WikiLeaks Leak

[gunowner930]

firehawk- nearest I can figure is that people know he will put information out their, info many governments may want to keep quite. So if someone had access to this info they could spread it at their discretions. Hell my roomate is a marine, and a wireman. H?e said he would have created an ip address through the gov's server. sent the info to wikileaks, and then rapid shares on 4 chan, and deleted the ip address.

thanks for the neg rep because i stated an opinion when I have experience in military intelligence and you don't.

Jeremiah via neg rep- Anyone exposing our government, or any government for that matter, doing something wrong should be commended. No matter how you dress it up, this stuff should not have occoured. Keep it quite they will do it again, only it may involve you .

What do you expect to find out of these leaked documents? That the U.S. government created a new super-virus to infect U.S. citizens through the water supply, maybe you'll discover that we got stealth technology from aliens, or there was a direct order to indiscriminately murder Afghan civilians, oh no!, you might just find the secret concentration camps set up for Americans once gun confiscation comes. The truth is battlefield intelligence was leaked not any tinfoil hat crap, you probably won't even be able to understand what you're reading if you took the time to read through all of the secret material leaked, nor will it mean anything to you. But it might mean something to the Afghan informant who has a name you can't pronounce who may have his child beheaded because some little punk named Bradley Manning violated his violated his oath, betrayed his fellow soldiers, and intentionally violated operational security because he is an unstable drama queen.

neg rep back at you.

 

[Jeremiah]

What oath did Bradley violate? the first Oath and Service member takes, from my lack of knowledge as I have never served, is one to uphold the constitution. The government sir is rarely constitutional these days. If someone ordered the death of a civilian, and informant, if they ordered torture, if a civilian residence was destroyed by an order from someone in teh decisions making roles of our government, we NEED to know about it. Any crime our government supports overseas it is certainly capable of perpetrating against its civilians. the government should not be allowed to act with impunity. I have many issues with thinks that came out in the wikileaks video over the summer. I paid for that to happen, by paying taxes I supported that, it is important for us to know what our government is doing.

Milliatry intelligence is one of the most commonly cited oxymoron todate, what is the ASVAB score needed to such a prestigious post? I know some boys that worked under that broad umbrella that barley made it out of highschool, so you may want to try another method of qualifying yourself.

I don't understand what your issue is here, you said something dumb, I let you know in a quick semi private method. This may turn into a flame war and I don't care. Whatever secrets he leaked, won't matter. Whatever obligation you have to support the government actions in them, blindly, is an emotional response and will be hard to rationalize. Something you need to consider is the message of the oathkeepers. Every cop and millitary service member is obligated to process their orders. The oathkeepers push people to decide if the order is constitutional, it is also important to decide if the action is moral. Many members of our armed forces don't understand that.

I will thank you not to assume my ignorance. "to the Afghan informant who has a name you can't pronounce " I can probably pronounce it. hell I bet I can even SPELL your real name, I are educate. Trying to lure me into some tin foil hat discussing won't work, I don't trust the government, I will not say for certain whether the tin foil hat crowd has a leg to stand on, only time will tell, I simply rule nothing out I cannot prove.

"there was a direct order to indiscriminately murder Afghan civilians, oh no" This remark is appaling. The concept that these people aren't americans so they are for some reason inferior to us, their lives are less important, or inconsequential is frightening to see.

 

[Jeremiah]

While you neg repped me, I'd like to ask how does my wireman room mate not know what he is talking about? is it impossible to set up ip addresses and then delete them? or is it wrong to contemplate the idea that our government could commit an atrocity, then try to bury it? that they could do something that would bother him to the point he would distribute the information in an anonymous way, to alleviate what he considered to be his moral obligation?

 

[Hotdoger]

While you neg repped me, I'd like to ask how does my wireman room mate not know what he is talking about? is it impossible to set up ip addresses and then delete them? or is it wrong to contemplate the idea that our government could commit an atrocity, then try to bury it? that they could do something that would bother him to the point he would distribute the information in an anonymous way, to alleviate what he considered to be his moral obligation?

