esmith
Veteran Member
Correct. Seems there is a lot of confusion it what actually was or was not done by the general public in matters pertaining to the 2016 election.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
U.S. Punishes Russia for Election Hacking, Ejecting Operatives
- Thread starter sovietchild
- Start date
Is it an act of war when we breach the systems of other countries?
Yes
[Edited]
Of course it is, that's why its done covertly and on secured systems.
If done covertly, is it then OK, ie, not an act of war?
I sense some inconsistency in Democratic protests.
Forget the covert part. That wasn't to describe all scenarios.
What's your point?
Do you consider it an act of war?
Setting aside the question of whether it was even Russians at all,
This strident (to the point of talking war) objection to something
which we also do is ripe for accusations of hypocrisy.
No.
You're jumping to conclusions. Did I say that I was for Americans breaching other nations? I did not nor do I condone.
Don't be so quick to pull the trigger.
[Edited]
Concerning the act of war... Breaching a computer system is no different than physically breaching a secure compound and physically removing sensitive material. This is an act that I am sure no nation, organization or individual would see as simply neutral or benign.
Last edited:
I was careful not to pull it.
Notice how I said only "ripe for", & spoke generally?
Some here have talked of a violent response to this "act of war".
And yet we do the same thing.
(Before anyone cries "False equivalency!", I don't say each act is identical.
Americastan's numerous global efforts could be even more heinous.)
So if it is indeed an "act of war", there are problems.....
- Should we go to war?
- If not, then are we weaklings?
- Are we provoking wars by doing the same?
- Do we deserve to be attacked for committing acts of war?
- Or is it not really an "act of war", but just sore losers acting out with histrionics on steroids?
Fair enough. I wouldn't say we should go to war for this act but there should be actions on our part. As there should be actions from other countries that the US has breached.
Last edited:
No doubt there are.
It could very well be that the Russians were reacting our interference in their affairs.
Maybe they were. But at some point, wouldn't you agree, that both sides needs to stop for peace to occur?
I see it as more the reverse, ie, that peace would bring about its stopping.
Or it may be that Putin is not so much petty as ambitious for himself and Russia. So he wants a weak president for the USA.
One who has no credentials except an ability to manipulate the media. One who can easily be baited into self destructive battles. One who is extremely divisive, poorly informed, selfcentered, and dishonest. One who has no gravitas with the rest of the world's leadership.
Hillary was a threat to Russian interests in a way that Trump is not.
Tom
esmith
Veteran Member
]
In what was Hillary a threat to Russia and President-elect Trump isn't. I thought that the Obama administration wanted to play nice with Russia. Why they even tried a "reset button"
In what was Hillary a threat to Russia and President-elect Trump isn't. I thought that the Obama administration wanted to play nice with Russia. Why they even tried a "reset button"
A weak president?
If that's Putin's strategic goal in electing Trump, he is one dumb bunny.
Thanda
Well-Known Member
Should the election have also been redone because if Trump had lost becuase someone illegally leaked information about his tax status?
I already said that this election is done. For future elections, I would propose provisions to ensure our elections are not tampered by foreign entities specifically through illegal means.
The information that was released on Clinton concerning the DNC and other things, IMO, are fair game to release. However, how the information was obtained is very questionable and ethically wrong which I believe should push the elections to a further date to allow the DNC to restrategize if Clinton is still their best candidate. Something as important as our Presidential election should have all provisions enabled to ensure that no foreign entity can illegally tamper with it.
Concerning Trump's taxes, if it was benign as Trump suggested then he should have released them. If another entity released them through legal means, then I have no problem with that. Many things are legally public information. If they weren't released through legal means, then we definitely should flush out the source and understand why and how it was done. A judge can tell his jurors to not process illegal evidence, but at some point too much damage is done which requires a retrial. If we do this for a legal system, why not try to keep the same integrity and ethics in our election process. I'm repeating myself here. Not every information should be made public. We as individuals and organizations have rights and liberties that should not be infringed on, first and foremost. This ensures a system of integrity and value which is what I'm focusing on.
Do I need to repeat anything else for you?
Last edited:
If Putin truly breached our system to help Trump win the election, I would assume it is not in the favor of America's interests. Can we at least agree on this?
