Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 40 of 40

Thread: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

  1. #31
    Dungeon Master
    Hooter Babe

    DiAnna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Northern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,652
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarcogito View Post
    But how is it whistleblowing if you don't even know what it is you are releasing?
    Exactly so, and that is the crux of the matter for me.

    If Manning had released only the video of the helicopter atrocity, then he is a whistleblower. He saw something horrific that was not being dealt with by the chain of command, and he acted. If that was his only "crime", I'd be on his side.

    But it wasn't his only crime. He proceded over a period of weeks to download more than 700,000 classified documents and dump them onto the internet without having the slightest clue as to what was contained in those documents. They could have contained spy lists, confidential informant lists, classified military procedures and reports... he didn't know and he didn't care.

    That's treason. And that's why I'm not on his side.

  2. #32
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    Then that's not treason he's being charged with. Make up your mind. If I have been grossly misinformed, I have been misinformed by you.

    Yes, in the UCMJ, which you did not cite in your quote, there are 5 different charges. All of them specifically list intent as a requirement except the first, which certainly does not have any language to suggest strict liability. Intent is an element of nearly every criminal charge, both in the US court system and in military court. There is no evidence to prove this intent. Manning did not aid any enemies. He went to the press.
    i never mentioned treason in a single one of my posts. And you should reread Article 104 in my link including the explanations. The only one that mention intent is Attempting to Aid an Enemy. The passing of intelligence specifically states direct and indirect methods. With the training Manning had received and his knowledge of the various terrorist organizations intelligence gathering methods, he was aware that the information he released could be used by them. Sorry man, this isn't and average Joe who stumbled on a memory stick with piles of government secrets, this was a trained intelligence specialist.

    And there a plenty of crimes that intent is irrelevant in.

  3. #33
    Professor
    Leo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 02:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,674

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    Re-read article 104 and the elements. Intention is not a factor so irrelevant.

    And he's not a whistleblower. A whistleblower releases specific information related to a gross violation, he didn't do that. Nothing he released revealed crimes. Some embarrassing and unflattering information but nothing criminal.
    I beg to differ. The deliberate and indiscriminate killing of noncombatant civilians, and those attempting to administer medical attention, is considered a serious crime in any civilised society. That one's military acts, on occasion, like an armed rabble, is not a justification for barbarous behaviour. When those responsible are identified, and charged with at least culpable manslaughter, we can discuss Mannings 'crimes'. Until then, it appears as scapegoating and an exercise in vindictiveness.
    I hate the idea of causes, and if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country. E.M. Forster

  4. #34
    Professor

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Last Seen
    10-28-16 @ 07:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,526

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo View Post
    I beg to differ. The deliberate and indiscriminate killing of noncombatant civilians, and those attempting to administer medical attention, is considered a serious crime in any civilised society. That one's military acts, on occasion, like an armed rabble, is not a justification for barbarous behaviour. When those responsible are identified, and charged with at least culpable manslaughter, we can discuss Mannings 'crimes'. Until then, it appears as scapegoating and an exercise in vindictiveness.
    Thats your personal interpretation of the events that took place, the two investigations and review after the video was made public disgaree. And this event didn't occur in "civilised society," it occurred in a battle field where things aren't nearly as cut and dry as you seem to think it is.

  5. #35
    Professor
    Leo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 02:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,674

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishstyx View Post
    Thats your personal interpretation of the events that took place, the two investigations and review after the video was made public disgaree. And this event didn't occur in "civilised society," it occurred in a battle field where things aren't nearly as cut and dry as you seem to think it is.
    All matters of opinion are personal interpretations, and the military investigating itself is less than convincing in any society. There is no need to put the term civilised in quotation marks - it is not a debatable concept. Most of the world knows what a civilised society is.

    As to the killings, where they occurred is irrelevant. The facts remain that unarmed and noncombatant civilians were deliberately targeted and killed - that constitutes a crime, no matter which inquiry whitewashes it. The fact also remains that had Bradley Manning not passed that information on to someone who published it - no examination would have taken place.
    I hate the idea of causes, and if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country. E.M. Forster

  6. #36
    Educator Paratrooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Al
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 12:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    888

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Leo View Post
    All matters of opinion are personal interpretations, and the military investigating itself is less than convincing in any society. There is no need to put the term civilised in quotation marks - it is not a debatable concept. Most of the world knows what a civilised society is.

