I like how what they're up to isn't placing them in danger, it's these leaks.

What's it the government likes to say all the time? If you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't worry about transparency?

11/29/2010 5:44:15 PM

Quote :

"I don't know why people act as if wikileaks are the ones causing any death. It's the CIA (mostly) doing fucked up shit in other countries (and not just our enemies, evidently) that is causing people to die."

That doesn't make their actions right though (if you assume that they cause deaths).

I'm not really sure that these leaks will directly lead to identifiable individuals' deaths. The deaths they do lead to may be of informants who helped the US at their hands of their nations' counterintelligence bureaus; their deaths will probably never be published.

If there is any cost, it'll be because these WikiLeaks have created a significant disruption to all American diplomatic efforts. Now if those diplomatic efforts were leading toward war or covering up war crimes, then we can say that what they've done is good. However, if the disruption leads to the delay of a peace treaty, hardens attitudes between nations that leads to conflict, or disruption of cooperation between the US and an ally leading to a security lapse that costs lives, then one could argue the resulting bloodshed is on WikiLeaks' hands. The problem is that these things are hard to quantify going in either direction.

In the end though, from what I've read, there's nothing that's particularly surprising in any of these releases. Oh noes, the US is spying on the UN?! So is every other nation that has an intelligence service worth a damn (they just don't get caught... ). The State department does less than flattering analyses on world leaders? Wow, that's basic negotiations prep. The Chinese government was responsible for hacking into Google? I think I read that on the cover of the NY Times. Arabs hate Iran? Saw that on al-Jazeera.

Seriously though: while the cables are certainly interesting, I haven't read anything that is earth shattering or even particularly surprising. A few embarrassing things that newspapers and academics have already written or speculated about (much like having someone blurt out in public what you really think of a person) that will create some temporary tension, but nothing that is going to ultimately change the course of American diplomacy.

11/29/2010 6:01:22 PM

Quote :

"I like how what they're up to isn't placing them in danger, it's these leaks. What's it the government likes to say all the time? If you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't worry about transparency?"

11/29/2010 6:05:50 PM

Its good that our secular humanist allies in the middle-east have been outed, right? Not like we wanted them in office anyways.

Why do email accounts even HAVE passwords?

[Edited on November 29, 2010 at 6:20 PM. Reason : what is "discretion"?]

11/29/2010 6:19:41 PM

Quote :

"what is "discretion"?"

Certainly not something the people in charge here have learned

11/29/2010 6:22:04 PM

Quote :

"If you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't worry about transparency?"

It's not the covering-up of wrongdoing that anyone's worried about. I don't think anyone has a problem with that being brought to light...but it's illegal to classify things for that purpose to begin with, and Wikileaks is releasing all sorts of other shit that doesn't need to be public knowledge.

11/29/2010 7:01:51 PM

Sorry but I think it's long past time that your crew be accountable to the public

[Edited on November 29, 2010 at 7:13 PM. Reason : .]

11/29/2010 7:13:03 PM

Dude, by the very nature of what the military (and CIA, etc) does, it simply cannot be transparent.

11/29/2010 7:17:17 PM

Secrecy should be afforded with legitimacy

11/29/2010 7:30:02 PM

Quote :

"I like how what they're up to isn't placing them in danger, it's these leaks. What's it the government likes to say all the time? If you're not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't worry about transparency? "

so the Afghani tribesman, who is sick of the thug tactics of the Taliban, decides to aid US forces in finding the bad guys...his name is in the classified documents...he is outed.

HIS ACTIONS SHOULD BE TRANSPARENT

thats why I said I would be a lot more impressed with Wikileaks and their intentions if they exercised some discretion and brought to light criminal action or evidence of corruption. they are nothing but attention-whoring bastards

11/29/2010 7:54:14 PM

..................................................................




[Edited on November 29, 2010 at 8:12 PM. Reason : .]

11/29/2010 8:09:33 PM

Quote :

"thats why I said I would be a lot more impressed with Wikileaks and their intentions if they exercised some discretion and brought to light criminal action or evidence of corruption. they are nothing but attention-whoring bastards"

Exactly. I don't think people would have a problem with that (as long as they didn't reveal any really damaging stuff along with it...although they might not always know what would be damaging and what would be fairly inert).

