-Trevor
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Things to point out: Israel has denied it and their word has some worth as compared countries like Iran and North Korea. I doubt that other allies either don't have their own spies or at least haven't tried. This might only mean that Israel is more proficient at spying. I doubt that we haven't haven't done our own spying on Israel. This could be a trick to try to dig up spies whose existence might be suspected but whose identies could be completely secret. Of course we should know one way or the other on this last one fairly soon.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Sure - but this kind of thing forces me to question my support for the US' unwavering endorsement of Israel.
And their word pales in the face of other spying incidents.
-Trevor
Edit: For clarity
[ August 28, 2004, 09:10 PM: Message edited by: TMedina ]
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Just because we caught Israel (assuming for the sake of argument that they are guilty) doesn't mean we have any right to condemn them when we're doing the same thing. Although I admit we probably don't have any human intelligence on Israel because we've cut back on it so much since the fall of the USSR we are almost certainly electronically spying on them as much as possible. In fact that may even be how we caught the Israeli spy.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Trevor, as I recall, you have questioned the US's support of Israel many times in the past.
And Pollard does not "other incidents" make. Or were you referring to something/someone else?
Posted by jebus202 (Member # 2524) on :
"It's OK buddy! What's a bit of espionage between friends?"
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
We just spent the last 45 minutes of class talking about this... many people in my class agree that this sort of thing is normal, it happens everywhere, that the only reason this is such an explosive story is because it's Israel, and because of all the problems. It's really not anything that out of the ordinary.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Just because they're allies doesn't mean they share all their information. For example the US doesn't know everything Israel does on Hamas and Israel doesn't know everything the US does on Al-Queda but they both have interest in both groups and since intelligence communities are very protective of what they do know they don't share too well or too often.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Raia, this is and isn't normal.
It is normal when unofficial avenues are used to transfer information. This does not appear to be the case, because otherwise it would have been ignored.
It is not normal when it is done illegally and in a way which seems intended to harm US foreign policy to the betterment of Israel's foreign policies. Essentially, the White House seems to have been considering taking a tact with Iran which Israel would have strongly disagreed with, and didn't want Israel knowing. This guy told Israel. This is most distinctly not normal, and would be a big deal no matter which country it occured with, be that England, Germany, Japan, or whichever.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Pollard is the most recent incident, but there was a case of Israel stealing US military secrets and selling them to China.
That cropped up when I was in high school, sometime in the early 90's, I think.
However, the Pollard incident should have warranted a serious re-evaluation of relationship with Israel.
As to whether or not the CIA actively conducts espionage missions against our allies, I don't know or really care. And yes, this is a one-sided opinion.
I think it's in amazingly poor taste to attempt to subvert citizens of our allies in order to spy on those allies. So if the CIA is routinely bribing British subjects for insider information and had been caught, I cannot fault any British citizen who might be just a tad upset at the US.
Likewise, I am less than thrilled at Israel taking at least a portion of US contributions and turning that money into spying on the US. That tells me we could scale back our economic package quite a bit.
And please don't give me that "Pro-Israel, not Anti-US" garbage.
-Trevor
Edit: For grammar
[ August 29, 2004, 12:51 PM: Message edited by: TMedina ]
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Well you admitted that you can't look at this objectively and that you are blinded by your...extreme dislike...for Israel's policies. I'm not really sure how you can not care about what the US does and then be pissed as hell about what Israel does. Now both sides are saying the spy had no effect on American policy, all he/she effectively did was to give Israel a heads up on certain issues.
Considering that defense spending is first on the Israelis list to get done all we would be doing by cutting down on our contributions to Israel is lower spending in other areas. Even is the US put a mandate on where their money could go Israel would just put more of its money into defense.
I'll also repeat that Israel has used its spying to help the US. Most notably obtaining a secret speech by Kruschev to party heads and stealing a MiG, the latter definitely saved American lives in Vietnam. Israel also spends its money to develop technology, for example vastly improved version of the Patriot, for the uses of both nations and to provide intell on the Middle East where the US has limited resources.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
I never claimed to be objective on the subject. No more than your pro-Israel bias.
