This comment actually ties into the GP's point about how when you get further from the context, not being overly precise will lead us to eventually not understanding that part of the point.
There are directives that prevent using clergy and missionary work as a cover for intelligence operations, and a longstanding prohibition for using the peace corps.
That Bin Laden operation was so insanely short-sighted in the use of a vaccine program for spying. Completely erodes trust where it should never have eroded, and rightfully contributed to antivax mentality, not just in Pakistan, but also in the US. "Trust us, we're doctors" means nothing.
Oh well. They shouldn’t have harbored bin Laden. Whatever justification about “loss of trust” you can use here anyone else gets to use too. There was a loss of trust from Dr. Fauci (not by me, I got the vaccine ASAP and wore a mask until restrictions were lifted) by some because of actions taken.
I'm talking about choices made by people doing the hunting. I don't know why you're absolving them as if all choices are good choices. It takes more than a circumstance to justify an action.
I like a win. But a clean win is worth being proud of. It would actually be really cool not to shoot yourself in the foot, I think.
I’m just saying it’s justified, not that it was or is the best choice available. Nobody really knows what choices are available. Pakistan and its people made a choice to harbor bin Laden - they certainly had choices that we don’t need to absolve them for either.
No, my position is closer to that our actions were justified and they (Pakistan, its government, its people) are responsible for harboring bin Laden. They aren’t like doomed forever because of some CIA scheme that helped uncover where that piece of shit is hiding.
If they’re not responsible then everyone else gets to claim not being responsible for the actions of their governments too.
To me there'a a difference between claining citizens having a moral responsibilty for the actions of their government, and some other entity deciding that all of some countrys citizen deserve to be punished for the crimes of said government.
The US government has murdered a lot more civilians than Bin Laden ever did, but there's not really anyone arguing for broad collective punishment of its citizens (well, ecept for thr Bin Laden-likes)
> To me there'a a difference between claining citizens having a moral responsibilty for the actions of their government, and some other entity deciding that all of some countrys citizen deserve to be punished for the crimes of said government.
Sure but that’s a claim you made up, it’s not one I am asserting. For example the US isn’t punishing the people of Pakistan, it simply enacted a temporary and targeted scheme to kill bin Laden. There may be other effects but any action anyone or any country takes has other effects. The government of Pakistan harbored bin Laden and then an effect of that might have been temporary vaccine skepticism. But those are choices the government of Pakistan and the people of Pakistan make too. They are also responsible.
> The US government has murdered a lot more civilians than Bin Laden ever did, but there's not really anyone arguing for broad collective punishment of its citizens (well, ecept for thr Bin Laden-likes)
By that logic the German government, Chinese government, and Russian government have murdered even more.
The US doesn’t intentionally murder civilians though which is a key difference. Results matter but intentions do too.
No, because they are children, but their parents and government are directly responsible.
Your view here is a very western colonial one in which you infantalize other people and cultures and believe you are superior and thus must help them, they have no responsibility for their own actions, and so forth.
If the people of Pakistan (or anywhere) are deprived of their agency as you are here to suggest, then we must colonize them for their own good, set up the institutions, take over their ministry of health, and so forth. That’s how the children get their Polio vaccines. I do not propose this because I do not hold these views, but you cannot escape the effects of the viewpoint in which you espouse here.
This is really bad. Now you can have one puppet, and no dissent.
The FCC is set up for this same tactic. 2 vacancies, so down to the minimum quorum there right now. They can change the rule and let Anna Gomez's term expire. Suddenly we'll be reviewing everyone's licenses and seeing all the TV and radio content becoming more right-wing.
> all the TV and radio content becoming more right-wing
Already happening. Also, I support diversity in media without regards to ideology because diversity in media increases the peoples' power and freedom against the ownership and political power classes.
I have a microsoft account but I use a local account for Windows 11. I always had MSDN and had a pro key so maybe its an enterprise thing. It is a legit copy. I don't use onedrive or 365. When I go to Accounts it has a blue button to Sign In, so maybe local accounts don't get ads.
I was heavily involved in the local maker space where I previously lived. The place seemed to attract these kinds of problems. Some people want to fix a VCR, others might want to fix a clock tower (who knows). Being involved there meant being around people who could really do anything, and the community seemed to know that.
My favorite keyboard for years was the Dell SK-8135. It had media buttons without messing with your function keys, a volume knob, and two USB ports!
For a long time I would argue (as an IT support person who would have to support your wireless keyboard problems) that having a wireless keyboard was wasteful and unnecessary if you never used it more than 3 feet from your computer anyway.