11/29/2010 8:14:44 PM

Quote :

"Secrecy should be afforded with legitimacy"

McDanger is winning this thread....

11/29/2010 8:16:36 PM

...but losing in pragmatic reality.

11/29/2010 8:36:17 PM

Yeah I am losing in the sense that literally nobody is going to stop you jackbooted thugs from doing whatever you want

11/29/2010 8:46:47 PM

smc, indy and McDanger are pretty committed to this Ménage à Troll. Do you guys do parties?

11/30/2010 1:54:42 AM

I dunno if you've ever read thewolfweb.com but indy, smc, and I get in pretty vicious flame wars with each other

11/30/2010 2:03:23 AM

Quote :

"I like how what they're up to isn't placing them in danger, it's these leaks."

There is an element of this.

There's a much larger part, though, which involves US diplomats offering frank assessments about world actors that were intended to be private. Such information is useful and far from unusual, even in day to day human interactions. Nobody is perfectly honest, in face-to-face interaction, about what they think of a person; but what they think might be of vital importance.

It's difficult to keep perspective on TWW, where everybody feels comfortable sharing their least charitable opinions of their fellow posters. But in the grand scheme of diplomacy, it's not normally acceptable to say that Leader X is an asshat to X's face, even if he is a total asshat. For all I know Nicolas Sarkozy is the most colossal prick in the history of pricks, but there are good and cogent reasons that we should avoid making it clear that we think as much of him.

11/30/2010 3:03:39 AM

any word on who leaked this round?

11/30/2010 3:57:57 AM

^

11/30/2010 6:30:26 AM

This latest round of leaks is about as useful as the leaked private e-mails from East Anglia's Climate Research Unit.

YAAAY!!! TRANSPARENCY!!!

....Oh, wait. The global warming debate just got set back by a decade, and now the public no longer trusts the scientists who provide research on the subject. Oops.


Only an anarchist or a naif would believe that our government should be afforded zero discretion in matters of diplomacy. McDanger sounds more and more like God every day. Just a faggoty little anti-establishment troll.


[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 8:49 AM. Reason : 2]

11/30/2010 8:46:01 AM

http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/wikileaks-julian-assange-wants-to-spill-your-corporate-secrets/?boxes=Homepagelighttop

Quote :

"Early next year, Julian Assange says, a major American bank will suddenly find itself turned inside out. Tens of thousands of its internal documents will be exposed on Wikileaks.org with no polite requests for executives’ response or other forewarnings. The data dump will lay bare the finance firm’s secrets on the Web for every customer, every competitor, every regulator to examine and pass judgment on. "

Has anyone else seen this? I skimmed the interview and the guy plays his cards pretty close, but the leak is supposedly coming sometime near the end of the year. The interview was also pretty interesting when he was talking about his "economic/political orientation" (I think a lot of conservatives would appreciate some of the things he says)

http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/11/29/an-interview-with-wikileaks-julian-assange/




for some reason this is so much jucier to me.

11/30/2010 9:41:49 AM

the only thing i dont like about wikileaks is the attention whoring. if you have something interesting, release all the raw material at once.

11/30/2010 9:55:30 AM

I get the feeling that Julian Assange is attempting to secure his life by making himself as publicly visible as possible. He can get away with it for now, but sooner or later, WikiLeaks is going to piss off the wrong person, government, or entity, and the poor guy is going to learn fear firsthand. The others are not going to be as nice as the United States.

11/30/2010 10:43:38 AM

This guy is a fucking hero.


All of the calls by both governments and citizens alike to label him a "terrorist" or "one of the worst criminals ever" are complete and utter bullshit.

There has never been anything more certain in the history of time, than the fact that banks, governments, etc. are all fucking corrupt as hell, and 100% transparency is needed. I don't give a fuck about loss of life. We Americans already celebrate holidays that revolve around revering those who lost their life to protect the liberty of others. So we already know that liberty >>>>> life. We know this. (Ooooo!! scary concept to authoritarians....) Either way, innocent lives may be lost -- but truth, transparency, openness, liberty, freedom, and death to tyrants is, and will always be, the right way.

Fuck you goddamn authoritarian shit-stains that wish for this hero to be killed.
Get a fucking clue already.

