Bradley Manning: the face of heroism

[DEAD7]

the egregious actions

 

[ogc163]

So you are fine with what was being done in the video?

 

[DEAD7]

Care to elaborate

Trust/confidence is an important part of military service, if the men and women serving begin to doubt/question the soldier next to them we have a major problem, and lives could be at risk.

What he did was potentially more damaging to our military branches than it was to our government(who hasnt been affected at all, save a little embarrassment).

Not sure what his supporters think he accomplished at all other than to ruin his own life.

The channels releasing the files have stated they are being careful not to release any info that could endanger lives... Manning was not so careful.

For that alone he was in the wrong.

 

[DEAD7]

So you are fine with what was being done in the video?

Fine? no, but i think the contents leaked as a whole have had their weight greatly exaggerated.


and the video itself seems bias

 

[ogc163]

Trust/confidence is an important part of military service, if the men and women serving begin to doubt/question the soldier next to them we have a major problem, and lives could be at risk.

What he did was potentially more damaging to our military branches than it was to our government(who hasnt been affected at all, save a little embarrassment).

Not sure what his supporters think he accomplished at all other than to ruin his own life.

The channels releasing the files have stated they are being careful not to release any info that could endanger lives... Manning was not so careful.

For that alone he was in the wrong.

There was nothing as far as I know that Manning gave to Wikileaks that endangered the lives of anyone, unless you have evidence pointing to the contrary. Even Robert Gates pointed out that the alarmism overall was not warranted...

“Now, I’ve heard the impact of these releases on our foreign policy described as a meltdown, as a game-changer, and so on. I think those descriptions are fairly significantly overwrought. The fact is, governments deal with the United States because it’s in their interest, not because they like us, not because they trust us, and not because they believe we can keep secrets. Many governments — some governments — deal with us because they fear us, some because they respect us, most because they need us. We are still essentially, as has been said before, the indispensable nation.

“So other nations will continue to deal with us. They will continue to work with us. We will continue to share sensitive information with one another.

“Is this embarrassing? Yes. Is it awkward? Yes. Consequences for U.S. foreign policy? I think fairly modest.’’

Gates on Leaks, Wiki and Otherwise - NYTimes.com

In terms of impact it has been argued at great length that the leaks helped influence the Arab spring and help bring about an end to the Iraq War The leaks also pointed to the US and other foreign leaders circumventing the law (both international and domestic). Now it is one thing to argue "this has been going on for a long time" versus "there is nothing wrong with what the U.S. has done", the fact that these type of things have been going on for quite some time does not in anyway make them any less reprehensible.

 

[88m3]

The silence to my questions is deafening

 

[ogc163]

The silence to my questions is deafening

The leaks pointed out the killing of civilians in Afghanistan
Afghanistan war logs: Massive leak of secret files exposes truth of occupation | World news | The Guardian

The US role in the Honduran Coup

Cable Leaked by WikiLeaks Reveals Honduras Coup Was Illegal | MyFDL

The US lying about their role in Yemen

Contrary to public statements, Obama admin fueled conflict in Yemen - Salon.com

Yemeni president lied about US strikes

The US pressuring German officials not to prosecute torture
The CIA's El-Masri Abduction: Cables Show Germany Caved to Pressure from Washington - SPIEGEL ONLINE

U.S. Pressured Germany Not To Prosecute CIA Officers For Torture And Rendition | American Civil Liberties Union

And there was an ample amount of links and citations in the previous articles I presented

 

[gringosuave]

 

[DEAD7]

There was nothing as far as I know that Manning gave to Wikileaks that endangered the lives of anyone,

If there was would it change your opinion of him/the crime? and if so how?

Spoiler

WikiLeaks decision to withhold any life threatening information kind of circumvents evidence doesnt it?

and of course the white house down played the leak... why would you expect any different?

 

[DEAD7]

Also "morally correct" does not equal "legal". He committed a crime, period.

 

[ogc163]

He was shedding light on goverment actions that were illegal and also morally bankrupt. The goverments involved commited crimes that far outweigh the crimes he plead guilty to.

In terms of Manning leaking evidence indiscriminately, there is no evidence of that as far as I know. In fact the chat logs between Manning and Adrian Lamo points to the contrary. If you have evidence showing otherwise I would be interested in seeing it.

I would look at him differently if he had put peoples lives in danger, I would think he was being reckless in his actions. But there is no evidence that this was ever the case and seems to be brought up only to smear him.

 

[DEAD7]

The goverments involved commited crimes that far outweigh the crimes he plead guilty to.

This is an opinion, and it would be scary to imagine a justice system that allowed you to break the law in order to do what you felt was right.

Should you be able to murder if you feel it morally sound?

What he did was against the law, I don't see where a/the disagreement could possibly be coming from...

Essentially, supporters are saying, "we like what he did, so dont charge him".

 

[ogc163]

This is an opinion, and it would be scary to imagine a justice system that allowed you to break the law in order to do what you felt was right.

Should you be able to murder if you feel it morally sound?

What he did was against the law, I don't see where a/the disagreement could possibly be coming from...

Essentially, supporters are saying, "we like what he did, so dont charge him".

There is a long history of breaking the law in order to protest unjust laws and actions on the part of the state. One does not have to go very far to find examples of civil disobedience

Essentially, supporters are saying, "we like what he did, so dont charge him".

No, sorry but this is nothing more than a strawman on your part. His supporters have focused more on the illegal actions of the US government/allies, his personal physical mistreatment, the inherent hypocrisy on the part of the US, moreso than his legal innocence/guilt. As it relates to the legal aspects of his case, his supporters have focused on prosecutorial overreach and transparancy/procedural issues just to name a few.

 

[DEAD7]

There is a long history of breaking the law in order to protest unjust laws and actions on the part of the state. One does not have to go very far to find examples of civil disobedience

Essentially, supporters are saying, "we like what he did, so dont charge him".

No, sorry but this is nothing more than a strawman on your part. His supporters have focused more on the illegal actions of the US government/allies, his personal physical mistreatment, the inherent hypocrisy on the part of the US, moreso than his legal innocence/guilt. As it relates to the legal aspects of his case, his supporters have focused on prosecutorial overreach and transparancy/procedural issues just to name a few.

So we agree he broke the law?

 

[bsmooth]

Finally: hear Bradley Manning in his own voice | Glenn Greenwald | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk