wikileaks inside story on Iraq

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

Who cares?

Brilliant answer.
Brava, New End.

 

[HUNGHUGE11X7]

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

I am conflicted on this issue. One one side I think WIKILEAKS is brilliant,The DEEPTHROAT of Iraq-gate.. just wished the information had been brought to light sooner than now .
On the other side, I fear that the enemy will read this & see what a colossal FUCK UP the W administration was, but won't care that it was BUSH & CO. and will retaliate against our troops serving over there .
One thing that bugs me above all is knowing we have murdered Hundreds of Thousands of INNOCENT citizens of the Middle East in the name of Democracy.

~HH~

 

[Drifterwood]

One thing that bugs me above all is knowing we have murdered Hundreds of Thousands of INNOCENT citizens of the Middle East in the name of Democracy.

~HH~

Me too. I am reminded of the Corsican saying that spilled blood never dries. Furthermore I feel that this action has left a deep stain on us and has wholly undermined our integrity. Someone mentioned Aeschylus, the Oresteia would make clear reading.

 

[dandelion]

On the other side, I fear that the enemy will read this & see what a colossal FUCK UP the W administration was, but won't care that it was BUSH & CO. and will retaliate against our troops serving over there .

I think they already knew what a fuck up it was and if you are being shot at it makes little difference if the guy who is shooting at you is a nice respectable lad who under normal circumstances wouldnt hurt a fly and did not vote for Bush. Unless thos nice guys put down their weapons and refuse to carry on with Bush's war, there is little choice but to keep on killing them.

 

[W/In 1 Stand Dev]

not to get all tin foil hat on you guys, but....

I am thinking the real reason the US invaded Iraq was because Iraq was going to set up an oil bourse (an exchange) to be traded in Euros versus the American dollar.

as far as us being in Afghanistan, well the poppy farming and heroin trade might have something to do with that. and just lately, huge deposits of lithium were discovered there.

kellog, brown, and root ( KBR) is some military contractor over there. so is halliburton...which somehow Dick Cheney is related to. they are charging the military large sums for their services over there.

like I said in my first post in this thread, the truth is the first casualty of war. we are never going to know for sure why this happened or that occurred even though many of us deep down inside will have this gut feeling.

 

[Drifterwood]

Why a war was fought is a very different issue to how it was fought. However, in the case of Iraq, the latter has compounded the former.

 

[dandelion]

Why a war was fought is a very different issue to how it was fought. However, in the case of Iraq, the latter has compounded the former.

:biggrin1: made me laugh. very true.

like I said in my first post in this thread, the truth is the first casualty of war. we are never going to know for sure why this happened or that occurred even though many of us deep down inside will have this gut feeling.

cross your wikileaking fingers....?

Gorbachev was being interviewed today for some reason. Gave his opinion the US would have no better luck in afghanistan than he did and advised they get out now.

 

[StrictlyAvg]

Out of date but bears repeating in the circumstances:



A man walks into a Washington coffeeshop, sees George Dubya and Dick Cheney at a table covered in paperwork. "Hey fellas what you up to?" he says to them.
"We're planning the invasion of Iraq." replies Dubya.
"Whoa! Isn't that a risky proposition Mr President?" says the dude.
"Well son, we think the casualties will be 2 million Iraqis and a blonde with really big tits." muses George W.
"But Mr President, why a blonde with big tits?" stammers the guy.
Dick Cheney turns to Dubya and interrupts "See George? I told you nobody would give a fuck about a couple of million Iraqis."

 

[B_New End]

Out of date but bears repeating in the circumstances:



A man walks into a Washington coffeeshop, sees George Dubya and Dick Cheney at a table covered in paperwork. "Hey fellas what you up to?" he says to them.
"We're planning the invasion of Iraq." replies Dubya.
"Whoa! Isn't that a risky proposition Mr President?" says the dude.
"Well son, we think the casualties will be 2 million Iraqis and a blonde with really big tits." muses George W.
"But Mr President, why a blonde with big tits?" stammers the guy.
Dick Cheney turns to Dubya and interrupts "See George? I told you nobody would give a fuck about a couple of million Iraqis."