11/30/2010 11:14:06 AM

You're corrupt as hell. 100% transparency is needed. Release all of your private e-mails. Any private photos or videos? Yeah, we'll be needing those as well.

The hypocrisy of those who champion Assange is that they are the same people who scream bloody murder about privacy rights, FISA, the Patriot act, etc. Governments and organizations are not people, but you're goddamn stupid if you can't see the need for a certain degree of secrecy in matters of diplomacy, business and the like.

The constitution calls for checks and balances to safeguard against corruption and abuse of power, but I missed the part where it calls for some douchey Australian hacker to oversee secret internal correspondence and release it as he sees fit.

11/30/2010 12:03:02 PM

AMERICAS FACEBOOK PHOTOS SHOULD NOT BE SET TO PRIVATE.

11/30/2010 12:17:40 PM

I'm amazed that you didn't notice the gaping hole in your logic. The difference between individual privacy and "government" privacy is that I'm not holding a gun to the head of everyone in the United States saying "pay up or die." The government is accountable to us. Rather than having one that goes around the world, plotting and intervening, meddling in affairs, we should be peacefully interacting with other world powers. Total transparency is consistent with a non-interventionist foreign policy, but not a "world's policeman" policy.

If you read some of these documents, you'll realize that anyone that challenges U.S. hegemony is either dismissed completely, marginalized, or mocked. That shows how ingrained interventionism is in the highest levels of government. Anyone that isn't on board with our "shoot first, ask questions never" policy is immediately demagogued. Most of these leaked documents pose no national security threat. It's just high-minded shit talking. If anything, the conclusion we can draw from Wikileaks so far is that "classified" status is being applied to things that really don't need to be classified. It'd be great if the government would recognize this, and legitimately work towards transparency. Unfortunately, I think the opposite will happen, and we'll see increased secrecy and tighter controls on the flow of information.

11/30/2010 12:17:55 PM

You can't win at poker if everyone knows what cards you're holding.

11/30/2010 1:20:01 PM

unless you have better cards

11/30/2010 1:21:47 PM

or guns

11/30/2010 1:27:35 PM

Quote :

"You can't win at poker if everyone knows what cards you're holding."

Don't play poker if you're not comfortable with everyone knowing what cards you have?

11/30/2010 1:36:26 PM

Quote :

"Only an anarchist or a naif would believe that our government should be afforded zero discretion in matters of diplomacy. McDanger sounds more and more like God every day. Just a faggoty little anti-establishment troll."

I'd rather be that then a submissive little pro-authority bitch like you. Conservatives are funny; they crave strong, masculine authority. Yet I'm "faggoty"? Ahahahaha.

Quote :

"You're corrupt as hell. 100% transparency is needed. Release all of your private e-mails. Any private photos or videos? Yeah, we'll be needing those as well."

Things are going this direction because people like you are slobbing the knob of authority left and right.

Get a clue you fucking idiot. Pull up a desk and I'll school you in some shit you should have learned a long time ago, being an American, and benefitting from the various ideological leaps and struggles that made this country what it is.

THINGS SHOULD BE EASY FOR THE INDIVIDUAL
THINGS SHOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR THE GOVERNMENT

Repeat after me until you return back to reality and sanity.

Quote :

"Governments and organizations are not people, but you're goddamn stupid if you can't see the need for a certain degree of secrecy in matters of diplomacy, business and the like. "

Secrecy should be afforded with legitimacy. Corruption is so rampant right now that full disclosure is needed. It's hilarious that an Australian is a bigger patriot than you and your bitch-made family will ever be. If this were the 18th century, you'd be getting shot at by revolutionaries you loyalist little prick.

Quote :

"The constitution calls for checks and balances to safeguard against corruption and abuse of power, but I missed the part where it calls for some douchey Australian hacker to oversee secret internal correspondence and release it as he sees fit."

Did you also manage to miss the past 50 years?