    As to the killings, where they occurred is irrelevant. The facts remain that unarmed and noncombatant civilians were deliberately targeted and killed - that constitutes a crime, no matter which inquiry whitewashes it. The fact also remains that had Bradley Manning not passed that information on to someone who published it - no examination would have taken place.
    I disagree. I have seen many investigations take place without having to make the national news to prompt them. In my opinion things like this are best handled internally. What if his supposed "whistleblowing" led to a blow back on troops that had absolutely nothing to do with the incident in question? What happens when it enrages the locals and people who traditionally are not combatants take up arms to retaliate, causing an escalation in IEDS, Ambushes, and sniping? The way the media reports stories these days they could be (and frequently are) completely wrong but the damage is done.

  7. #37
    Professor
    Leo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 02:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,674

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Paratrooper View Post
    I disagree. I have seen many investigations take place without having to make the national news to prompt them. In my opinion things like this are best handled internally. What if his supposed "whistleblowing" led to a blow back on troops that had absolutely nothing to do with the incident in question? What happens when it enrages the locals and people who traditionally are not combatants take up arms to retaliate, causing an escalation in IEDS, Ambushes, and sniping? The way the media reports stories these days they could be (and frequently are) completely wrong but the damage is done.
    I think perhaps we must agree to disagree. You are entitled to your opinion, and I have made mine quite clear.
    I hate the idea of causes, and if I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country. E.M. Forster

  8. #38
    Educator Paratrooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Al
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 12:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    888

    US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Lets look at it from a non military perspective. Lets say a man is accused of being a child molestor and in retribution someone beats him to death. Afterwords it is found that he was completely innocent, is the accuser not at least partly responsible?

    People tend to be more open to "whistle blowers" in the military for several reasons:
    It could be that they don't support the mission and support any effort to undermine it.

    Or it could just be a symptom of this era where arm chair generals think there should be 100% transparency. That they have a right to know every detail regardless of classification/ sensitive nature of the job/mission.

    You should be well aware that a simple video (particularly if it has been edited by the media) does not give the entire perspective of an event.

    You might see a video of police beating a dude down that was conveniently edited to remove the previous event of the dude assaulting the officers (those are critical details that entirely change things).

    In the case of this particular video you make some assumptions as many do because you don't have all the details.
    Firstly your looking at a FLIR footage which is not exactly crystal clear. What's to say a guy didn't fire of a rocket and then toss it a side? What's to say he wasn't setting up an IED, or running to a weapons cache?

    I have seen personally how the news can and consistently do get it wrong in reporting events on the battlefield.

    Either because of their bias or in their zeal to be the first one to get the story out, they often go with rumors and rarely recant when their version of events proves wrong.

    As far as Manning is concerned I believe his actions were
    Premeditated. If he was simply concerned about this one event, it does not justify the largest security leak in US history.

  9. #39
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,037

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by Moon View Post
    I hope I'm not expected to defend this cookie cutter stereotype you've created.

    It's the duty of the press to ask the tough questions, and that duty is correctly protected by the Constitution.

    It's the duty of those entrusted with classified information to not divulge that information to anyone not cleared for it.

    It shouldn't be a criminal offense to ask a question. The whole notion is absurd.
    You think I created this stereotype? Did a black man create the stereotype that white men can't jump? The thing about stereotypes is that they are usually true to life and they are only branded racist or ignorant because the people that fit into them find the truth uncomfortable.

    You are playing into the stereotype yourself. Was it the duty of liberals to ask questions and seek out "truth" under the Bush administration? Of course it was, however, conservatives weren't singing the tune you are singing here in this post. If it is the job of the media to seek out "truth" (and then twist it into bias commentary), then it is their duty no matter the administration. I don't like the media, politicians, or their many sheep that contradict who they are according to the story they like at the time.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  10. #40
    Why so serious?

    Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Washington State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,291

    Re: US soldier goes on trial over security leaks

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    You think I created this stereotype? Did a black man create the stereotype that white men can't jump? The thing about stereotypes is that they are usually true to life and they are only branded racist or ignorant because the people that fit into them find the truth uncomfortable.

    You are playing into the stereotype yourself. Was it the duty of liberals to ask questions and seek out "truth" under the Bush administration? Of course it was, however, conservatives weren't singing the tune you are singing here in this post. If it is the job of the media to seek out "truth" (and then twist it into bias commentary), then it is their duty no matter the administration. I don't like the media, politicians, or their many sheep that contradict who they are according to the story they like at the time.
    It's not uncomfortable, because it's utter nonsense. If you have to rely on that foolish notion to support your own opinion, then you probably need to reassess that opinion. Considering I don't watch the commentary shows on Fox, your stereotype completely fails with me. Maybe it's time to find a new narrative you can spout off at random intervals?

    Since you don't seem to get it, allow me to repeat:

    It's the duty of the press to ask the tough questions, and that duty is correctly protected by the Constitution.

    There is no party affiliation in that comment. If you can find otherwise in any of my posts, please post it.
    "I believe in a Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."

    --Albert Einstein, 1929

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •