Discussion: WikiLeaks

[Marx]

This ridiculous punishment needs to be thrown out of court and the entire process reformed and made not so vague and harsh in punishment. If Obama does not pardon him, I think he should resign.

On what grounds? There is a very fine line between being a 'whistleblower' and committing the equivalent of treason.

 

[Paroxysm]

Manning is an absolute hero.

 

[StorminNorman]

People need to realize that UCMJ has several very strict laws and consequences, especially regarding classified material. It's not surprising that a new charge would have death as the maximimum penalty, especially if the charge is during a time of war.

Besides, prosecutors have already stated that if he is convicted, they will not be seeking the death penalty. IMO, people are just blowing it out of proportion.

Exactly.

 

[kytrigger]

It's not just that, its that he's even being treated as a criminal in the first place.

Of course he's being treated like a criminal. Whether you find his actions ultimately just or not, he broke the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I understand you believe he did this for the greater good and should be let go, but that is what the actual trial is for.

Whether he did it for a greater sense of justice or whatever is not for me to decide, but no matter what, Manning should have known that what he was doing would get him sent to prison initially. I gaurantee you they went over the legal ramifications with him at his intelligence training course and when he first got to his unit.

 

[Fading]

I see the above arguments side as well. Despite thinking it's wrong to harshly punish someone for telling leaking the truth about ppl who are committing crimes. I do agree that he had to have know what his actions would bring to him personally. It's not like he was an unwitting normal citizen who came across the material by accident. He was a military man who was probably warned over and over what his actions would mean to him on a personal level. So he had to have known what was coming, but on the other hand it doesn't necessarily make it easier to swallow for the ppl following the story.

I also agree that there may have been a bit of a jumping of the gun on over reacting to the death sentence thing, but I think that's mainly due to it even being on the table. It probably is even only mentioned as a scare tactic, and probably really isn't being considered. However when you hear about that type of sentence you think about mass serial killers, not information leaks. So it's probably more of a knee jerk reaction to even hearing, "Death Penalty".

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Manning is an absolute hero.

He's as much of a hero as John Wilkes Booth.

 

[Paroxysm]

He's as much of a hero as John Wilkes Booth.

Too bad Spidey!

Manning's a hero.

Your not.

Deal with it!

 

[Spidey-Bat]

No, he's not a hero. The term "hero" is thrown around far too much and used when not appropriate as in this case.

Also, it's you're, not your.

 

[Bob ROARman!]

On what grounds? There is a very fine line between being a 'whistleblower' and committing the equivalent of treason.

Think of the kind of ******ed, scary logic that you, and others, are proposing here by talking like that:

Forget about the crimes he's revealed of the super elite and governments, including our own, we can't know about it. Those crimes are literally too big to know about. That as much as we ***** and cry and whine and complain about corruption in government, about when will we have honest leaders, about hoping, one day, to see the people behind bars that sit on the highest seats of power that deserve it, the person who reveals who and what those people are and have done, of which none of us would have no idea other than just pure speculation, that's the guy that has to pay the price.

That's the guy that has to be vilified, that has to be locked up. Because we weren't supposed to know of those crimes. Even though that's what we always say we want to know about. Crazy. Hypocritical.

"But he committed he a crime, he committed a crime!!"

Yeah he committed a crime in so much as under a policy that says it's a crime to reveal the crimes of higher ups basically without warning them about it first. Yeah he committed a "crime".

So whether you realize it or not, what you're saying is as much as we like to cry otherwise we really don't want to know about this stuff. Because if we did, it would shatter our image of the government, it would shatter our image of the military, it would show our entire system to be the kind joke it really is and in turn, would reflect horribly on us, the people, that like to patriotically defend it as the end all, be all, greatest country on the world ******** story they've been feeding us since we've been born. We can't have that.

 

[Bunker]

On what grounds? There is a very fine line between being a 'whistleblower' and committing the equivalent of treason.

You probably think releasing the Pentagon Papers makes Daniel Ellsberg a traitor, too.

Think of the kind of ******ed, scary logic that you, and others, are proposing here by talking like that:

You might want to edit that out. You don't Marx to issue you a warning in bold lettering, do you?

 

[Marx]

I will go a little farther than 'issuing an on-thread warning in bold lettering' if the tone of this entire conversation doesn't take a few steps back. The personal digs and generalizations are not needed.

 

[Paroxysm]

No, he's not a hero. The term "hero" is thrown around far too much and used when not appropriate as in this case.

Also, it's you're, not your.

He exposed the US military for it's crimes against the people of Iraq. Despite what you might think, those people were MURDERED.

So I don't give a rats ass what you think about him. He's a hero to me.

and thanks Tips!