I also accept that Israel has provided useful information in the past. Out of an elightened self-interest, certainly - but that's hardly a rare or unique motive.
However, I cannot sanction, support or damnit encourage Israel's repeated attempts at espionage against the US. And if it makes you feel any better, I'd be just as upset if the British had been caught doing the same thing.
Israel is motivated by one desire - Israel. I don't fault them for that. Likewise, I support the US. More than I support Israel.
-Trevor
Edit: Correct me if I'm wrong - but I thought Israel was still categorically denying all charges that this person was spying for them? So which "both sides" are you referring to?
[ August 29, 2004, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: TMedina ]
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
The issue, of course, is whether we as Americans are okay with having our leadership manipulated into supporting Israeli causes that many of them would probably support anyway.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
nfl - uh, yeah, so Israel has used results of its spying ot help the US. We've used the results of our spying to help Israel, does this now give us the right to obtain through spying all information of the internal workings of their government? This seems to be roughly what you're saying.
Just because Israel's spying has been useful does not make it right or okay to use against us (or anyone else for that matter).
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:there was a case of Israel stealing US military secrets and selling them to China.
Can someone find a link on this? I don't remember this at all, and I thought I paid attention to most spy stories.
Someone commits espionage, we punish them. A country does it, and we take steps to make sure it doesn't happen again. It's that simple.
And if we do it, same thing applies in reverse.
Dagonee
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I agree with what Dagonee says, with an added:
I don't really think morals enter into it, it's more a straightforward case of cause and effect. It is necessary for every country's well being to have as complete a picture of every other country as possible. It is also to their advantage to keep other countries from getting a clearer picture than they have. Therefore spying and counterspying. Can you really say either country is in the wrong? No, all you can do is ask them to deal with the consequences of what they're engaging in.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Trevor, I am looking at it objectively. I may not look at the Israeli-Palestinian issue objectively because I am Jewish but don't think that me being pro-Israel constitutes me being anti-US. I'm still American and want the best for my country. But I'm not about to watch a country be hypocritically criticized for something that is neither suprising nor unique of nations with any ability to gather intelligence. Even if people are predisposed to one side it is possible to take a step back and evaluate both sides. When you're clearly only seeing American interests you can't make reasoned arguments. The "both sides" is on the assumption that this case genuinely does involve an Israeli spy. As far as Israeli denial, it means something although admittedly not much. Did Israel at any time deny Pollard? I honestly don't remember one way or the other.
Tom, Americans are saying the purported spy did not have an affect on US policy and Israel says there was no spy. Either way that's not the situation here.
The only way mutual spying will stop is if Israel and the US both completely open intell lines between themselves and even then they wouldn't necessarily believe that they were getting everything. I also don't believe that Israel would agree to it as Israelis still believe the only people that can be counted on to provide Israeli defense is Israelis. Such a paranoid attitude is hard to be faulted considering history.
Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
Nfl - I didn't accuse you of being anti-US. I was, however, growling about Pollard's last round of "I'm not anti-US, I'm just pro-Israel" rhetoric.
I will concede there is a difference between putting another government ahead of your own and actively opposing your own government.
However, the fact Pollard was ready and willing to place the well-being of a foreign power ahead of his own country's interests is an unforgiveable transgression.
Even if I grant that Pollard put his sympathies for Israel first and his loyalty to the US second, that is no less offensive in my eyes and still treasonous.
You say neither Pollard nor this newly-accused person did any lasting harm to the US. Frankly, Pollard, this new alleged traitor nor you are qualified or capable of making that judgement. Nor is it your decision, or theirs, to make. However, since they chose to make the decision to betray their country and government, they must accept the consequences of their actions.
You are, of course, welcome to your opinion as to the lasting damage these bastards may or may not have done - whether they managed to inflict any real damage or not is, to me, supremely irrelevant.
They intended to betray their country and in Pollard's case, he did. How effective they were in these betrayals is immaterial. If they didn't do much damage, I would be grateful for their incompetence as I pulled the trigger. If they did lasting damage, I would take a grim satisfaction in knowing they won't do it again as I pulled the trigger.