Wikileaks: Next release is 7x the size of the Iraq War Logs

[Joyrex]

What Wikileaks thinks is "free speech", etc. is just clumsy, arrogant and ignorant, considering they didn't stop to consider the lives they put at risk by releasing such documents - from the front line troops to the operatives working behind enemy lines. I'm not judging whether the content constituted war crimes or was unjust, but exposing confidential information that endangers people is just irresponsible. What's worse, is the supplier(s) of the intel to Wikileaks share the same misguided ideals and clearly haven't stopped to assess the potential consequences of their actions.

 

It would be one thing to release these documents AFTER the conflict was over, to expose the injustices undoubtedly committed by the players involved, but doing so during the conflict is just wrong, IMO, especially when it endangers lives needlessly.

 

War, such as the United States in Afghanistan, already endangers lives needlessly. But we know that. After the first large batch of documents was released months ago, the Pentagon issued the complaint that the indiscriminate release of such documents could compromise the well-being of certain individuals in the field. Well, Wikileaks publicly announced their willingness to collaborate with the Pentagon in obscuring such identities in order to resolve that claim. The Pentagon never took them up on such an offer. (1)

 

Any way in which I can trip a thug on his way into infiltrating someone's home will be considered. It's hard to have sympathy for the well being of an aggressive force that is wreaking havoc on an entire country. Anything that can be done to unravel the technically illegal - under U.S. law - and shameful behavior of the United States military and it's operations seems better.

 

t is bringing people closer and closer together and although I do not know these people who live across the world, I empathize with them. Indirectly or not, they are my neighbor and I find it immoral to allow their murder to continue at the hands of such a monster that - let's not forget - carries out it's atrocities in the name of the people of the United States of America, something that I simply cannot tolerate.

 

 

1. - http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/08/18/wikileaks018.html

 

So it's all right then if the Taliban or another terrorist group uses the information within to murder soliders and operatives that, despite whether the wars are justified or not, may be preventing the murder of innocent civilians who would otherwise be killed?

 

It's not so simple a case of "good" vs. "evil".

[Dale]

War, such as the United States in Afghanistan, already endangers lives needlessly. But we know that. After the first large batch of documents was released months ago, the Pentagon issued the complaint that the indiscriminate release of such documents could compromise the well-being of certain individuals in the field. Well, Wikileaks publicly announced their willingness to collaborate with the Pentagon in obscuring such identities in order to resolve that claim. The Pentagon never took them up on such an offer.

Exactly

[Joyrex]

War, such as the United States in Afghanistan, already endangers lives needlessly. But we know that. After the first large batch of documents was released months ago, the Pentagon issued the complaint that the indiscriminate release of such documents could compromise the well-being of certain individuals in the field. Well, Wikileaks publicly announced their willingness to collaborate with the Pentagon in obscuring such identities in order to resolve that claim. The Pentagon never took them up on such an offer.

Exactly

 

And why should they cooperate with a rouge organization on their terms? Next thing you'll be telling me we should be sitting down with Osama Bin Laden and hold peace talks...

[Dale]

What Wikileaks thinks is "free speech", etc. is just clumsy, arrogant and ignorant, considering they didn't stop to consider the lives they put at risk by releasing such documents - from the front line troops to the operatives working behind enemy lines. I'm not judging whether the content constituted war crimes or was unjust, but exposing confidential information that endangers people is just irresponsible. What's worse, is the supplier(s) of the intel to Wikileaks share the same misguided ideals and clearly haven't stopped to assess the potential consequences of their actions.

 

It would be one thing to release these documents AFTER the conflict was over, to expose the injustices undoubtedly committed by the players involved, but doing so during the conflict is just wrong, IMO, especially when it endangers lives needlessly.

 

War, such as the United States in Afghanistan, already endangers lives needlessly. But we know that. After the first large batch of documents was released months ago, the Pentagon issued the complaint that the indiscriminate release of such documents could compromise the well-being of certain individuals in the field. Well, Wikileaks publicly announced their willingness to collaborate with the Pentagon in obscuring such identities in order to resolve that claim. The Pentagon never took them up on such an offer. (1)

 

Any way in which I can trip a thug on his way into infiltrating someone's home will be considered. It's hard to have sympathy for the well being of an aggressive force that is wreaking havoc on an entire country. Anything that can be done to unravel the technically illegal - under U.S. law - and shameful behavior of the United States military and it's operations seems better.