 

[Buckeye HerkFE]

He exposed the US military for it's crimes against the people of Iraq. Despite what you might think, those people were MURDERED.

So I don't give a rats ass what you think about him. He's a hero to me.

and thanks Tips!

Sorry man but you are worshiping a man that swore under oath he would not disgrace the military, while also obeying ALL orders from those appointed over him. Well when this CPL was read in for his Secret and/or Top Secret Clearance, we was ordered not to release classified and sensitive information to those who do not need to know. The American public has ZERO need to know of military actions, specifically classified ones.

As a USAF C130 flyer myself (Flight Engineer), I know a lot of Sensor Operators and have friends that fly AC-130 and see action that they don't always agree with. The biggest difference that separates them from this tool bag that leaked sensitive information? - They keep their mouths shut as ordered.

Since when did America become so tolerant and supportive of persons that defy military obligations?

 

[Franklin Richards]

"Why did you eat those babies?"


"I was only following orders, sir."

 

[Buckeye HerkFE]

"Why did you eat those babies?"


"I was only following orders, sir."

Im glad you find the hardest part of our jobs as military members funny. Taking a life is not easy. Also, Im sure sitting at home on a computer makes things seem so crystal clear in your head of "well, I would have just done this." Its not that easy, you will NEVER know the feeling of being in one of these moments.

 

[Franklin Richards]

I like how you presume I know nothing.


Well I do know that the term, "I was only following orders." has been used to justify many tragedies in the history of history.

 

[Bat-Mite]

Since when did America become so tolerant and supportive of persons that defy military obligations?

Some of those who committed the rapes, torture, and murders at Abu Ghraib were merely following the orders of their superiors. Most people would probably say that they SHOULD have defied their "military obligations." In a situation like that, saying that you were following orders is merely an excuse to try to avoid being held personally accountable. There are certain situations in which following orders does a greater disservice to the country than disobeying them.

 

[Paroxysm]

Sorry man but you are worshiping a man that swore under oath he would not disgrace the military, while also obeying ALL orders from those appointed over him. Well when this CPL was read in for his Secret and/or Top Secret Clearance, we was ordered not to release classified and sensitive information to those who do not need to know. The American public has ZERO need to know of military actions, specifically classified ones.

As a USAF C130 flyer myself (Flight Engineer), I know a lot of Sensor Operators and have friends that fly AC-130 and see action that they don't always agree with. The biggest difference that separates them from this tool bag that leaked sensitive information? - They keep their mouths shut as ordered.

Since when did America become so tolerant and supportive of persons that defy military obligations?

The American public also has a right to know when innocent civilians are being murdered.

It's funny how in America, Manning is considered a criminal but everywhere else they regard the guy a hero.

Is it because he exposed the US military?

I think so.

 

[Bob ROARman!]

Some of those who committed the rapes, torture, and murders at Abu Ghraib were merely following the orders of their superiors. Most people would probably say that they SHOULD have defied their "military obligations." In a situation like that, saying that you were following orders is merely an excuse to try to avoid being held personally accountable. There are certain situations in which following orders does a greater disservice to the country than disobeying them.

Right. Where's the line? Anything can be deemed "classified". From the biggest to the smallest offenses. When it involves people being murdered senselessly, when it involves things like standing pat on possible terrorist attacks, when it involves those kinds of things which in effect keeping it classified means not holding the people responsible for these crimes accountable, that's wrong. How people can defend that is beyond me, whether you were in the armed forces or not. It's ridiculous. Everyone wants change, everyone wants things to be better, as long as you keep it in place that it is a crime to reveal the crimes of higher ups, there won't be any.

I will go a little farther than 'issuing an on-thread warning in bold lettering' if the tone of this entire conversation doesn't take a few steps back. The personal digs and generalizations are not needed.

So besides that, no response?

 

[Buckeye HerkFE]

The American public also has a right to know when innocent civilians are being murdered.

If you want answers to everything that goes on in other countries and you want hardcore information, join the military. That simple. Neither the DoD nor the gov't owes the American people a nightly debrief of mistakes made or accounts of what operations have went down.

What do you expect the military to do, hold a press conference every time we make a mistake and tell the entire world:

"Okay people, listen up. We have information here that concentrates on our war fighting efforts we want to let everyone know about. We are also gonna show you some videos from a top secret military aircraft and the ways we control it in combat. Please don't tell our enemies."

The expectations of the American public and their daily confusing of "want to know" over "need to know" is quite outrageous.

 

[Buckeye HerkFE]

Right. Where's the line? Anything can be deemed "classified".

Yes, anything can be deemed classified, but it must go before a data classification screening, assigning it a certain level of classification based on the sensitivity to the National Security. Sorry but Billy Bob in Oklahoma doesn't have the need to know everything.

