is the wikileaks founder a traitor or hero?

[hortysir]

And I thought liberals were the ones that thought with their emotions and not with their logic...

Not apologetic for being emotional over my military brothers and sisters.

 

[Oscar Wao]

And as to your question to the Woyzreck guy:

It's "admirable" because it's always good to expose corruption.

 

[hortysir]

And as to your question to the Woyzreck guy:

It's "admirable" because it's always good to expose corruption.

Military brass not revealing every detail =/= corruption.

 

[blu]

And as to your question to the Woyzreck guy:

It's "admirable" because it's always good to expose corruption.

Military brass not revealing every detail =/= corruption.

hiding war crimes and other criminal actions is

 

[SFC Ollie]

I don't give a rats ass what these papers may or may not reveal. Not even sure i want to know.

What I do know is we have a damned traitor and this administration better find him and deal with him ASAP. And i don't mean a slap on the wrist.

 

[Woyzeck]

What they've done is admirable, but whether he's a hero or traitor is up to debate. Quite frankly, canonizing him or demonizing him as either isn't really going to do anything. Instead of arguing over the morality of what they've done, why not examine the bloody documents they've released? Julian Assange has stated that the documents released contains nothing about current troop movements. There are 15,000 other documents waiting to be released until the names are redacted and those already released are at the very least are seven months old. Hell, Gibbs and even Karzai are saying most of the information isn't even new.

We were promised a more transparent government after all, looks like WikiLeaks stepped up to fulfill that. At any rate, I think the more important question here is the content of the documents themselves. Because it looks like there's a lot of new civilian causalities that weren't reported, which raises the question of just how are we conducting ourselves over there? Does no one else here find it worrying we weren't told about a lot if civilian causalities?

I can't believe you just opened with the word "admirable" and closed with mention of "government transparency".
We got +/-300 pillow biters in DC that can't be bothered to read a 1,500 page healthcare bill, before voting on it, but it's fucking "Admirable" to give the entire planet >90k pages of Classified documents?

I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to say here. It's admirable because Obama promised more transparent government, and it took a leak to actually tell us some of the grisly details that were being left out in Afghanistan.

the documents released contains nothing about current troop movements

With the slightest amount of logical elimination, any Haji with a computer can calculate where we've been, to what result, and where we're likely to go next.

Can you? I mean, you've got a computer, logical skills and the documents are freely available online, so can you calculate where we're going to go next, i.e., where we are right now? As people have stated, much of this information isn't new, and it's made up of raw reports from the troops themselves. I really don't think it's going to give away that much.

At any rate, discussing the morality of this is pointless, as I've said. What's done is and done, and what warrants an actual discussion is what the government and military have not been telling us. What's more concerning is that much of this is new to us, but some of the people in Afghanistan are seeing this first hand. Just how effectively can clear the Taliban out and 'win' the war, so to speak, if we've got (unreported) stuff like this on our plate?

And, as to why **we weren't told about a lot if civilian causalities?**:
Because we already have enough computer-desk-generals surfing yahoo, google, wiki, and snopes trying to find any-fucking-thing they can to discredit this operation and thus demoralizing my troops.

Well gee, if the truth coming out about these sort of things discredits the operation and demoralizes the troops, maybe we shouldn't be there committing such fucking acts in the first place. It'd be saving us a lot of money, and more important lives.

 

[2Parties]

And as to your question to the Woyzreck guy:

It's "admirable" because it's always good to expose corruption.

Military brass not revealing every detail =/= corruption.

Military brass not revealing corruption = corruption.

 

[hortysir]

And as to your question to the Woyzreck guy:

It's "admirable" because it's always good to expose corruption.

Military brass not revealing every detail =/= corruption.

hiding war crimes and other criminal actions is

Not for wiki-bloggers to decide

 

[hortysir]

And as to your question to the Woyzreck guy:

It's "admirable" because it's always good to expose corruption.

Military brass not revealing every detail =/= corruption.

Military brass not revealing corruption = corruption.

Not for wiki-bloggers to define.

 

[Oscar Wao]

It's good to expose government...according to your views, I supposse.

 

[hortysir]

I don't give a rats ass what these papers may or may not reveal. Not even sure i want to know.

What I do know is we have a damned traitor and this administration better find him and deal with him ASAP. And i don't mean a slap on the wrist.

I haven't (and I refuse to) read a line of these documents. Nor have I clicked on a single youtube video of the shit.
I probably don't have the clearance.
One thing I noticed, in a sound byte I caught earlier today, is that the newest of these docs is dated Jan.'09.
Can someone remind when our most recent Presidential Inauguration was again?

 

[2Parties]

The stuff that was "leaked" is just more confirmation (assuming it's not BS) of what the alternative, anti-war online media has been reporting for years. Nothing truly groundbreaking...

 

[2Parties]

Military brass not revealing every detail =/= corruption.

Military brass not revealing corruption = corruption.

Not for wiki-bloggers to define.

Correct. I'll leave that to Webster or Oxford, not someone on an interweb discussion board...

 

[hortysir]

Military brass not revealing corruption = corruption.

Not for wiki-bloggers to define.

Correct. I'll leave that to Webster or Oxford, not someone on an interweb discussion board...

...or a court, or a senate committee, or a judge??

 

[SFC Ollie]

Doesn't matter when the Documents were dated or what is contained in them. What matters is that someone with the authority to do so marked them as classified information,whether that be Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret. All classifications even FOUO are so marked because of national security. Some asshole has now hurt that national security and could possibly cause the death of some of our troops.

A traitor during a time of war? Shoot the bastard.

 

[Old Rocks]

Find the American ASSHOLE who leaked them in the first place. Any one want to place a bet on that person being a lefty?

I see. Was the traitors that released the info on Plame lefties? Not only published the name of an undercover CIA agent, but also her cover, as well as that of many other agents. But that was just OK with you, because it was good political revenge, right?

 

[hortysir]

Doesn't matter when the Documents were dated or what is contained in them. What matters is that someone with the authority to do so marked them as classified information,whether that be Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret. All classifications even FOUO are so marked because of national security. Some asshole has now hurt that national security and could possibly cause the death of some of our troops.

A traitor during a time of war? Shoot the bastard.

Whole-heartedly agree, Ollie.
I just find it strangely curious that this "corruption" magically stopped on Jan 20, 2009

 

[Oscar Wao]

January 2009 can mean January 3rd, 10th, 11th, or 19th. It doesn't necessarily mean 21st-31st.

 

[random3434]

Find the American ASSHOLE who leaked them in the first place. Any one want to place a bet on that person being a lefty?

Likely a DOD employee subscribing to child porn, or a Dept. of Ag. employee, or member of the NAACP.

Frankly I do not care who they are. Democrat, Republican, Right, Left. If they leaked classified material they should pay the price.

Yet you keep on saying you wouldn't be surprised if someone from the "Left" did this.

 

[2Parties]

Doesn't matter when the Documents were dated or what is contained in them. What matters is that someone with the authority to do so marked them as classified information,whether that be Confidential, Secret, or Top Secret. All classifications even FOUO are so marked because of national security. Some asshole has now hurt that national security and could possibly cause the death of some of our troops.

A traitor during a time of war? Shoot the bastard.

Totally. If some rogue soldier wipes out 50 civilians and the documentation of the incident is marked "Top Secret" we shouldn't know about it. In fact, the soldier should be given a promotion and the person who leaked the information should be shot.

It's so disgusting that someone would leak the truth about civilian deaths and what is actually happening. We need to go back to the days where we could firmly plant our heads in the sand and pretend this stuff didn't happen without it being shoved in our face on a day to day basis.

God Bless America.