 

t is bringing people closer and closer together and although I do not know these people who live across the world, I empathize with them. Indirectly or not, they are my neighbor and I find it immoral to allow their murder to continue at the hands of such a monster that - let's not forget - carries out it's atrocities in the name of the people of the United States of America, something that I simply cannot tolerate.

 

 

1. - http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/08/18/wikileaks018.html

 

So it's all right then if the Taliban or another terrorist group uses the information within to murder soliders and operatives that, despite whether the wars are justified or not, may be preventing the murder of innocent civilians who would otherwise be killed?

 

It's not so simple a case of "good" vs. "evil".

Joyrex - why do you think the West are in Afghanistan and Iraq?

[chenGOD]

What Wikileaks thinks is "free speech", etc. is just clumsy, arrogant and ignorant, considering they didn't stop to consider the lives they put at risk by releasing such documents - from the front line troops to the operatives working behind enemy lines. I'm not judging whether the content constituted war crimes or was unjust, but exposing confidential information that endangers people is just irresponsible. What's worse, is the supplier(s) of the intel to Wikileaks share the same misguided ideals and clearly haven't stopped to assess the potential consequences of their actions.

 

It would be one thing to release these documents AFTER the conflict was over, to expose the injustices undoubtedly committed by the players involved, but doing so during the conflict is just wrong, IMO, especially when it endangers lives needlessly.

 

While I don't think wikileaks releasing information will actually change much, it might make people more aware.

 

Your second point is just one from the talking heads though Joyrex, and has been proven utterly false.

And yes sit down and have peace talks wit Osama bin Laden, though that won't do you any good since he has as little to do with the conflict as you or I.

[Joyrex]

What Wikileaks thinks is "free speech", etc. is just clumsy, arrogant and ignorant, considering they didn't stop to consider the lives they put at risk by releasing such documents - from the front line troops to the operatives working behind enemy lines. I'm not judging whether the content constituted war crimes or was unjust, but exposing confidential information that endangers people is just irresponsible. What's worse, is the supplier(s) of the intel to Wikileaks share the same misguided ideals and clearly haven't stopped to assess the potential consequences of their actions.

 

It would be one thing to release these documents AFTER the conflict was over, to expose the injustices undoubtedly committed by the players involved, but doing so during the conflict is just wrong, IMO, especially when it endangers lives needlessly.

 

War, such as the United States in Afghanistan, already endangers lives needlessly. But we know that. After the first large batch of documents was released months ago, the Pentagon issued the complaint that the indiscriminate release of such documents could compromise the well-being of certain individuals in the field. Well, Wikileaks publicly announced their willingness to collaborate with the Pentagon in obscuring such identities in order to resolve that claim. The Pentagon never took them up on such an offer. (1)

 

Any way in which I can trip a thug on his way into infiltrating someone's home will be considered. It's hard to have sympathy for the well being of an aggressive force that is wreaking havoc on an entire country. Anything that can be done to unravel the technically illegal - under U.S. law - and shameful behavior of the United States military and it's operations seems better.

 

t is bringing people closer and closer together and although I do not know these people who live across the world, I empathize with them. Indirectly or not, they are my neighbor and I find it immoral to allow their murder to continue at the hands of such a monster that - let's not forget - carries out it's atrocities in the name of the people of the United States of America, something that I simply cannot tolerate.

 

 

1. - http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/08/18/wikileaks018.html

 

So it's all right then if the Taliban or another terrorist group uses the information within to murder soliders and operatives that, despite whether the wars are justified or not, may be preventing the murder of innocent civilians who would otherwise be killed?

 

It's not so simple a case of "good" vs. "evil".

Joyrex - why do you think the West are in Afghanistan and Iraq?