Quote :

"I'm amazed that you didn't notice the gaping hole in your logic. The difference between individual privacy and "government" privacy is that I'm not holding a gun to the head of everyone in the United States saying "pay up or die." The government is accountable to us. Rather than having one that goes around the world, plotting and intervening, meddling in affairs, we should be peacefully interacting with other world powers. Total transparency is consistent with a non-interventionist foreign policy, but not a "world's policeman" policy. If you read some of these documents, you'll realize that anyone that challenges U.S. hegemony is either dismissed completely, marginalized, or mocked. That shows how ingrained interventionism is in the highest levels of government. Anyone that isn't on board with our "shoot first, ask questions never" policy is immediately demagogued. Most of these leaked documents pose no national security threat. It's just high-minded shit talking. If anything, the conclusion we can draw from Wikileaks so far is that "classified" status is being applied to things that really don't need to be classified. It'd be great if the government would recognize this, and legitimately work towards transparency. Unfortunately, I think the opposite will happen, and we'll see increased secrecy and tighter controls on the flow of information."

Right on.

Quote :

"You can't win at poker if everyone knows what cards you're holding."

This perfectly captures the American mentality; we're in direct competition with everybody in a winner-takes-all game. Best play dirty and grab everything rather than play a different game

11/30/2010 1:38:22 PM

Quote :

"This perfectly captures the American mentality; we're in direct competition with everybody in a winner-takes-all game. Best play dirty and grab everything rather than play a different game"

what game exactly, do you think Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, N Korea, al Queda, and Hezbollah playing? tiddlywinks?

your post captures fully the ignorance and naivety of the idealistic. we are in competition with other world powers and interests, whether you like it or not. whether we caused said competition or not. it is REALITY.

11/30/2010 1:49:26 PM

Quote :

"what game exactly, do you think Russia, China, Pakistan, Iran, N Korea, al Queda, and Hezbollah playing? tiddlywinks? "

Hmm I guess you're right, let's go back to keeping all of the massively immoral and illegal shit we do secret

(Yo Okinawa shut the fuck up about the rapes already)

Quote :

"your post captures fully the ignorance and naivety of the idealistic. we are in competition with other world powers and interests, whether you like it or not. whether we caused said competition or not. it is REALITY."

Being in competition with others doesn't require building an aggressive global military empire now, does it? I realize there are bad people in the world, but we're damn near the worst these days. Do we have to be so bad? I don't think so.

Conservatives are so scared they think we need to ram it up everybody's ass 24 hours a day just in case they get any ideas.

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 1:56 PM. Reason : .]

11/30/2010 1:54:32 PM

To people upset about wikileaks...at what point would the leaks be justified?

Assassination of civilians without trial?

Secret concentration camps?

I'm curious where the line is drawn, that is where you believe morality trumps USA-must-conquer-all-ethics-be-damnedism

11/30/2010 1:57:12 PM

Quote :

"Being in competition with others doesn't require building an aggressive global military empire now, does it?"

No, but it does require secrets

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 1:58 PM. Reason : lol wrong tag]

11/30/2010 1:57:55 PM

Quote :

"No, but it does require secrets"

SECRECY. SHOULD. BE. AFFORDED. WITH. LEGITIMACY.

I'm going to start treating you people like your masters do. Repeat after me until you believe it.

11/30/2010 1:58:46 PM

Quote :

"your post captures fully the ignorance and naivety of the idealistic. we are in competition with other world powers and interests, whether you like it or not. whether we caused said competition or not. it is REALITY."

At what point is enough enough? Do we keep bankrupting ourselves, both financially and in terms of how the rest of the world perceives us, by pursuing the same foreign policy objectives? We intervene, then play dumb 50 years later when entire generations of foreigners hold anti-American sentiment. I think we should stop reacting to the domino effect that our government set off, and start worrying about the serious problems we have here.

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 2:01 PM. Reason : ]

11/30/2010 2:00:44 PM

Quote :

"To people upset about wikileaks...at what point would the leaks be justified? "

When what's being exposed is illegal

11/30/2010 2:02:09 PM

"When what's being exposed is illegal"

Does that include the Geneva convention? Did you read the war logs??

Is it just legality that bothers you? If it was legal to massacre 60 American civilians in an airstrike would you have no problem with it happening and being concealed?


[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 2:05 PM. Reason : .]

11/30/2010 2:03:43 PM

Quote :

"When what's being exposed is illegal"

Good thing we have our Dear Leaders to tell us what is right and what is wrong.

11/30/2010 2:06:00 PM

It is possible to be in direct competition with other states while not pursuing military adventures abroad. But unless "non-interventionist" means "don't interact with other governments at all," we're going to continue to need a State Department and a Foreign Service, neither of which can do their jobs well if everything they say and do is going to end up on the internet.

