Fleeing the consequences of his actions is akin to ducking after disagreeing with an irrational person. Right or wrong, they're about to hit you. You don't have to stand there and take it.

If he had faced the consequences of his actions, he wouldn't be around right now to continue this discussion.

You don't have to stand there and take it, but sometimes it is better if you do. You don't know that he wouldn't be around right now. I happen to think that he would still be around, but certainly his life would be more difficult. But I also think he'd be more "popular".

Interesting trade-off: living in exile but invited to video conference at every big name event and helping direct the course of the national security discussion, or in solitary confinement in Guantanamo but more "popular"

I'd say Snowden made the right choice.

While I think the "solitary confinement in Guantanamo" assumption is probably off-base, certainly he'd be in a tough situation somewhere, and he probably did make the right choice. I definitely wouldn't have had anywhere near the courage he has shown in his whistleblowing, let alone the courage it would take to face the punishment.

Nonetheless, I'll expand on what I meant by "popular"; in the mainstream his flight is seen as evidence of guilt, and the particular countries to which he fled cast even more of a shadow on his intentions. Lots of people I've talked to think he must be an enemy because he fled. Martyrdom is always terrible for the martyr but often better for the martyr's ideology than the alternative. You're definitely right that he's having a continued impact on the discussion, and perhaps that does make his exile a net positive for his ideology. But the people I know who think he's a traitor who betrayed his country before seeking asylum with its enemies don't tend to listen to what he has to say.

Remind those people what happened to Chelsea Manning. She was tortured for months.

(I understand your point, though.)

Bear in mind another point - believing Snowden needs to stand trial doesn't necessarily presume a belief that he's guilty, or should be punished, either. Americans also tend to believe the justice system works as advertised.

As a matter of order, people should only stand trial if the government legitimately believes them guilty and the government believes it can prove this to a jury.

Trials aren't for finding out facts or uncovering the truth. They are the formal processes that a government must do after deciding that a citizen deserves punishment to actually effect their decision.

minor edits

This was be one of the easiest trials the government has ever had to put on though. Snowden admitted what he did himself, after all.

I for one feel he should not be punished under whistleblower laws, but I would be open to a proper trial. I would like to see that discussion in open court, not a secret tribunal where the outcome is only reported by the government doing the prosecution.

Which is why I think he should not return to face trial, because I think there's no way he'll ever get a fair and open trial in the US.

According to that poll, a majority of people also disapprove of what he did. But yes, very true.

I am not American, so perhaps it is that the rest of the world sees this differently than American's do.

Regarding Snowden fleeing, if you disagree with his choice then give this interview a read[1], it is with the whistleblower for the Pentagon papers. The opinion is that if Snowden didn't flee in today's climate then he likely would have ended up in isolation or Guantanamo.

As an outsider to the US it is interesting to observe that American's (on average) have a high distrust of their government, yet follow quite closely the US government's line. (Please note this is not intended to inflame, but it is an honest observation from an outsider that has observed many American's and is intended for you to reflect upon).

[1] http://www.salon.com/2013/06/14/daniel_ellsberg_edward_snowd...

> The opinion is that if Snowden didn't flee in today's climate then he likely would have ended up in isolation or Guantanamo.

That's his opinion, and it's unfounded IMHO. Actual terrorists are increasingly and deliberately put on public trial in New York, and Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning got his (now her) trial as well.

Manning was held in effective solitary confinement for 9 months.

Which had a lot to do with being in a military prison where joking with the guards about killing yourself actually could result in being placed in a Prevention of Suicide status. In any event, even with that Manning was transferred away from solitary in the first half of her detention and finished the trial outside of solitary (and thereby set the precedent for how later activist spies should be treated).