Should the U.S. continue NSA surveillance of its allies?

Probably yes -- all nations do this, yes?

Yes, but only with the permission of the ally in question so long as they can do the same with us, and only target individuals or organizations with suspected ties to terrorists/subversive movements.

Yes, surveillance of all foreign countries is essential to tracking potential terrorist threats and increase surveillance on drug traffickers and on sex and slave traffickers

Yes, as long as they can do the same to us and a warrant is acquired that proves the surveilled target’s link to criminal or terrorist interests

Yes and surveillance all countries

Yes, as long as a warrant showing probable cause of criminal or terrorist activity is acquired first. Involve our allies in joint surveillance if possible

No, abolish the NSA and rely on the UN

No, there should be clear communication of all actions, including ones detrimental to other allies, between allies

Are they are allies as in friends and trustworthy or allies because of fellow interests.

Yes, but reform the NSA

I bet everyone else is secretly collecting intelligence on us as well. Espionage is a natural part of statecraft.

Yes, but only with permission from the allied countries

No, the NSA should only be used for what affects us.

Probably, because they most likely are doing it also.

Not enough knowledge on the subject matter to give an informed response

I don’t care enough for this topic

I believe the NSA could be used for good but it was leaked at the NSA was spying on the US people and I believe it goes against the constitution and we should sue the US government for violation of our rights.

Each country should be looking for potential terror threats but only if allowed by the government of the other country

As long as it doesn't harm anyone and helps to track potential attacks it should be fine. This could also help show / remind people of rules or regulations they stated in order for them not to go back on their word.

No, surveillance of allies should only occur when [1] we have the permission of the ally, or [2] there is an active military conflict in the country.

Yes, providing the U.S. and the country having surveillance done are in agreement about the specifics of the work

Yes, but reduce funding to Intelligence agencies which frequently go off the rails and get into shady buisness

Strict oversight and permission through established legal and diplomatic channels (e.g., Congress or courts), ensuring surveillance remains focused on national security, not overreach.

No war or extrajudicial killing of suspected terrorists; instead, the surveillance should be used for intelligence gathering and prevention rather than military action or unilateral violence.

Yes, the surveillance of the NSA is necessary due to the fact that other countries are likely conducting surveillance on the United States as the United States is on them to abolish the NSA would put the United States at a high risk for attack and a strategical disadvantage.

Yes, but we should at least make an attempt at joint surveillance operations first before we just spy on our allies.

No (this undermines trust and international cooperation; prioritize diplomatic and legal means for intelligence gathering).

No, spying on anyone causes more problems than it solves, and we don't need to control and watch every aspect of the world.

No, only if we are granted permission and there are legitimate terrorist suspects residing in the countries.

I feel both the 3rd and 5th option fits my opinion. Because if we don’t monitor our allies, we are putting ourselves at risk of attacks, but if we do, it could damage our relationship with our allies.

Yes, gathering intelligence is important for holding governments accountable and discovering human rights violations and other similar violations of international law

Yes, as long as a warrant is acquired that proves the surveilled target’s link to criminal or terrorist interests

Mainly on countries that threatens freedom of their citizens (by either government or corporations) or if the country is threatened to grow into a fascist country.

In a way, it's not a bad idea to surveillance other foreign allies cause you never know if or when they could turn their backs on you. But I'd definitely monitor it in a way that wouldn't damage relation but also protect yourself.

Yes if we suspect that the allied country has gone rogue with an unreliable leader of their government

There is no need for this in a new one world order, however for now we should always trust but verify.

It depends on if the foreign governments are surveilling threats in their own countries effectively and deterring or preventing terrorist attacks, either on their own soil or emanating from their country but striking other countries

I think the USA should strengthen its bonds wit our allies n actually have conversations before and about spying

Unless there are suspicions of a potential terrorist threats supported with evidence, NSA surveillance shouldn't be used.

We should but not with NSA surveillance maybe with more basic means. We should only use NSA surveillance if we know that ally is not able to be trusted.

So long as there is an agreement between the nations the surveillance of allies and neutral countries can prevent conflicts and attacks before they take place.

I used to think no. Now that many of our allied nations are electing more conservative/radical governments we should continue the practice. Knowledge is power.

No, unless viable evidence emerges of foreign nations becoming a threat to the United's State's condition.

I think that the United States and these foreign countries should work together to do surveillance together.

Yes, but only if foreign countries allied with the nation consents with doing the same with us in return.

I believe to a certain extent of surveillance is warranted but nothing overboard because those are our allies and we must trust them.

No, we should be working with our allies to monitor and track potential terrorist threats that come for anywhere, including their own boarders and ours. We should also expect to receive the same treatment in return.

Yes, it's distasteful but generally necessary to insure the ability to make informed decisions regarding policy and military strategy.