Quote :

"To people upset about wikileaks...at what point would the leaks be justified"

When the good from leaking them outweighs the bad, I suppose, but ultimately that's what the whole argument is about anyway.

Which has more weight: revealing some American war crimes, or increased levels of terrorism and violence because of outrage at the revelation? Accountability is immensely important, but I'm not sure I'd price it higher than human lives.

What bothers me about this round of leaks is that so much of the information can really only do harm. What good comes from knowing that a Foreign Service Officer in Moscow thinks Putin is a shit? Meanwhile, now that officer can no longer do his job properly, our relations with Russia suffer, and now maybe everybody has to start lying to their superiors in their assessments when being perfectly frank serves everyone better.

---

And isn't/wasn't Str8Foolish and McDanger the same person? Am I mistaken, or is he using Str8Foolish to be calm and McDanger to scream at us?

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 2:45 PM. Reason : ]

11/30/2010 2:42:29 PM

not this

Quote :

"Which has more weight: revealing some American war crimes, or increased levels of terrorism and violence because of outrage at the revelation? Accountability is immensely important, but I'm not sure I'd price it higher than human lives."

this

Quote :

"What bothers me about this round of leaks is that so much of the information can really only do harm. What good comes from knowing that a Foreign Service Officer in Moscow thinks Putin is a shit? Meanwhile, now that officer can no longer do his job properly, our relations with Russia suffer, and now maybe everybody has to start lying to their superiors in their assessments when being perfectly frank serves everyone better. "

Quote :

"SECRECY. SHOULD. BE. AFFORDED. WITH. LEGITIMACY."

I agree. Whats your point?

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 2:55 PM. Reason : .]

11/30/2010 2:55:02 PM

Quote :

"When the good from leaking them outweighs the bad, I suppose, but ultimately that's what the whole argument is about anyway. Which has more weight: revealing some American war crimes, or increased levels of terrorism and violence because of outrage at the revelation? Accountability is immensely important, but I'm not sure I'd price it higher than human lives."

The entire point of increasing accountability is to save human lives by making it clear that war crimes can't go hidden and unpunished. If the military continues to conduct an unethical war and terrorism results, it's the military's fault. Isn't this what we're supposed to be fighting anyway? Wasn't the primary outrage about 9/11 over the civilian death? Do we even care about being good guys anymore or is it just about killing anyone who so much as casts a shadow on American supremacy?

Quote :

" What bothers me about this round of leaks is that so much of the information can really only do harm. What good comes from knowing that a Foreign Service Officer in Moscow thinks Putin is a shit? Meanwhile, now that officer can no longer do his job properly, our relations with Russia suffer, and now maybe everybody has to start lying to their superiors in their assessments when being perfectly frank serves everyone better."

The he-said/she-said leaks I'm not as gung-ho about, but I don't think they're that damaging either. I doubt Putin is at all surprised to hear this, as his boys probably say the exact same things all the time about Americans. And is unprofessionally bad-mouthing Putin part of that officer's job? I thought it was to develop positive relations, so maybe he isn't the right person for the job anyway? Just because he's appointed by an officer holder doesn't mean he's not accountable to the public. We have a say in how our foreign relations are conducted, if you disagree then you're the definition of an elitist.


And I'm a friend of McDanger's that he let use this account, believe it or not. You did note that we have different styles.

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 2:59 PM. Reason : .]

11/30/2010 2:57:47 PM

Quote :

"I agree. Whats your point?"

Our foreign policy goals are by and large illegitimate, and these leaks are showing us that the avenues we use to achieve them are rife with illegitimate practices.

How's the sand feel? You missed the back of your neck.

11/30/2010 3:04:54 PM

Troll harder.

11/30/2010 3:09:00 PM

How far backwards will you bend to pretend your wealth is okay?

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 3:09 PM. Reason : kids of billionaires ITT going to tell us the business lol]

People will say and do anything to maintain belief in a simple, just world. Again: how far will you all bend? These leaks will show us, I guess. *plugs ears* La la la la!

[Edited on November 30, 2010 at 3:10 PM. Reason : .]

11/30/2010 3:09:30 PM

There you go!

11/30/2010 3:16:23 PM

Well, you asked for it.

11/30/2010 3:28:08 PM