Europe getting the benefit of US resources. In this case, our intelligence network. The war is over but the alliance remains. The US is a friend to Europe. A friend to Germany, France, England, Sweden, Spain, Italy, etc. And part of that friendship is sharing intelligence. We spy on the EU because we spy on everyone just as everyone else spies on everyone else. But what is more, we share our intelligence with EU members on a quid pro quo basis. Basically... honor your end of the alliance and we'll honor ours. Its entirely normal and reasonable. Furthermore, as with much of this... were the EU member states not to take advantage of the intelligence and other aid provided by the US they'd have to provide it themselves which would be expensive. And not only that but they'd have to get their hands dirtier then they're accustomed.
Their desktop market won't sustain much more.
As to AMGOT and the FFI and de Gaulle... All I am saying is that the man did not liberate france and that left to its own devices the FFI would not have liberated France. And without either de Gaulle or the FFI, the allied powers would have liberated France.
Between the United States, the British Empire, and the Soviet Union... the Nazis were going down. One way or another.
Without those powers the French would have remained a subject power to the Reich. Just reality.
I know I'm going to get legions of frothing "AGW is the doom of humanity" nitwits drooling all over me for this... but its really not a big deal. At worst this is something we have to watch for the next couple generations and possibly remedy it with some light geo-engineering. Short of that... its irrelevant.
I don't want an electric car because its good for the environment. I want an electric car so I can have energy freedom with my automobile. So I can fill it up with coal, nuclear, hydro, or even solar. But where the power comes from is less important to me then that it can come from anywhere. Where as my gasoline powered car is pretty intolerant on the subject. It will run on gasoline or nothing.
Claiming de Gaulle was required for a french resistance is as silly as claiming that Eisenhower was required for an effective allied command.
Gaulle was simply the man conveniently at hand that could do the job. The war was bigger then any one man. Had we not had Gaulle, we would have found another.
You know that.
Nothing on the allied side hinged on any one man. Not one. Not Roosevelt. Not Churchill. Not Eisenhower. Not any one of the scientists, generals, industrialists, or politicians...
Kill Hitler and that might have had an impact. But on the allied side... Our war was a reaction to the Nazi aggression and not the ego trip of any one man. If any of our leaders or bright lights had fallen... they would have been replaced. Possibly not as effectively but then again possibly even more effectively.
Can we say de Gaulle was the absolute best man for the job? We didn't try everyone. He was sufficient to our ends. That is all we needed. And after the war we set him up as a hero to stabilize his country and do something to heal their national pride.
And that is in the end what Gaulle has come to mean... Pride. Pride is fine so long as you keep it under control. Let it run wild and its a menace.
1. The NSA doesn't only hold their secrets by terror. In fact, that is the least of their tools. They're not actually very good at terror.
2. The leak was an aberration and similar leaks have occurred elsewhere in other organizations all over the world. Its just rarely wikileaked. Do you know how many times the US received a Russian or Chinese agent that revealed all? Be realistic.
3. That union would have happened regardless. He was their leader but as with most things had they not had him they would have found another and it would have worked out much the same. The man was deified so the french could recover from the shame of falling to the Nazis. He did nothing that was especially brilliant or pivotal.
After WW2, the Allies needed stability in Europe. Gaulle secured France. That box was checked and we moved on to other things. He unfortunately let the power go to his head and turned into something of an egomaniac. But happily there was no lasting damage from it.
Don't count on it. Not many women wear those shirts... the guys playing dress up form whole communities around it.
Show me any collection of women doing the same thing in such numbers that they can do the same thing.
Men are more varied. It is their gift and curse. More varied with the pros and cons. Men are the mutants. They succeed or fail but they don't play it safe. They are risk takers even down to their genetics. You see it with the health disorders. Men are much more likely to die in child birth. Much more likely to not survive to adulthood due to genetic disorders.
Men are expendable. And so they tend to be "different" because they can be different. Women generally are more consistent. Less varied. More reliable.
Don't get political or ideological about it. Its biology. Arguing about it is like arguing with the Sun.
You assume the system was healthy under de Gaulle? Just because something was preferable by him or not doesn't mean it was working or not.
The reality is that a robust military and intelligence network is not cheap. Cut too many corners and you have NOTHING. That is how competition works. There are winners and losers. Binary. And if your assets are substandard you're going to lose practically every time. Thus rendering the whole fact that you have any military or intelligence network at all pretty much irrelevant.
Who thinks the French intel network in world class? That is why countries contract with the US NSA. Say what you like, its a world class intelligence agency. And they're willing to share with allies in return for cooperation. Its a good deal. Smart nations accept it. Even if you have a world class intelligence agency like the British, you'd still contract with the NSA because why not? There's no downside.
I agree that de Gaulle had ego issues. More is the pity. We actually catered to the man's ego when we let him enter liberated Paris first. As if he had anything meaningful to do with its liberation.
I don't have to go to the theater.
Try talking on your phone or annoying texting in a play and see what happens. They will kick you out and not refund your money. And if you're obnoxious about it, you'll get banned.
That is the solution right there. The problem is not that people are texting and talking on the phone. The problem is that the theater's aren't stopping it. And they can very easily.
Theaters have become disgusting. The seats are gross. The food is gross. The movies are gross. The people that go to see the movies are gross. Its a disgusting experience. And on top of that, the price has well exceeded the rate of inflation by a factor of three or four. So you know what... I don't need to go to the movie theater.
maybe that's what we're really seeing here. The death of the movie theater. I've got a 60 inch flat screen at home. Explain why I should go to the theater and deal with their garbage? I don't see the attraction.
We were talking about morality and ethics.The assertion was that the EU nations or the EU itself was more moral because it didn't spy.
It does spy. And what spying it doesn't do is due to politics and resources.