Yes but make sure surveillance is known, and if asked, that surveillance can be reciprocated by them.

We surveill our own people for threats. Tracking others is sadly a move we have to make. And we should expect that they are all doing the same.

Unjustified surveillance is unethical and causes more damage than it helps. Proper communication should be made with other nations to counter terrorism. We should not police the world.

No, because non-consensual spying on our allies severely damages our reputation abroad. However, reasonable surveillance of non-allied countries is essential to tracking potential terrorist threats.

I think the allies in question should know about the surveillance and it should only be on groups suspected to be terrorists or suspected to be connected to them

while the nsa is essential for tracking potential terrorist threats it damages our reputation with allies

Yes, but don't put your head where you are not wanted, you could work with the countries instead of doing it behind their back.

Yes, on the condition that we should make our allies aware of our agent's presence (without being specific enough to compromise them), and we make it known to them what our goals are, and they consent to their continued presence.

Very light, non-intrusive spying. Be friends and be around enough to know what’s going on without wire taps and hacking

Yes, surveillance of all foreign countries with a history of terrorism or potential terrorism should be monitored

The NSA is essential to tracking and stopping worldwide terrorism and should still continue. Should probably work with the country in question though.

Both have pros and cons, spying can lead to distrust but it can also thwart potential terrorist threats

NSA should continue its surveillance programs for those individuals who are on Interpol watch lists.

Yes, it is inevitable that most countries will spy on eachother and unrealistic to expect one or all countries to cease doing so.

When you say, "it's allies", who are they? Are you talking about citizens or governments? This question is too vague for a worthwhile response.

Yes, but require that a warrant showing probable cause of criminal or terrorist activity be acquired first.

Yes, but should be used as protection and made clear that its the case so they don't get the wrong idea

Although damaging to our relations, we should still somewhat survey communications of foreign countries.

We should be able to trust our allies I understand the reasons we don´t and it might be a good Idea for other foreign countries who don´t like us but for our allies it makes them think we don´t trust them which isn't fair.

No. But the answer becomes a yes if the ruling party shows signs of operating on problematic radical ideology.

It depends on factors such as if there is a possible threat. I feel like there needs to be more trust, but if there is word of threats I think surveillance is crucial to protecting our people.

I think that in some situations they can soy on other people but only If they know that something is wrong or suspicious but not just able to do it all the time with random people just because. Even if they feel like something is off or wrong they should get evidence before they can act a pon anything and also have a sense of privacy to whoever they are trying to spy on.

Due to the controversial history of the NSA, we should put strict regulations on what the NSA does and heavily limit their access to our personal data and information.

No, but promote a stronger cooperation with allied counterparts to more effectively share vital intelligence and through that process determine any weaknesses in the system

No, that is damaging for relations but in situations of national security reasons and public safety the NSA should be active

Be transparent with our allies with what we'd be surveilling, and be transparent with what was recorded. Work with our allies to build and share surveillance information.

Yes, but only if the agency has clear probable cause of criminal or terrorist activity in an allied nation.

I think its both a good and bad thing. It can give us the higher hand in possible dangerous situations, but it could also effect reputation and increase possible threats/attacks

I think there should be more diplomatic transparency and NSA funding should be focused exclusively on specific regions of concern.

No, but it should have been let known to other allied governments that it was happening within some form.

Yes, but protect whistleblowers and focus the surveillance more on trafficking and terrorism than political threats.

No but, the NSA has a conflicting charter which means it should be split into two entities. One for surveillance and one for the protection of national secrets.

The NSA should not continue SIGINT surveillance on FVEY partners, but other allies should be allowed with certain stipulations.

I don't think that the US should necessarily spy but if they have a lead that could become a large issue or concern then they should be able to persue that.

this question is hard to answer because I wouldn't want my country under surveillance of enemy's or ally's in means of distrust, however I believe the watch of foreign country's is essential In case of betrayal and or other means.

Yes, but only to investigate terrorist threats and the NSA should be more highly scrutinized to prevent any overreach or abuse of power.

No, and the NSA needs a drastic reduction in power and a complete investigation into its corruption.

Only in cases of a threat to the country or citizens and must be cleared by the justice department and heads of the 3 branches of government are informed.

It shouldn't be much more than what other countries do to us. I'm sure other intelligence services do some kind of spying or surveilling of us

NO and eliminate all 400+ UNCONSTITUTIONAL FEDERAL Mregulating agencies AND their UNCONSTITUTIONAL REGULATIONS!

No, spying on our allies damages our reputation and encourages the government to violate the rights of americans.

Yes, but agreements between the US and its allies must be created before foreign surveillance of such kind is conducted.

Yes, It's important to help keep us safe from terrorist threats but that's all it should be used for