So it is a "moral obligation" for him to comit an illegal act?

Are his homsexual acts a "moral obligation" too?

 

[Jeremiah]

Hotdoger, I fail to see your logic.

complying with the law is not always the moral thing to do.

 

[ATF Consumer]

Hotdoger, I fail to see your logic.

complying with the law is not always the moral thing to do.

And to bring homos into the discussion says something right there

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Getting away from neg-repping people for their opinions, PFC Manning (and I stress his rank because he may or may not be smart but his rank shows he has no experience) violated his sworn oath to safeguard confidential information in his possession. You may argue whether or not he was honoring his oath to protect and defend the Constitution, but I suggest that he had too little experience with intelligence operations to understand the harm he was doing to "innocents" such as native informants (that is: providers of information, not "snitches") and his fellow soldiers who might be affected by his "brave act". I will leave his motivations to him and God, but he'll be tried and, if convicted, justly sentenced to hard labor and dishonorable discharge.

For those of us who've never been in the thick of combat and had to kill or be killed (I'll bet some of the LEOs on this forum understand this) we have very little idea of the split-second decisions involved in the types of low-level combat our Infantry and others are involved in, both in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Combat against an insurgency is as much about getting the right information and acting on it as it is about getting overwhelming force concentrated on the right place at the right time. Asymmetrical warfare isn't pretty and it's really hard on the civilians in the middle. Information Warfare is just as invaluable a tool as smart bombs and laser-guided munitions. To reveal raw intelligence data and analysis like this just ties our hands and makes it more difficult to win the fight. Fie on Manning.

 

[Jeremiah]

Blackhawk- this is not a fight we can win.

 

[Hotdoger]

Hotdoger, I fail to see your logic.

complying with the law is not always the moral thing to do.

Wikileaks founder Assange has rape and sexual molestation charges against him.

The rumored homosexual Manning sure has his moral compass pointed in a precarious position.

 

[ATF Consumer]

Wikileaks founder Assange has rape and sexual molestation charges against him.

The rumored homosexual Manning sure has his moral compass pointed in a precarious position.

Are they just charges or does he have a conviction?
Because if they are just charges, I'll go along with the innocent until proven guilty idea.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Blackhawk- this is not a fight we can win.

Correction: This is not a fight we can win in two years. Whether or not it can be won at all is a more nebulous question. Asymmetrical wars can be won; the British did it in Maylaysia, but it took 10 years and had almost no press. Likewise, there has been a low-level insurgency in Thailand for over 20 years, which the Thais have successfully fought - but haven't erased.

No other country which has fought in Afghanistan has tried the "hearts and minds" approach, so we don't know whether it will work there or not, but such an approach is, of necessity, a long-term one. It's doubtful we will stick with it long enough to succeed (look at your attitude), but that's not the same thing as saying it can't be won.

 

[Jeremiah]

Hotdoger- did you ever have sex outside of wedlock? I'll play the law of averages card, and guess that you have. If not I apologize. So here goes, trying to say that PFC manning is gay and therefore immoral is a false assumption. Morality has very little to do with who you have sex with. For using that as a benchmark is to use a sliding scale, some people would say having sex with the same sex is immoral, others having sex for fun, still more "moral" people would argue having sex outside of marriage is wrong, and I have heard arguments from christians that having sex for any other reason then to create a child is wrong. I would argue that morality has to do with decisions you consciously make, I would hazard that most people that frequent this board are immoral as they support and approve of theft in the form of taxation.

Black hawk- The hearts and minds approach was shot after we funded the mujahideen to fight the russians, and then cut and run, It was lost after we helped oust the shah's and the movement to a democratically elected form of government, and held install the ayatollah's. The last ten years we have been invaders, we have meddled with their governments and installed puppets, funded drug lord, and destroyed their cities, how will this win the hearts and minds. If we had planned to take that appreach we should have started five years before the invasion took place.

 

[SavageEagle]

I have no opinion on this. I'm just enjoying the show.

