wikileaks inside story on Iraq

[dandelion]

Wikileaks 'Iraq according to the US military' has made it to UK TV. The documents apparently document way more deaths and incidents than the US has yet admitted to. Yet the documentary I see now says they have actually checked up on some of the documented incidents, which are bad enough as written, and found the soldiers accounts are diametrically different to that of the local survivors when asked their version of events. One of the survivors is filmed being interviewed', 'they brought us freedom? they brought us slaughter and killing.'

Just wondered what reaction is to this in the US? Apart that is, from renewed calls to shut down wikileaks.

 

[W/In 1 Stand Dev]

In war, truth is the first casualty. Aeschylus Greek tragic dramatist (525 BC - 456 BC)

 

[StrictlyAvg]

Well anyone can have a look at the documentary. Decide for yourself.

Dispatches - Iraq Reckoning

 

[SilverTrain]

Just wondered what reaction is to this in the US? Apart that is, from renewed calls to shut down wikileaks.

Yeah, there are just so many people calling for the shutdown of wikileaks.

Liz Cheney, for one. Some media pundits. And who else, exactly?

The reaction is: 1) Transparency is good; 2) Blanket dumping onto the www of a gazillion classified documents, which "out" a great many arguably innocent people who will be subsequently targeted--Hmm, this probably could be handled a bit differently.

 

[B_New End]

2) Blanket dumping onto the www of a gazillion classified documents, which "out" a great many arguably innocent people who will be subsequently targeted--Hmm, this probably could be handled a bit differently.

arguably innocent


collaborating with imperialist invaders for wealth and power is not innocent. It makes you a valid target of the resistance.

 

[SilverTrain]

arguably innocent


collaborating with imperialist invaders for wealth and power is not innocent. It makes you a valid target of the resistance.

Gee, perspective means a lot doesn't it? And "facts" are a bit elusive on the ground, so lumping everyone into either the "I'm greedy for wealth and power" or "I'm seeking only the triumph of virtue over sin" camps is a bit simplistic.

"Collaborating" with the guy with the rifle to your daughter's ear is arguably traitorous.

 

[lucky8]

There's nothing wrong with exposing corruption and truth. Those documents, in all likelihood, endanger nobody as specific names and locations have been omitted. Example: SNIPER FIRE ON IPS IVO ___ AFAR: ___ CIV KILLED, ___ CIV INJ, ___ CF INJ/DAMAGE -- Iraq War Logs I'd say they're probably more of an embarrassment to the government than they are a threat

 

[dandelion]

If a few get targeted because their identities were revealed in these papers it is a drop in the ocean compared to the numbers of deaths documented. The US forces clearly had an escalating policy of self preservation. Understandable, but since it was at the expense of innocent civilians they were supposed to be saving, extremely counter productive. It leaves the US condemned by its own paperwork as a clear aggressor. Matters getting worse, too. The amount of damage done by the US is staggering. What is supposed to be the benefit from this?

 

[lucky8]

I think i would say that if a few get targeted because their identities were revealed in these papers it is a drop in the ocean compared to the numbers of deaths documented. The US forces clearly had an escalating policy of self preservation. Understandable, but since it was at the expense of innocent civilians they were supposed to be saving, extremely counter productive. It leaves the US condemned by its own paperwork as a clear aggressor. Matters getting worse, too. The amount of damage done by the US is staggering. What is supposed to be the benefit from this?

Dude, it was about the oil...not the people

 

[StrictlyAvg]

The documentary also documented the AQ tactic of using mentally handicapped bombers to carry out their dirty deeds. It's a nasty war and isn't getting much less nasty now the US has largely departed.

 

[D_Fiona_Farvel]

There's nothing wrong with exposing corruption and truth. Those documents, in all likelihood, endanger nobody as specific names and locations have been omitted. Example: SNIPER FIRE ON IPS IVO ___ AFAR: ___ CIV KILLED, ___ CIV INJ, ___ CF INJ/DAMAGE -- Iraq War Logs I'd say they're probably more of an embarrassment to the government than they are a threat

I agree. But, then again, I'm all for disclosure in our "democracy".

Well anyone can have a look at the documentary. Decide for yourself.

Dispatches - Iraq Reckoning

Thank you for the link.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

Dude, it was about the oil...not the people

You may be right, lucky, but I'm not so sure.
The Merkuns ... Rumsfeld, Cheney, Dubya of course, and all the rest ... are avaricious but also true believers who have drank their own kool-aid.
I think they really believed in the democracy project as something that would win more safety for the United States and the West generally.
And they really thought that true democracy would be good for the people ... not that we've ever seen true democracy anywhere, and most certainly not in Iraq.
So, sure it was about the oil ... but the people of Iraq were in the war room calculations, somewhere.
(Imo, of course.)

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

collaborating with imperialist invaders for wealth and power is not innocent. It makes you a valid target of the resistance.

Were all of them collaborating for wealth and power?
How do you know, New End?

Also, if they are valid targets of the resistance, does Julian Assange, by the same logic, become a valid candidate for take out by, oh, the CIA?

 

[B_New End]

Also, if they are valid targets of the resistance, does Julian Assange, by the same logic, become a valid candidate for take out by, oh, the CIA?

The CIA is not the target of foreign, imperialist aggression.


Assange is fighting for good, and the CIA is fighting for evil.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

Sure.