 

Oh, that's easy - the US clearly went into Iraq for oil and establish a base so an inevitable confrontation with Iran would give them a clear staging area since Turkey proved they are unreliable as an ally in that sense. Afghanistan was invaded under the auspices of getting the terrorists behind the 9/11 attacks, but again, was an opportunity for oil (pre 9/11, the Taliban was cock-blocking us left and right in our attempts to get pipelines ran through Afghanistan) and to establish a foothold in the region (possibly for future conflicts with Russia, and more importantly, China).

 

That doesn't mean soliders and other people required to fight in the conflict should be endangered anymore than they already are.

 

What Wikileaks thinks is "free speech", etc. is just clumsy, arrogant and ignorant, considering they didn't stop to consider the lives they put at risk by releasing such documents - from the front line troops to the operatives working behind enemy lines. I'm not judging whether the content constituted war crimes or was unjust, but exposing confidential information that endangers people is just irresponsible. What's worse, is the supplier(s) of the intel to Wikileaks share the same misguided ideals and clearly haven't stopped to assess the potential consequences of their actions.

 

It would be one thing to release these documents AFTER the conflict was over, to expose the injustices undoubtedly committed by the players involved, but doing so during the conflict is just wrong, IMO, especially when it endangers lives needlessly.

 

While I don't think wikileaks releasing information will actually change much, it might make people more aware.

 

Your second point is just one from the talking heads though Joyrex, and has been proven utterly false.

 

How's it been proven false? Just because it hasn't been announced that this soldier or operative was killed due to being outed in those documents? Obviously the government isn't going to announce such a thing, that being an admission of the validity of the information above all else.

[GORDO]

the best way to "undendangering" them would be to get them out of there no?

[Joyrex]

the best way to "undendangering" them would be to get them out of there no?

 

Yes, of course - but it's not in the US' long-term interests to do so, and while they would never openly admit it, they'll willingly sacrifice troops to maintain the holds they have in Iraq and Afghanistan, all under the auspices of "spreading democracy". Ha!

[YEK]

can't we all just eat mcdonalds ?

[awepittance]

i don't think i have ever seen this much apathy in a single thread on watmm before

 

Joyrex, the claim that Wikileaks 'endangering' people or innocent of afghanis has been completely and utterly debunked. The pentagon tried to claim this about 7 months ago but then had to retract their statement.

 

It's also quite interesting to me that all the people in this thread who are downplaying Wikileaks act as if they have read all 70,000 or however many documents have been leaked .

 

You guys are basically only reading the media's interpretations of events, and if you can trust those since the NY times loves to tell us how little of a big deal these leaks are, then we have a problem. Critical thinking seems to be lacking in this mindset

 

All of these strange oppositions to Wikileaks (besides criticizing Assange's looks) could be equally applied to Daniel Ellseberg, perhaps one of the most important figures that help end the Vietnam war.

 

edit: joyrex you said

So it's all right then if the Taliban or another terrorist group uses the information within to murder soliders and operatives that, despite whether the wars are justified or not, may be preventing the murder of innocent civilians who would otherwise be killed?

 

(sourcing documents now for my reply)

[Guest morphis2525]

this thread is way too serious for me.

 

sigh...

[Guest Rambo]

glad you made that post, awepittance. I thought it might have just been me going completely insane.

[Guest theSun]

the sheer quantity of docs/info leaked makes it impossible to analyze and judge its effects immediately.

 

i haven't read more than 3 pages so i can't really testify wtf will be learned from these, what questions will be raised etc.

 

i'm still confused about building 7 9/11 but there's so much BS i don't have the drive to wade through it. it would be nice if wikileaks had something on that shit.

[awepittance]

the general prevailing attitude in this thread reminded me coincidentally of this Wikileaked document by the CIA about how they can help Europe as a whole be more on board with the Afgahnistan war

 

 

this is the actual TITLE of the document that the us government wrote, in a weird way i hope the title of this article is correct!

[Joyrex]

Joyrex, the claim that Wikileaks 'endangering' people or innocent of afghanis has been completely and utterly debunked.

 

You guys are basically only reading the media's interpretations of events... Critical thinking seems to be lacking in this mindset

 

Debunked where? By whom? Did the media state this to be the case? If so, then I direct you to your second statement (edited and bolded by me)

[Guest theSun]

the american people just need another celebrity to get divorced or hit by a bus or come out

[awepittance]

Joyrex, the claim that Wikileaks 'endangering' people or innocent of afghanis has been completely and utterly debunked.