Ok, I do have an opinion on this, but it's still juvenile and I'm still forming my opinion as I haven't read the leaks. Hell, I just learned about them being released today.

 

[Vasili]

Correction: This is not a fight we can win in two years. Whether or not it can be won at all is a more nebulous question. Asymmetrical wars can be won; the British did it in Maylaysia, but it took 10 years and had almost no press. Likewise, there has been a low-level insurgency in Thailand for over 20 years, which the Thais have successfully fought - but haven't erased.

No other country which has fought in Afghanistan has tried the "hearts and minds" approach, so we don't know whether it will work there or not, but such an approach is, of necessity, a long-term one. It's doubtful we will stick with it long enough to succeed (look at your attitude), but that's not the same thing as saying it can't be won.

no, it can't be won because we're halfassing this and have halfassed it from day one. it seems to me that no one since patton has understood the concept of war. i want to go back in time and walk with the tyrant sherman on his march to the sea. he understood what war was. he salted the ground behind him as he went, let his troops rape women along the way, and general consumed and destroyed all that crossed his path. THAT man knew of war. we only know of halfassing combat. our troops could do SO much more to actually WIN this thing, and instead the military higherups and president HAMSTRING them so they can BARELY engage the enemy, and then we wonder why, after almost ten years of halfassing it, why we've covered so little distance toward victory. i want JDAM and NREPs from pakistan to morocco. anything short of that is failure long term. you know, POTUS knows it, military knows it, and the american people know it. GO BIG OR GO HOME. or in obama's case, go small, go home, and then claim you did all you could.

 

[gunowner930]

What oath did Bradley violate? the first Oath and Service member takes, from my lack of knowledge as I have never served, is one to uphold the constitution. The government sir is rarely constitutional these days. If someone ordered the death of a civilian, and informant, if they ordered torture, if a civilian residence was destroyed by an order from someone in teh decisions making roles of our government, we NEED to know about it. Any crime our government supports overseas it is certainly capable of perpetrating against its civilians. the government should not be allowed to act with impunity. I have many issues with thinks that came out in the wikileaks video over the summer. I paid for that to happen, by paying taxes I supported that, it is important for us to know what our government is doing.

"and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice." I'm pretty sure that since he had a TS SCI clearance he was told at some point not to leak classified material.

Milliatry intelligence is one of the most commonly cited oxymoron todate, what is the ASVAB score needed to such a prestigious post? I know some boys that worked under that broad umbrella that barley made it out of highschool, so you may want to try another method of qualifying yourself.

Well I've worked with Marines that had relatively low ASVAB scores (70s) that made outstanding analysts. Does 27 months experience at Intelligence Analyst (MANNING'S JOB) in Iraq qualify me to know a little bit about this subject?

I don't understand what your issue is here, you said something dumb, I let you know in a quick semi private method. This may turn into a flame war and I don't care. Whatever secrets he leaked, won't matter. Whatever obligation you have to support the government actions in them, blindly, is an emotional response and will be hard to rationalize. Something you need to consider is the message of the oathkeepers. Every cop and millitary service member is obligated to process their orders. The oathkeepers push people to decide if the order is constitutional, it is also important to decide if the action is moral. Many members of our armed forces don't understand that.

My issue is that you seem to think these secret documents will expose some very dark government secrets. You won't find anything like that. As you probably know there are different clearance levels. All of this information is "secret." You sound like you're looking for information that would be classified well above secret. Do you really think that if all of these tinfoil hat conspiracies exist, the government would trust kids two years removed from the street with access?

This has nothing to do with the oathkeepers. Safeguarding classified material is a lawful order, and of course Manning intentionally violated that.

I will thank you not to assume my ignorance. "to the Afghan informant who has a name you can't pronounce " I can probably pronounce it. hell I bet I can even SPELL your real name, I are educate. Trying to lure me into some tin foil hat discussing won't work, I don't trust the government, I will not say for certain whether the tin foil hat crowd has a leg to stand on, only time will tell, I simply rule nothing out I cannot prove.