Unfortunately, Assange is fighting for good, and the CIA is fighting for evil.

Maybe you are attracted to his megalomania.
Many of his supporters have left, and others are wavering.
He is alone with the truth ... kinda like you, right?
You know, the "auguro que vencí" stuff.
Yawn.

 

[B_New End]

Maybe you are attracted to his megalomania.

Your calling of the desire to expose the truth as megalomania belies your inability to comprehend what is truly just, and what is power hunger.

Many of his supporters have left, and others are wavering.

so what. They are under an incredible amount of pressure. Tangling with the CIA and FBI will make many a man want to stop.

He is alone with the truth ... kinda like you, right?

alone? Hell no, there are billions of us on this planet that know what the truth is. I and Assange are certainly two of them.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

Your calling of the desire to expose the truth as megalomania belies your inability to comprehend what is truly just, and what is power hunger.

What makes you think that that was I was calling his megalomania?

so what. They are under an incredible amount of pressure. Tangling with the CIA and FBI will make many a man want to stop.

For many of them, the issue, apart from his increasingly imperious and condescending manner, is the releasing of names of people on the ground in Afghanistan and his unilateral decision to release the Iraqi documents as he did, as though his organization was only the mirror of his own mind.
People who were loyal to him ... people who have regular dealings with him ... are calling his sanity more and more into question.

 

[B_New End]

What makes you think that that was I was calling his megalomania?

because you'll believe what you want to.

For many of them, the issue, apart from his increasingly imperious and condescending manner, is the releasing of names of people on the ground in Afghanistan and his unilateral decision to release the Iraqi documents as he did, as though his organization was only the mirror of his own mind.
People who were loyal to him ... people who have regular dealings with him ... are calling his sanity more and more into question.

right dude. Oh, also his molesting of innocent boys too.
whatever. All this is no indication of megalomania. You obviously don't know human behavior. Under intense stress, there will be cracks. If you were an operative in the CIA or FBI you would look to exacerbate these cracks by bringing rumors and even facts to light that could help break apart any of these kinds of movements. Furthermore, you get dirt on the people and blackmail them into playing ball. Everybody has skeleteon, and they will be used against you if you want to play in the big leagues like this.

The fact that the documents were still released means that there are still plenty of people willing to work with Assange.

Furthermore, I don't see what Assange's leadership style has to do with the fact that American imperialism is being shown for what it is, a giant lie. As if the invasion of Iraq wasn't enough.

Your sad attempt at character assassination has trailed the conversation into an irrelevant direction, so for that you can be proud of yourself. It still doesn't mean that America in Iraq is anything but the product of an evil, stupid, gluttonous nation full of evil, gluttonous, stupid people that have way too much power. their joy in seeing muslims killed, their calls for "turning the middle east into glass" and their rabid islamophobia makes me pray dark prayers every night for the justice they all deserve.

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

What makes you think that that was what I was calling his megalomania?

because you'll believe what you want to.

Total disconnect between my question and your answer. But never mind ...

right dude. Oh, also his molesting of innocent boys too.

Why in the world would you say something like that? There are rape allegations, but they have been brought forth by women ... with what validity, I, like you, have no clue.

All this is no indication of megalomania. You obviously don't know human behavior. Under intense stress, there will be cracks. If you were an operative in the CIA or FBI you would look to exacerbate these cracks by bringing rumors and even facts to light that could help break apart any of these kinds of movements. Furthermore, you get dirt on the people and blackmail them into playing ball. Everybody has skeleteon, and they will be used against you if you want to play in the big leagues like this.

All this could be the case, but it's not part of why people are speaking of his megalomania.

Furthermore, I don't see what Assange's leadership style has to do with the fact that American imperialism is being shown for what it is, a giant lie. As if the invasion of Iraq wasn't enough.

Your sad attempt at character assassination has trailed the conversation into an irrelevant direction, so for that you can be proud of yourself. It still doesn't mean that America in Iraq is anything but the product of an evil, stupid, gluttonous nation full of evil, gluttonous, stupid people that have way too much power. their joy in seeing muslims killed, their calls for "turning the middle east into glass" and their rabid islamophobia makes me pray dark prayers every night for the justice they all deserve.

I don't even disagree with much of the above. But it has nothing to do with my remarks.
Even Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders were critical of Assange's release of the names of Afghans working for the Americans.
Assange drips venom on his own people, if they start to doubt his judgment.
He calls them "not consequential people" and wonders if he is dealing with "a confederacy of dunces."
This is not the tone and manner of a real leader.
He said in an email exchange with a critical employee: “I am the heart and soul of this organisation, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organiser, financier and all the rest. If you have a problem with me, p— off.”
That starts to sound like megalomania to me.

Good causes attract bad advocates, and increasingly Assange seems like a case in point.

 

[B_New End]

Even Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders were critical of Assange's release of the names of Afghans working for the Americans.
Assange drips venom on his own people, if they start to doubt his judgment.
He calls them "not consequential people" and wonders if he is dealing with "a confederacy of dunces."
This is not the tone and manner of a real leader.
He said in an email exchange with a critical employee: “I am the heart and soul of this organisation, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organiser, financier and all the rest. If you have a problem with me, p— off.”
That starts to sound like megalomania to me.

Good causes attract bad advocates, and increasingly Assange seems like a case in point.

Who cares?