• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US judge rules not to drop Manning charge

greyhat said:
I suppose that by that assessment, Hezbollah, which has no navy and no army isn't a thread... This isn't a discussion about our endeavors in Afghanistan/Iraq btw.

Back to the point: your feelings about Afghanistan & Iraq do not warrant Manning's actions, they may rationalize your point of view, but they don't justify his crime.

He joined the Army in 2007- five years after the current Iraq conflict began, it's not like he didn't know a war was going on.
Click to expand...

Duh!

I joined the Army years after Vietnam started. What's your point?

Justify his crime? Revealing government crimes is itself a crime? In what authoritarian country do you live?

Revealing the crimes of government is ALWAYS the right thing to do. It is NEVER a crime.

You are apparently quite content to defend and condone government crimes. I'm not.
 
Henry David said:
Duh!

I joined the Army years after Vietnam started. What's your point?

Justify his crime? Revealing government crimes is itself a crime? In what authoritarian country do you live?

Revealing the crimes of government is ALWAYS the right thing to do. It is NEVER a crime.

You are apparently quite content to defend and condone government crimes. I'm not.
Click to expand...

Crimes as defined by you..? The point was that if Manning was such a contentious objector he should have either not joined the Army or stated his position as one and been removed from active his role.

He can't say he joined the forces of good and then became disillusioned so he decided to break the law, his oath of secrecy and expect to be innocent..really?

You may defend him but he is no hero and will get what he deserves. Who the hell is he to decide what should and should not be made public???!

That's a pretty F'ng arrogant position to take..
 
greyhat said:
Crimes as defined by you..? The point was that if Manning was such a contentious objector he should have either not joined the Army or stated his position as one and been removed from active his role.

He can't say he joined the forces of good and then became disillusioned so he decided to break the law, his oath of secrecy and expect to be innocent..really?

You may defend him but he is no hero and will get what he deserves. Who the hell is he to decide what should and should not be made public???!

That's a pretty F'ng arrogant position to take..
Click to expand...

The difference between Manning and you is that he knows right from wrong and you do not, judging from your posts.

Mannning has a moral conscience, a moral compass, and you do not. :peace
 
Henry David said:
The difference between Manning and you is that he knows right from wrong and you do not, judging from your posts.

Mannning has a moral conscience, a moral compass, and you do not. :peace
Click to expand...

That was funny! No, the difference is some of us have honor- he does not..
 
greyhat said:
That was funny! No, the difference is some of us have honor- he does not..
Click to expand...

When it comes to honor in defending the rule of law, it appears right now that he has more honor and courage in his little finger than you have in your entire body.

He has literally put his life on the line, as you sit here babbling away with government talking points on the internet.
 
Henry David said:
Are you aware of Curveball? What about WMD? What about the claim that Iraq, whose army was decimated 12 years prior in the First Gulf War, who had no navy and no air force, was a threat to the US? Did you really believe that, or were you too young at the time to have been aware of all that?

I did my time in the US Army, and it was a no-brainer that after 12 years of sanctions, with no effective military at all, Iraq was no threat at all to this country on the other side of the globe.

The war was brought under fraud, and if you don't understand that, well...it's a personal problem of some sort with understanding history.
Click to expand...

At the time the war in Iraq kicked off, I was app 30,000ft above Saudi Arabia and a few hours later I was 30,000ft above Iraq. I had been part of both Operations Southern Watch and Northern Watch in the preceding years. I also received almost daily intel briefs on what was going on, some of which I am not at liberty to discuss here. I have no desire to enter an adjoining cell to Manning's.

I have absolutely no problem understanding history, unlike some, I don't filter reality through biased goggles. And in the case of Iraq, I have quite a bit more knowledge about it than most Americans do. Funny though how everyone I know that was there and had been involved in it for years thinks the war was wrong, wonder why that is?

You seem to feel that "threat" means ability to cause significant damage to the physical structure of the United States. Sure glad others don't use that definition.