Well, why should I assume you to be an expert on this subject? I didn't say you were stupid, you just don't have any experience in this field. What is an informant's name going to mean to you? Are you going to do a link analysis on all the bad guys? You're not sure about the tinfoil crowd? These documents will do nothing to prove anything they say.

"there was a direct order to indiscriminately murder Afghan civilians, oh no" This remark is appaling. The concept that these people aren't americans so they are for some reason inferior to us, their lives are less important, or inconsequential is frightening to see.

The remark was sarcastic, in that you'll find nothing like that in any of those documents. I thought the sarcasm clear.

As far as your roommate's theory. Secret and Unclassifed materials are kept on seperate networks, secret computers are set up to not allow data transfer through email to an unclassified computer. However, transferring data to a flash drive or external hard drive from a secret to unclassified computer is probably how this happened. Manning would likely have recieved Non-Judicial Punishment at the minimum for merely transferring data from a secret computer to an unclassified computer, let alone leaking to Wikileaks. There is no way Manning could have made this leak anonymously.

 

[Hotdoger]

Hotdoger- did you ever have sex outside of wedlock? I'll play the law of averages card, and guess that you have. If not I apologize. So here goes, trying to say that PFC manning is gay and therefore immoral is a false assumption. Morality has very little to do with who you have sex with. For using that as a benchmark is to use a sliding scale, some people would say having sex with the same sex is immoral, others having sex for fun, still more "moral" people would argue having sex outside of marriage is wrong, and I have heard arguments from christians that having sex for any other reason then to create a child is wrong. I would argue that morality has to do with decisions you consciously make, I would hazard that most people that frequent this board are immoral as they support and approve of theft in the form of taxation.

.

No I have never cheated on my wife. I will be married 30 years next month.
You brought up the thought that Mannings did what he did for "moral" reasons.

I guess Mannings decisions were and are made when he is unconscious?
LOL

A Christian renders unto Ceaser what is Ceasers.

 

[Jeremiah]

The remark was sarcastic, in that you'll find nothing like that in any of those documents. I thought the sarcasm clear.,

As far as your roommate's theory. Secret and Unclassifed materials are kept on seperate networks, secret computers are set up to not allow data transfer through email to an unclassified computer. However, transferring data to a flash drive or external hard drive from a secret to unclassified computer is probably how this happened. Manning would likely have recieved Non-Judicial Punishment at the minimum for merely transferring data from a secret computer to an unclassified computer, let alone leaking to Wikileaks. There is no way Manning could have made this leak anonymously.

There is always a way to get information out free and clear, lt just takes ingenuity. Most government policies, regulations, and laws are reactionary, and put in place after something happens, with the intent of preventing a similar unwanted action. You could make a strong argument he wanted attention/to be a martyr/drama queen. But it is possible to outwit federal government protocol, I'm sure you with your hands on time have noticed several small holes that could be exploited.

 

[Jeremiah]

No I have never cheated on my wife. I will be married 30 years next month.
You brought up the thought that Mannings did what he did for "moral" reasons.

I guess Mannings decisions were and are made when he is unconscious?
LOL

What?

A Christian renders unto Ceaser what is Ceasers.

congratulations, but I asked about out of wedlock, did you ever sleep with someone prior to being married? I am poking this as food for thought feel free not to answer, it is non of my business.

We don't live under Ceasar, the american form of government was established and flourished without taxation. My argument is theft is far more immoral than who your sexual partners are, and that spreading info that bothers you, or that you feel should be public could be a question of morality. If you knew someone stole a can of green beans, in a grocery store, do you ignore it? or do you at least tell the manager/a clerk?

 

[right winger]

ASSange isn't the primary culprit. Bradley Manning is the one that deserves to be hung.

They both need to be shot as Traitors

 

[WWIIIDefender]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0jrEFOV2dE&feature=player_embedded]YouTube - Iraq War Logs Every Death Mapped - From Wikileaks and Guardian MIRROR[/ame]