Should foreign spies be tried as common criminals for spying?
Heck Yeah
Side Score: 0
|
No, That's Their Job
Side Score: 1
|
|
|
|
No arguments found. Add one!
|
Oh, I'm sure this is legitimate. Yet when I read the article the ideas that flashed through my head were: 1) They're Russian spies. There is zero chance Russia will hand them over to the USA unless they do somethng separately to p!ss off Russia. Heck, I can't see any scenario where the USA would hand one of it's own spies over to Russia. 2) Even though supposedly this was for their own profit (thus not on behalf of Russia) how the heck can anyone tell anymore why these things happen. How do we know Russia didn't get some of the money? How do we know it wasn't part of their assignment to simply cause mayhem? 3) If we can charge government agents such as spies then can't we charge any other government official, like even Putin himself? This sets a precedent. 4) If what was stolen isn't US government issued (Yahoo is a private enterprise) then why is the US government the one to file charges? Yahoo should instead. Or individuals who were hacked. And charges with whom? There isn't exactly an objective world court to try this at. And if the answer is the courts of the country who filed charges is where the case must be heard then what constitutional rights (none) would two Russian spies have when being tried in US courts? Side: No, That's Their Job
|