Henry David said:
The criminal actions he revealed were those of the gunship crew and its supervisors.
Click to expand...

If criminal, then it would be criminal actions of those individuals and the lack of actions of their chain of command, not the Government. I haven't personally seen the video which you are talking about and I don't believe all the factors involved in the "incident" could be present upon the video.

This inability of civilians to understand what is going on in combat and place into context is another reason why the military has it's own Justice System.
 
clownboy said:
You're over thinking it. Not that difficult to prove or to conceive that he knew the enemy would be aided by the info he revealed to a source he knew was going to release it to the world. Wikileaks has nothing to do with this other than being the conduit. He just used them thinking he could keep his own butt out of the hotseat.
Click to expand...

Actually, he is just thinking. There is no evidence anywhere that indicates or implies that Manning was using Wiki as a conduit. Wiki is info for the public at large. The only aid was that the USA looked like a bag of turds when the Apache murders were revealed.
 
Henry David said:
When it comes to honor in defending the rule of law, it appears right now that he has more honor and courage in his little finger than you have in your entire body.

He has literally put his life on the line, as you sit here babbling away with government talking points on the internet.
Click to expand...

Funny now much you know about me.. LMFAOL @ U
 
DaveFagan said:
Actually, he is just thinking. There is no evidence anywhere that indicates or implies that Manning was using Wiki as a conduit. Wiki is info for the public at large. The only aid was that the USA looked like a bag of turds when the Apache murders were revealed.
Click to expand...

Sigh, another one. The article in the UCMJ doesn't take into account whether he knew it would get to the "enemy" or not, just that it did or could have.

Does somebody have a link to this damned video, I don't feel like goggling it myself.
 
DVSentinel said:
At the time the war in Iraq kicked off, I was app 30,000ft above Saudi Arabia and a few hours later I was 30,000ft above Iraq. I had been part of both Operations Southern Watch and Northern Watch in the preceding years. I also received almost daily intel briefs on what was going on, some of which I am not at liberty to discuss here. I have no desire to enter an adjoining cell to Manning's.

I have absolutely no problem understanding history, unlike some, I don't filter reality through biased goggles. And in the case of Iraq, I have quite a bit more knowledge about it than most Americans do. Funny though how everyone I know that was there and had been involved in it for years thinks the war was wrong, wonder why that is?

You seem to feel that "threat" means ability to cause significant damage to the physical structure of the United States. Sure glad others don't use that definition.



If criminal, then it would be criminal actions of those individuals and the lack of actions of their chain of command, not the Government. I haven't personally seen the video which you are talking about and I don't believe all the factors involved in the "incident" could be present upon the video.

This inability of civilians to understand what is going on in combat and place into context is another reason why the military has it's own Justice System.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you mistyped what you actually meant to say, but I agree in general terms. When I was in Vietnam, most (not all) the troops understood it was a bogus war, and had nothing to do with actually protecting or defending this country. That everyone that was there thinks the war was wrong in consistent with what my nephew says, and he's been there twice. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure such things out, but a conscience is necessary, and the courage to speak out.

As to the Collateral Murder video, you should check it out. And being military, make sure you have the audio on to hear the commo between HQ and the gunship, and the intercom talk between front seat and back seat.

I blame the chain of command more than I do the crew. And when I blame "the government", that's because it was the C-in-C who started the illegitimate war, the specious AUMF notwithstanding. It was brought under fraud, and it was waged under fraud. That is not really the fault of the pawns fighting it.
 
greyhat said:
Funny now much you know about me.. LMFAOL @ U
Click to expand...

I know you ONLY by your posts here. :peace And so far I'm impressed in all the wrong ways.
 
Henry David said:
I'm not sure if you mistyped what you actually meant to say, but I agree in general terms. When I was in Vietnam, most (not all) the troops understood it was a bogus war, and had nothing to do with actually protecting or defending this country. That everyone that was there thinks the war was wrong in consistent with what my nephew says, and he's been there twice. It really doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure such things out, but a conscience is necessary, and the courage to speak out.