Hah! I've never heard it. :biggrin1:

 

[cyclistlarge]

As a US citizen who was opposed to the Iraqi invasion from the onset, I feel horrified over some of the things we have done. Overseas secret prisons, numerous violations of the Geneva convention and UN charter, outright torture of sometimes innocent civilians, General disregard for life, use of a sniper technique known as "baiting" (which is outright illegal), use of banned weapons (and depleted uranium rounds), hiring of private security firms and individuals unnamed for our dirty work and a paving of the way for our corporations. The list goes on. In Europe you are fortunate to see a less watered down version of what war is like. In America we see numbers on the screen, not blood in the street. There's a good amount of footage that documents our soldiers executing insurgents as well as firing on civilians, which we never saw. That doesn't even take into account the impact on people's lives who have nothing to do with this conflict. I remember being opposed to the idea of a seemingly spontaneous war with Iraq over alleged WMD's. it seemed like a false premise in the first place. Turns out it was. I was in high school at the time and not old enough to vote but I knew I disagreed. I commend the boldness of wikileaks for not backing down to government pressure. It shows definite conviction. I've found that they censor the documents more than the pentagon and the Associated Press has uncovered documentation of the pentagon's own, that states clearly, the Afghanistan leak endangered no lives even after claiming it would.

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.

Really? You sound like terrorist dude. We aren't all the same. You are becoming what you critique when you say these sorts of things.

kellog, brown, and root ( KBR) is some military contractor over there. so is halliburton...which somehow Dick Cheney is related to. they are charging the military large sums for their services over there.

I can't say I'm anything but skeptical about these corporations roles in the whole thing.

Even Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders were critical of Assange's release of the names of Afghans working for the Americans.

yeah but they were also saying this: http://blog.amnestyusa.org/waronterror/us-must-investigate-detainee-abuse-claims-in-wikileaks-files/
and to be fair, this isn't the same leak. Wikileaks was more thorough in removing information which could harm innocent people this time 'round. More thorough than the pentagon has been in fact. This portion of your argument holds no water.

 

[B_New End]

Really? You sound like terrorist dude. We aren't all the same. You are becoming what you critique when you say these sorts of things.

becoming? What I critique? I am not critiquing "terrorists".
Fact is, Those in America who love war need to be taught what war really is, or they will continue to traipse around the world killing brown people for fun and profit.
The only other way is complete economic collapse.
either fate is fine with me. Whatever cripples the worlds biggest bully.

 

[cyclistlarge]

becoming? What I critique? I am not critiquing "terrorists".
Fact is, Those in America who love war need to be taught what war really is, or they will continue to traipse around the world killing brown people for fun and profit.
The only other way is complete economic collapse.
either fate is fine with me. Whatever cripples the worlds biggest bully.

I'm aware you aren't critiquing terrorists. I said you sounded like one. they are seperate statements. please review my post. Your rhetoric sounded very polarized and just an opposing equal to America's. speaking in absolutes the way you did was reckless. Fact is, war is fueled by a select few at the top who manipulate those beneath them. It's also never for fun. It's almost always about money/resources.

For what it's worth. I'd bet most Iraqi's would consider us terrorists. so you kind of were anyways.

 

[B_New End]

I'm aware you aren't critiquing terrorists. I said you sounded like one. they are seperate statements. please review my post. Your rhetoric sounded very polarized and just an opposing equal to America's. speaking in absolutes the way you did was reckless. Fact is, war is fueled by a select few at the top who manipulate those beneath them. It's also never for fun. It's almost always about money/resources.

For what it's worth. I'd bet most Iraqi's would consider us terrorists. so you kind of were anyways.

I make no qualms or try to hide who I am, or what I believe. I do not reject war. I especially do not reject war when it is done to destroy evil. In fact, I find that those who do, are worthless, and have no understanding of the real world.

the western world has been cowed by Anglo-based "reason", which states you should talk, and talk civilly, that you should protest, but only protest within the bounds of the law. Then they tighten the bounds, and tighten the defintion of civil, until soon, all you are allowed to say civilly, is what they approve, and all your protests are so weakened that they are ignored. All this, while being taught t abhor violence, and resorting to violence makes you "just like them"

It does not. When a slave whips his master, it is not the same as when a master whips his slave.

 

[cyclistlarge]

well quit talking and go start your war then. or are you just paying lipservice? I never stated that violence doesn't have it's place. but if we were to resort to violence i can promise you it would be the people not involved with the policies you oppose who got hurt. that does make you just as bad. good luck picking a fistfight with Donald Rumsfeld. if a slave whips his master is he really a slave? it is the direction of violence which determines the subjector and subjected. not the names we give them.

 

[B_New End]

well quit talking and go start your war then. or are you just paying lipservice?

*YAWN* Every time I read this, I just laugh.

 

[cyclistlarge]

*YAWN* Every time I read this, I just laugh.

Great point!!!!
:You_Rock_Emoticon:

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

Even Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders were critical of Assange's release of the names of Afghans working for the Americans.

yeah but they were also saying this: US Must Investigate Detainee Abuse Claims in Wikileaks Files | Human Rights Now - Amnesty International USA Blog
and to be fair, this isn't the same leak. Wikileaks was more thorough in removing information which could harm innocent people this time 'round. More thorough than the pentagon has been in fact. This portion of your argument holds no water.

I don't suggest that they had only criticisms of him.

The fact, which your link makes clear, that they are largely sympathetic to the general idea of disclosure is all the more reason to note their criticisms of his sloppy disclosures regarding Afghanistan. That's why I say "Even Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders were critical ..."

As you note, he did not repeat that same somewhat murderous tactic with the Iraqi disclosures. I was very clear in noting that I was referring only to the Afghanistan disclosures.

You say that portion of my argument holds no water. I don't think you've made clear why.

 

[cyclistlarge]

Fair enough. I wasn't defending the Afghanistan leak either was I? I see your point, but I was talking about Iraq. That argument holds no water in the Iraq leak (what this thread is about and what I was referring to). see prior posts as to my case on that. The pentagon itself admitted this.
Pentagon Review: WikiLeaks Docs Pose No Danger to Troops | NBC New York

 

[D_Gunther Snotpole]

I see your point, but I was talking about Iraq.

And I was talking about Assange's revelations about Iraq ... an entirely adjacent and relevant topic, once discussion turns to Assange (which it did from the outset, since he heads Wikileaks).

That argument holds no water in the Iraq leak (what this thread is about and what I was referring to). see prior posts as to my case on that.

The argument doesn't address the Iraqi leak ... it addresses larger questions around Assange's conduct.

The pentagon itself admitted this.
Pentagon Review: WikiLeaks Docs Pose No Danger to Troops | NBC New York

You're rather unclear here.
The Pentagon material says nothing about Iraq.
It addresses the leaks regarding Afghanistan.
Note that the Isikoff piece was filed in July.
It also irrelevantly claims that the leaks did not harm American interests.
The objections that people had made to those leaks is that they compromised people who had provided intelligence to the Americans.
Extremists claimed to be combing the documents looking for names.
If harm came to any of those people, there's nothing saying the Americans will even know.
So no American died from those revelations. Fine.
But that doesn't mean no one died ... among them, some people who had really bought into the notion that democracy would change Iraq and bring the nation and certain strains of Islam closer to modernity.
(I don't say they weren't almost foolishly idealistic ... merely that they existed.)
So I find no real comfort in that report.

 

[cyclistlarge]

And I was talking about Assange's revelations about Iraq ... an entirely adjacent and relevant topic, once discussion turns to Assange (which it did from the outset, since he heads Wikileaks).

Yes. We've established this. This is the first of my posts to use the name Assange.

The argument doesn't address the Iraqi leak ... it addresses larger questions around Assange's conduct.

Aaaah yes Assange. who I'd yet to mention until this post. You have already asserted this. This was my response:

I see your point, but I was talking about Iraq.

You're rather unclear here.
The Pentagon material says nothing about Iraq.
It addresses the leaks regarding Afghanistan.
Note that the Isikoff piece was filed in July.
It also irrelevantly claims that the leaks did not harm American interests.
The objections that people had made to those leaks is that they compromised people who had provided intelligence to the Americans.
Extremists claimed to be combing the documents looking for names.
If harm came to any of those people, there's nothing saying the Americans will even know.
So no American died from those revelations. Fine.
But that doesn't mean no one died ... among them, some people who had really bought into the notion that democracy would change Iraq and bring the nation and certain strains of Islam closer to modernity.
(I don't say they weren't almost foolishly idealistic ... merely that they existed.)
So I find no real comfort in that report.

That's fine if you don't trust the report. But we aren't the only government who have stated there is no documentable harm caused. Are you suggesting that a later (and far more censored dump) is somehow more dangerous? The pentagon has released some of the same documents in a far less censored form. It's pretty clear that they are concealing people pretty well. The link is to refute your aghan claim. If it's valueless to you, then that's just what you believe. I was talking about Iraq to reiterate. if you weren't then you've no need to defend your comment. I'm not arguing with you over assange.