I saw that there isn't a thread about it. Anyway, I think that Israel won most than anyone else because that it shows that Isael isn't the one pressurising the US into attacking Iran.
I get what you are saying, and I do not like that some soldiers have been put in danger. However, a lot of this exposure really shows how immature our foreign officials really are. I read up a bit last night. What I can tell is a lot of them contain just a bunch of crap-talking about other officials. It's like a high school note that got in the wrong hands.
You have proven that you have no idea how war works.
And you've proven that you didn't read the title, in my post I was addressing the OP and referring only to the recently released diplomatic cables. In dealing with the released military papers I see your point, however, the problem was created by the US government. If they allowed more transparency then events like this wouldn't be necessary and they could continue to protect their most guarded secrets; right now we're forced to operate under an all or none policy and only the government can change that.
Even if you change names and places around, the people mentioned will still be placed in danger. Understand that both sides have many experts who are trained to break codes and ravel together altered information.
Diplomats who insulated foreign leaders or soldiers? Honestly if you were stupid enough to insult a foreign leader and they get unhappy about it it's your own fault. As was pointed out it's like high school gossip, if you saw something behinds someones back and they beat you up for it now one blames them. Soldiers are, again, a different story.
2. A huge amount of money goes towards research on ways to protect our soldiers. To suggest that the government does not pay extra to protect them is nothing but an outright fabrication, an assumption triggered by emotion rather than logic.
Correct, never said any differently and wasn't what I was even discussing. Let me reiterate, they wouldn't spring the money to protect anyone that they don't already have a need to protect. To say the US government only provide it's soldiers with this gear for their individual protection is based on emotion; it's to create a better military as a whole.
I'm sick of hearing people talk about the Americans as if they were Mr.Crabs. If the government isn't greedy, then it's the businessmen.
The government isn't greedy it simply hates spending money on anything, corporations inherently are greedy but that's for another debate.
it has just become this crutch for horrible arguments and false accusations.
Telling me my argument is bad isn't the greatest argument.
Yeah, except for the fact we are in the middle of a war.
Bomb them. Kill them. Harhar, that's what we should do.
As I have no access to these documents do to Wikileaks' current DDoS situation, I cannot tell you whether or not these will have any bearing or not.
Either way, the website needs to go down. It's giving the public access to documents they have no business and should not see. Simple fact of life: We cannot know everything that's being done to protect our or our government's interests. If we lived in a perfect world, this would be possible. Please people, get your heads out of the sand. This is a flat out bad idea. Not just for America, but for all countries with intel officers and an internet connection.
Not just for America, but for all countries with intel officers and an internet connection.
Right, right. Which was the worst part again, the fact that the government is now accountable for its actions or that the government of the people is now forced to be open with those people?
Although I agree, this isn't likely to happen for two reasons:
1) Free Speech/Constitutional Rights: The US Government can't block or remove a website it simply finds offense at, even if there are legitimate reasons. IT would be hindering my ability to see it, and therefore my free speech.
2) And I'm pretty sure the owner of the website isnt even American, so...
I think that Wikileaks is bad. The government has to have secrets. There has to be some limits on freedom of speech. For instance, you're not allowed to yell "FIRE" in a movie theater. The leaks contain military secrets that could endanger the lives of soldiers, veterans, and officials. It could ruin relationships with other countries. They have to be able to communicate without everything being revealed. I heard that a ex-soldier in prison for leaking was suspected.
Free Speech/Constitutional Rights: The US Government can't block or remove a website it simply finds offense at, even if there are legitimate reasons. IT would be hindering my ability to see it, and therefore my free speech.
You do realize freedom of speech stops at things that hinder national security?
Which was the worst part again, the fact that the government is now accountable for its actions or that the government of the people is now forced to be open with those people?
The part where people and entities can be put in danger of their lives or security. The government must be held accountable, but only after the fact, when the dust settles. The dust has not settled, these things need to be kept secret.
I think the US should not have the power to close down a website when the owner is not an american and when his computer is not in america, if the website does not harm national security. Well, I think that the US should not have the power to close down Wikileaks yet.
It published the truth witch I think is a universal virtue any person/society and group should posses when they have power and their actions influence people around then in important ways. This I believe trumps any law.
and when his computer is not in america
That doesn't matter once you buy a computer you could technically do what you want with it.
The part where people and entities can be put in danger of their lives or security. The government must be held accountable, but only after the fact, when the dust settles. The dust has not settled, these things need to be kept secret.
Are they not put in danger when such diplomacy occurs behind hidden walls under the assumption that no one will know. Is that what their being paid for, insulting other nations? Wikileaks just publishes the truth, it has not hidden agenda. It come to what you think is more important the truth and transparency in your government or putting a few people in danger.
The government has to have secrets.
I agree somethings cannot go public but I wouldn't stretch it as to far keep things like this secret. It prove your diplomacy sucks and you need to do something before it get out of control. It's more of a wake up call.
Lastly Wikileaks publishes information that is immoral or things that other countries and the public should know.
Well I think that the wiki-leaks leader needs to just disappear, he is causing a huge amount of damage to the US government and to the united states causes abroad.
Nooooo. Wikileaks is a huge positive, no matter how much disturbance it is causing. Rather, actually, it is a positive because of the disturbance and fear it is striking within the governments. I fully support its actions.
Wikileaks is a huge positive, no matter how much disturbance it is causing. Rather, actually, it is a positive because of the disturbance and fear it is striking within the governments. I fully support its actions.
Wiki-leaks has caused many problems in the diplomatic community, other countries now know some of the stuff the US has been saying behind their back, why hasn't Wiki-leaks released anything from N. Korea, Iran or China? I think the answer would be traitors and those who reveal secrets are just shot where they are standing.
Although it's interesting to here world leaders being insulted by American diplomats and Wikileaks makes for good news fodder, I say that freely releasing information such as this has the potential to endanger lives. I have a firm belief in the power of speech.
However I don't support idiocy. The United States government sure as hell needs to make a better effort at keeping what should be kept under wraps secure.