 

You guys are basically only reading the media's interpretations of events... Critical thinking seems to be lacking in this mindset

 

Debunked where? By whom? Did the media state this to be the case? If so, then I direct you to your second statement (edited and bolded by me)

The Pentagon released a statement essentially retracting what they had said before, surprisingly (or should i say unsurprisingly) this statement had little coverage in the media and was mostly back paged, which is why im having a hell of a time actually finding it. (im getting close!)

 

this 2nd statement i made was meant to illustrate that ALL of us are relying on 2nd hand media outlet interpretations of the events, so its very surprising to me that an individual who has not done their own direct first hand research could so easily dismiss the importance of the information. Last time there was a leak if i remember correctly, it nearly doubled the known civilian death toll in Iraq. I find that to be a pretty big deal personally, but who i am to argue that it's important?

[awepittance]

RE: Joyrex from earlier in the thread

 

'We have yet to see any harm come to anyone in Afghanistan that we can directly tie to exposure in the WikiLeaks documents,' [Pentagon spokesman Geoff] Morrell said."

17 days after the SECOND major wikileak event, the Iraq files

 

and here is an associated press story from statements by defense secretary Robert Gates and a senior NATO official

 

The online leak of thousands of secret military documents from the war in Afghanistan by the website WikiLeaks did not disclose any sensitive intelligence sources or methods, the Department of Defense concluded. . . .

 

The assessment, revealed in a letter from Secretary of Defense Robert Gates to the Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Michigan), comes after a thorough Pentagon review of the more than 70,000 documents posted to the controversial whistle-blower site in July. . . .

 

The defense secretary said that the published documents do contain names of some cooperating Afghans, who could face reprisal by Taliban.

 

But a senior NATO official in Kabul told CNN that there has not been a single case of Afghans needing protection or to be moved because of the leak.

 

the part at the bottom is the most revealing, if the government believed these people were in such danger why do nothing about it? There seems to be a strong disconnect between whatt the Pentagon says about these risks VS what they actually do, which leads me to believe that it's nothing more than a way to smear Wikileaks and discredit them (and it's clear how effective this smear has been)

[chenGOD]

Awepittance - I'm not dismissing the information out of hand, I only question the impact of it precisely because of the apathy. Basically it seems to me that people will actually need video of George Bush rimming Osama before any possible critical tipping point occurs.

[Joyrex]

Joyrex, the claim that Wikileaks 'endangering' people or innocent of afghanis has been completely and utterly debunked.

 

You guys are basically only reading the media's interpretations of events... Critical thinking seems to be lacking in this mindset

 

Debunked where? By whom? Did the media state this to be the case? If so, then I direct you to your second statement (edited and bolded by me)

The Pentagon released a statement essentially retracting what they had said before, surprisingly (or should i say unsurprisingly) this statement had little coverage in the media and was mostly back paged, which is why im having a hell of a time actually finding it. (im getting close!)

 

this 2nd statement i made was meant to illustrate that ALL of us are relying on 2nd hand media outlet interpretations of the events, so its very surprising to me that an individual who has not done their own direct first hand research could so easily dismiss the importance of the information. Last time there was a leak if i remember correctly, it nearly doubled the known civilian death toll in Iraq. I find that to be a pretty big deal personally, but who i am to argue that it's important?

 

No, you're right - the media is really our only source of readily-available information. Even what's online is subject to the same scrutiny, perhaps even moreso since the parties' true motivations for making said info available are just as circumspect as wikileaks and the media. I'm not dismissing the importance of the information, either - it IS important. I just feel releasing it in such a careless and haphazard way is damaging more to those the documents mention, versus the government. The US should be held accountable for any violations of the Geneva Convention in either conflict.

[chenGOD]

Joyrex, the claim that Wikileaks 'endangering' people or innocent of afghanis has been completely and utterly debunked.

 

You guys are basically only reading the media's interpretations of events... Critical thinking seems to be lacking in this mindset

 

Debunked where? By whom? Did the media state this to be the case? If so, then I direct you to your second statement (edited and bolded by me)

The Pentagon released a statement essentially retracting what they had said before, surprisingly (or should i say unsurprisingly) this statement had little coverage in the media and was mostly back paged, which is why im having a hell of a time actually finding it. (im getting close!)

 

this 2nd statement i made was meant to illustrate that ALL of us are relying on 2nd hand media outlet interpretations of the events, so its very surprising to me that an individual who has not done their own direct first hand research could so easily dismiss the importance of the information. Last time there was a leak if i remember correctly, it nearly doubled the known civilian death toll in Iraq. I find that to be a pretty big deal personally, but who i am to argue that it's important?

 

No, you're right - the media is really our only source of readily-available information. Even what's online is subject to the same scrutiny, perhaps even moreso since the parties' true motivations for making said info available are just as circumspect as wikileaks and the media. I'm not dismissing the importance of the information, either - it IS important. I just feel releasing it in such a careless and haphazard way is damaging more to those the documents mention, versus the government. The US should be held accountable for any violations of the Geneva Convention in either conflict.

 

But that is precisely what Robbie has actually illustrated; that opinion has demonstrably been proven false.

[awepittance]

Awepittance - I'm not dismissing the information out of hand, I only question the impact of it precisely because of the apathy. Basically it seems to me that people will actually need video of George Bush rimming Osama before any possible critical tipping point occurs.

 

this is understandable cynicism, i have a little bit more hope for american's 'waking up' . I think people do have a breaking point, however as long as our wars are fought without the need for a mandatory draft, you're probably right.

 

edit: it's been an old trick out the Pentagon's classic playbook to paint something that they perceive as threatening to their war efforts as 'endangering our troops' When the anti war movement against Iraq was a it's highest point, it was practically a conservative and Bush/Cheney mantra that you're putting our troops lives in danger by protesting , they tried to spin it and in some circles they effectively did convince people that protesting 'gives comfort to the enemy' .

[goDel]

why blame wikileaks when the government should be hold responsible for releasing their documents in a less careless but open way (within a reasonable amount of time). it's the secrecy that should be made illegal.

[Guest Ranky Redlof]

Joyrex, the claim that Wikileaks 'endangering' people or innocent of afghanis has been completely and utterly debunked.

 

You guys are basically only reading the media's interpretations of events... Critical thinking seems to be lacking in this mindset

 

Debunked where? By whom? Did the media state this to be the case? If so, then I direct you to your second statement (edited and bolded by me)

ex high ranking militaries confirmed the pentagon and Clinton just say that because it's the only thing they can say regarding this leak. They will never admit their mistakes.

just government standard policy of bullshit and fear spreading

[awepittance]

quick story: i got into a fist fight in high school that lasted approximately 5 seconds, it was immediately shut down by a plain clothes school employee. I got the guy in a headlock and he swung his fist over and punched me in the back. When we got taken to the principals office, the person i was fighting revealed in very sad moment that he was too afraid to go home after being suspended because his dad was going to beat the shit out of him, he broke down into tears in front of me and the principle. This kid that i hated with a vile feeling at the pit of my stomach started to become very sympathetic. That night i thought it over and decided that it wasn't worth pushing things any farther, after all if this kid had an abusive father he already has enough problems outside of school. The next day at school a kid runs up to me and says 'dude, i heard you started crying in front of the principle' , the person i fought with had effectively preempted what really happened by a disinformation story. After the day was over i realized what he did was actually very clever, if i countered with 'well no he was actually the one who was crying' it would seem unbelievable to most people. I swallowed my pride, realized that his propaganda worked and went on with my life.

 

So i guess the reason i just wrote this little anecdote is because all the US government has to do is go to their minions (the establishment washington press which includes the NY times, Wall st journal, Washington Post, Fox News, CNN, MSNBC) and tell them something from an 'official' source with no facts or evidence to back it up. They plant the seeds that these leaks are dangerous, and who in the press would have the balls to counter that? apparently no one, even though the Pentagon's claims of endangering troops have never been backed up by evidence of any kind. It's emotionally provocative to make a statement claiming that Julian Assange has blood on his hands, it's designed to effect you at the emotional core first, bypassing reason.