As to the Collateral Murder video, you should check it out. And being military, make sure you have the audio on to hear the commo between HQ and the gunship, and the intercom talk between front seat and back seat.

I blame the chain of command more than I do the crew. And when I blame "the government", that's because it was the C-in-C who started the illegitimate war, the specious AUMF notwithstanding. It was brought under fraud, and it was waged under fraud. That is not really the fault of the pawns fighting it.
Click to expand...

Correct on the mistype, I don't know any of them who thinks it was wrong. Believed in it then, still do.

Vietnam was never about defending the US directly. It was supposed to be about aiding an ally against communist insurgents supported by the Soviets and N. Vietnam. I agree with that conceptually except that the S. Vietnamese government wasn't one that I think we should of been allied with. Killing commies and not letting them take over the world is good, but supporting an oppressive regime to do it, no so good.

Watched the video. Kind of unclear. At the start, it did look like several of them were carrying weapons. I didn't see the number they said, but then, I only have the camera video and not the whole scene. The talk about the Brad and Humvee's in the background, not for sure what that was about, maybe traffic on a different com circuit. I certainly didn't see any Bradlys or Humvee's. As to the supposed children in the van, I see something there, but cannot make out what it is and wouldn't of even notice had the arrows not come up to point it out. Overall, I see nothing wrong except maybe some confusion and misinterpretation of what they were seeing. If charges were brought against the helicopter crew and after seeing that video, evidence to me would be inconclusive on any charges. I would need far more information than what was there to say they were absolutely in the wrong. It would certainly be protected due to it's potential as propaganda.

I didn't find what classification it was originally given, but mishap reports and documents relating to incidents are usually given For Official Use Only to protect them from release while investigations are in progress. Dealt with that during my time in the safety office all the time.
 
DVSentinel said:
Correct on the mistype, I don't know any of them who thinks it was wrong. Believed in it then, still do.

Vietnam was never about defending the US directly. It was supposed to be about aiding an ally against communist insurgents supported by the Soviets and N. Vietnam. I agree with that conceptually except that the S. Vietnamese government wasn't one that I think we should of been allied with. Killing commies and not letting them take over the world is good, but supporting an oppressive regime to do it, no so good.

Watched the video. Kind of unclear. At the start, it did look like several of them were carrying weapons. I didn't see the number they said, but then, I only have the camera video and not the whole scene. The talk about the Brad and Humvee's in the background, not for sure what that was about, maybe traffic on a different com circuit. I certainly didn't see any Bradlys or Humvee's. As to the supposed children in the van, I see something there, but cannot make out what it is and wouldn't of even notice had the arrows not come up to point it out. Overall, I see nothing wrong except maybe some confusion and misinterpretation of what they were seeing. If charges were brought against the helicopter crew and after seeing that video, evidence to me would be inconclusive on any charges. I would need far more information than what was there to say they were absolutely in the wrong. It would certainly be protected due to it's potential as propaganda.

I didn't find what classification it was originally given, but mishap reports and documents relating to incidents are usually given For Official Use Only to protect them from release while investigations are in progress. Dealt with that during my time in the safety office all the time.
Click to expand...

You agree with that conceptually, but you weren't there. Your larger point is right on--we were defending "US interests", and not really the US itself. Wink, wink ;) The Vietnamese could no more invade the US than the Iraqis or Afghanis could, wink, wink.

No, I believed all that nonsense. 4 years in ROTC and I believed all that stuff. Domino theory was quite a good image, really.

Once I got in country I realized that everything I had been told was a fantasy in a perverse way. The only people who believed in the cause did so only because of career considerations, promotions. I was not one of those guys, and the war was ending anyway.

Glad you watched the video, and thanks for the straight comments. :peace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom