Bradley Manning sentenced

Yeah, good point, I should have added an addendum to that. As far as I know, Manning's leaks were mostly embarrassing and internationally complicated, rather than directly putting soldiers in harms way. Correct me if I'm wrong though, I'm not hugely familiar with this case.
 
Highlighting abuses by American Soldiers puts the lives of American Soldiers at risk. Just because they can't identify specific cases where Manning's actions have led to a soldier's death, doesn't mean his actions have been without consequences.
 
I guess I'm more outraged by the abuses of the soldiers than I am that someone tattled. vv

In general though, I'd say that what puts American soldiers at risk is going to war. An educated public should be aware of the costs of war, both in terms of American casualties and foreign casualties. Camouflaging both of those, un-complicating war by creating hero narratives, those to me make war 'cheap' and much more likely to be engaged in.
 
Has there been a single incident of harm to soldiers or their informants attributed to the Manning leaks? Because I've never heard of one.



Ah, so a few years of torture = +112 days of time served. Seems legit.
 
I find it offensive that we as a nation would claim we are going to war and then act amazed and offended when people act a certain way in a combat environment. The morality of those not in the thick of it are not the same as those who are. You can be as outraged as you want to be about it but in my opinion you really don't know what you're getting outraged about until you've experienced somebody trying to kill you daily or somebody blowing into pieces in front of you.

If you want to argue about us even having to be in that situation, well, that's an entirely different discussion and I honestly think anybody's opinion (granted they actually thought about it) is worth hearing.


Edit: I wrote this before you edited your post Philo.
 
I would agree with you if I knew if Snowden had to swear an oath to a nation to protect it in order to work for said company. I think it's ridiculous we contract that work out to the private sector. I really don't see Snowden equal to Manning in any way.
 
Haha, yeah, I realized I needed to write a little bit more. I'm not so offended by the people who have perpetuated some of the abuses - I'm sure things happen and you might shoot the wrong way and a bullet hits the wrong person and everyone's really sorry. That makes sense. I guess I'm more offended by people covering this information up as, in the end, I think this makes war easier to wage.
 
As a former government subcontractor who was privy to a lot of information that foreign governments would love to have had, I don't think he'll serve much time. Many americans view him as a hero not a traitor, just like snowden.
 
You're bound by national and international rules of war in combat, are you not?
 
What is your point? It seems like you're making the assumption that I think people shouldn't be punished over war crimes or something? I'm not. I'm saying if you're outraged and offended so much you want to spit, and you've never been there and done it and lived it, then you're opinion isn't worth much. It's nice to be able to sit back away from the fire and say "this is how people in war should act" when you've never done it. "International rules of war" is kind of funny though, especially when your side is the only one abiding by them. Oh, but we have to have standards right! We have to set the example! One would think finding ways not to engage in warfare would be the way to do that though right? To slap morality and standards (standards other than combative efficiency) into warfare is a bit ridiculous sometimes since the nature of warfare is often made up of a lack of standards and morality. I mean c'mon, you're trying to kill people and be moral about it, sounds legit.
 
I expect he had to sign some document swearing that he would not steal the data and make it publicly available.
 
How can civilians with no experience with violence make an informed decision about supporting or opposing a war when they're being systematically lied to about the presence of WMDs, the true reason for the war, the loss of US soldier life, collateral damage, the budget costs to wage the war, torture practices, withdraw dates, and the ultimate effectiveness of all that effort, money, and loss of life? If even the collateral damage of war reporters from a respected international news organization can be covered up, how can you honestly expect civilians to be intelligently informed short of serving a combat tour themselves? (And even if they did serve combat tours, they would have to swear oaths of secrecy resulting in their prosecution if they chose to publicly share the truth about the lies mentioned above.)
 
This is just my opinion, but allegiance to a corporation that has been entrusted with national security is not the same as allegiance through service to your nation directly. For me this causes Snowden to be ok while Manning is not. Feel free to disagree with that and I can understand why, but one just feels like it's allegiance to the government while the other is to the people, you just take orders from the government.
 
Lovely world we live in innit?

I have a nice reply to that, but it involves me getting rolled up by our MAP Chat NSA friends. Give me a few months to heal up from my TBI where I stand a chance of making a run for it
 
Respectfully, that 'only people who have been in combat can judge the actions of people who have been in combat' line is crap. It is perfectly possible to stand from the outside and point at atrocities and abuses carried out by soldiers and say that it is not OK for soldiers to behave like that.

I don't need to have been shot at to know that Robert Bales deserves to be locked away for the rest of his life for what he did anymore than I need to have performed experiments on children to know that what Mengele did in WWII was an abomination.

We put a moral code on war because we understand now that how you win is just as important as the winning itself in the long term.
 
Snowden wasn't serving a corporation, he was a DOD contractor working in an instrumental, unconstitutional role in signals intelligence so that the government could enjoy plausible deniability in the event of a leak. That's hardly the same thing as working at the local Apple store sales counter.
 
Hey, anybody hear from Jonathan Pollard lately? Many people viewed him as a hero as well.

I think there are more variables at play here. Manning gave his information to Wikileaks. No one in the USG of any authority will think that's a good thing and deserving of a pardon. Plus this case has all sorts of publicity all over it as well which really won't sell a pardon well either.

People who have disclosed information to foreign governments for personal gain have gotten far less. An example was made of Mr. Manning. He won't be seeing the light of day for a long time......
 
You'll have to forgive me for not being able to articulate myself well with what I'm trying to say here but you have me mistaken. This isn't a topic I like to discuss very much so I haven't had much practice getting things across the way I want to.

To the bolded, that's not what I'm saying. I think the regulations we attempt to have are needed and that people violating them should face consequences. It's easy to sit back and judge somebody over something from comfort and safety though and sometimes the condemnation is way too strong. I'm not saying these people doing the deed should have a pass, but rather those who haven't experienced warfare to look at things a bit more objectively and realize the context is war, not your average day in the neighborhood when looking at these individuals. I think that is missed in a lot of peoples judgments.

I can say Robert Bales needs to go away for what he did, but I can also not hold any hate or contempt for the man because I know there were probably a million things that made him snap. Just because I understand what may have led to the incident a little better than somebody who hasn't been there doesn't change the fact that I acknowledge he needs to face punishment, but you're not going to see me shaking my fist and spitting about it. As far as Mengele goes, for me that's a different kind of situation and a little out of the scope of what I'm meaning to address.

Honestly though Headache I think you're the type of person who's opinion about things are worth hearing because by the posts I read you seem to try and look at things objectively. I've been walked up to on the street and told I'm a murderer and evil before, I don't appreciate that kind of condemnation coming from somebody who has no idea about what they're talking about and have no right passing that kind of judgment.
 
Back
Top