When it involves people being murdered senselessly, when it involves things like standing pat on possible terrorist attacks, when it involves those kinds of things which in effect keeping it classified means not holding the people responsible for these crimes accountable, that's wrong.

Public opinion, such as yours is one of the sole reasons as to why stuff is held in its rightful place - amongst gov't employees in the need to know. You deeming a kill as a "senseless murder" have NO backing to say this. Do you know any of the intel that was gathered prior to engagement? Do you know how they got the intel or where they got the intel? If not then you are giving a one sided argument, a senseless argument. Also, do you know what the end result was to the military members careers? Do you know that they were not held accountable?

How people can defend that is beyond me, whether you were in the armed forces or not. It's ridiculous. Everyone wants change, everyone wants things to be better, as long as you keep it in place that it is a crime to reveal the crimes of higher ups, there won't be any.

Thank you for wanting change but we keep rules in place for a reason. You knowing or not knowing about our gov't officials is not necessary. Next thing you will be wanting is personal involvement with each and every Armed Forces members career when they have a wrong doing.


Bottom line: Every American that wants to know whats going on and wants to fix it - serve, join. Less than 1% of us are doing it.

 

[Bunker]

I will go a little farther than 'issuing an on-thread warning in bold lettering' if the tone of this entire conversation doesn't take a few steps back. The personal digs and generalizations are not needed.

You didn't address my reply to your post...

 

[Bob ROARman!]

The expectations of the American public and their daily confusing of "want to know" over "need to know" is quite outrageous.

When both wars going on right now are based on, and this is being generous, pretty ****ing shaky logic and reasoning, we need to know. When it's us volunteering to risk our lives in a war which will potentially destroy familes (both our own and abroad), we need to know why. If we're being lied to, if those reasons told to us are just pure fodder and nothing more, we need to know that. I don't see the disconnect here.

It's almost like you know that most of it is really just BS, but....because they say it's a crime to reveal any of that, because it risks their reputation (and in turn, reveals them as being in the psychotically, criminally wrong), you have to go along with it. We can't be wrong, even if we really are wrong. We can't have that out in the open and bear the consequences of it, even though that's what we like to do to everyone else.

Do you understand the ramifications of what you're saying? It's like the sports argument for defending an annoying player on the team you root for:

"Well, they may be criminals, but they're OUR criminals and we have to protect them for our sake."

Why? WHY? They don't care about you. You are a stat. A number.

 

[Fading]

I know it's not in line with the discussion, but just want to say I think it's pretty messed up to say the want to know what goes on by the American public is outrageous. Before I go any further, I just want to say, like everyone else here, that I respect the hell outta the men and women who lay down their lives to protect us in all branches of the military.

However, Goverment officials, military, all of them are Americans. Governement officials started out as average joes who the public elected to office, and military are also our brothers and sisters who joined up to protect our country. Neither is a super human whose life is above anyone elses (not saying anyone said that before anyone jumps on that). They are humans who grew up just alongside the rest of us. They do however hold our lives in their hands, literally. We elect politicians to do what's in our best interest, they hold the power to send our country to war, to use our tax money for schools, food, trade, ect. I think we have EVERY right to know what they do with the power we gave them by electing them.

The notion that just because they are the government, that they're somehow above us all, the law, and everything our country is supposed to stand for is absurd. They, like anyone else, should be held accountable, and shouldn't be able to commit crime after crime and keep it secret like it's normal. Some things are understandable, like not leaking new weapon tech to enemies, or giving away our troops positions. Turning a blind eye to our leaders actions however is the opposite of what any nation should do. There shouldn't be any blank checks written that says the Government should be able to do anything they want with human lives and never be questioned for it. In fact, that's pretty much the point of a democracy. That if we don't like what they're doing, we the ppl can vote them out and put someone else in power who lines up more with America's ideals.

 

[Bob ROARman!]

Apologists can downplay this all they want, but using lies and false pretexts for reasoning of war is criminal. I don't understand what's so hard to get about that. There's no sane reason to defend the suppression of that information. None. "Because it makes us look bad" is not a sane reason. People are ****ing dying every day, tell their families that. Nope, can't do that either, because then that soldier's death would be in vain, he wouldn't be a "hero". And that brings up another point.

The military does not serve us. They haven't for a long time. They serve the interests of corporations and banks and war is one of their best businesses. I know there are people that have served on this board and please understand I'm not doubting any of the reasons of why you volunteered, I don't doubt your conviction at all of what you believed to be the right thing to do. If it helped you, helped you get in college, if you made good out of it or whatever, great, more power to you, none of that changes the fact that the military overall is just a tool for business. Not for freedom, not for justice, but the bottom line, profit.