• 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!

Bradley Manning found not guilty of aiding the enemy, convicted on other charges

repeter said:
Yeah, that horse died a long time ago. It's absolutely ridiculous that you'd even bring that up.
Click to expand...

Why is it ridiculous when Iraqis continue to pay for it and there are still neocons out there who thought it was a good idea?
 
Geoist said:
Why is it ridiculous when Iraqis continue to pay for it and there are still neocons out there who thought it was a good idea?
Click to expand...

In the context of this thread, you used it to shift blame from Manning for a resurgent Al Qaeda (resulting from our inability to gain immunity for our troops) to the government when we initially started the Iraq War.

I'm saying its completely fallacious, and illogical to say because we're in Iraq, Manning's contributions to Al Qaeda's current resurgence is Bush/Congress's fault.
 
repeter said:
In the context of this thread, you used it to shift blame from Manning for a resurgent Al Qaeda (resulting from our inability to gain immunity for our troops) to the government when we initially started the Iraq War.

I'm saying its completely fallacious, and illogical to say because we're in Iraq, Manning's contributions to Al Qaeda's current resurgence is Bush/Congress's fault.
Click to expand...

And what I'm saying is that it is ridiculous to point to Manning for a 'resurgence' in Al-Qaeda when there was very little Al-Qaeda activity in Iraq before the US military invaded. If you are going to blame Manning for the resurgence then you better be ready to blame our govt//military for Al-Qaeda in Iraq's initial surge.

On the immunity, if we had Chinese troops in the US would you want them to have it?
 
Geoist said:
Proof?
Click to expand...
Prove what? Prove that the same military courts who can convict and execute a Soldier of aiding the enemy for something as small as giving an enemy agent a TM that is available to the public went soft?


Yet you need proof to back up your claim.
Click to expand...
The proof is in his actions, which were reported by fellow Soldiers and family. He is a homosexual who, according to his councilor in Iraq, questioned his own gender. He was even considering sexual reassignment surgery. During Basic Training, he couldn't hack it, and was scheduled for a failure to adapt discharge, but his discharge was denied. He was constantly harassed, and became insubordinate. He was openly gay. He had a troubled relationship with his boyfriend, which caused him to be referred to the mental health facility due to claims that he was emotionally unstable. His superiors even wanted to leave him in Ft Drum because he was "a risk to himself and possibly others,". In an interview with a school reporter he had during a homosexual marriage rally, he said "I've been living a double life. ... I can't make a statement. I can't be caught in an act. I hope the public support changes. I do hope to do that before ETS". Because of all this, he felt isolated. He didn't have any friends in the Army, and this angered him. It doesn't take a genius to put two and two together. I have seen the same thing in the Army. Some Private can't hack it, they get mad, they lash out, ostracizing themselves from their peers, and eventually they end up doing something very stupid that either gets them arrested or kicked out with a bad conduct discharge. Manning was a piece of ****, he didn't belong in the Army, and he sure as hell didn't belong anywhere near classified materials. It was only a matter of time before he did something idiotic, and then he did. He didn't do it because of patriotism, or because he was an outstanding human being. He was mentally ill, he was angry, and he had a personal vendetta against the Army, and the US for not granting his majesty the right to marry another man who didn't want to have anything to do with him.
 
Geoist said:
And what I'm saying is that it is ridiculous to point to Manning for a 'resurgence' in Al-Qaeda when there was very little Al-Qaeda activity in Iraq before the US military invaded. If you are going to blame Manning for the resurgence then you better be ready to blame our govt//military for Al-Qaeda in Iraq's initial surge.

On the immunity, if we had Chinese troops in the US would you want them to have it?
Click to expand...

You know what, I think the problem is evolution's/God's (whichever way you go) fault for creating humans. If there were no people there would be no Iraq or any war :roll:

Does that help you understand why your point is irrelevant to the current conversation? My example is completely sound by your logic, but I hope you can see my example (and therefore your logic) is ridiculous.
 
repeter said:
You know what, I think the problem is evolution's/God's (whichever way you go) fault for creating humans. If there were no people there would be no Iraq or any war :roll:

Does that help you understand why your point is irrelevant to the current conversation? My example is completely sound by your logic, but I hope you can see my example (and therefore your logic) is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

God is not to blame for the evil actions of humans. Our military, however, is to blame for creating a power vacuum which allowed Al Qaeda to get a foothold in Iraq.

And you didn't answer the question to my hypothetical: If we were occupied by another nation (say China) would you or would you not want those troops to have immunity?
 
Surtr said:
Prove what? Prove that the same military courts who can convict and execute a Soldier of aiding the enemy for something as small as giving an enemy agent a TM that is available to the public went soft?



The proof is in his actions, which were reported by fellow Soldiers and family. He is a homosexual who, according to his councilor in Iraq, questioned his own gender. He was even considering sexual reassignment surgery. During Basic Training, he couldn't hack it, and was scheduled for a failure to adapt discharge, but his discharge was denied. He was constantly harassed, and became insubordinate. He was openly gay. He had a troubled relationship with his boyfriend, which caused him to be referred to the mental health facility due to claims that he was emotionally unstable. His superiors even wanted to leave him in Ft Drum because he was "a risk to himself and possibly others,". In an interview with a school reporter he had during a homosexual marriage rally, he said "I've been living a double life. ... I can't make a statement. I can't be caught in an act. I hope the public support changes. I do hope to do that before ETS". Because of all this, he felt isolated. He didn't have any friends in the Army, and this angered him. It doesn't take a genius to put two and two together. I have seen the same thing in the Army. Some Private can't hack it, they get mad, they lash out, ostracizing themselves from their peers, and eventually they end up doing something very stupid that either gets them arrested or kicked out with a bad conduct discharge. Manning was a piece of ****, he didn't belong in the Army, and he sure as hell didn't belong anywhere near classified materials. It was only a matter of time before he did something idiotic, and then he did. He didn't do it because of patriotism, or because he was an outstanding human being. He was mentally ill, he was angry, and he had a personal vendetta against the Army, and the US for not granting his majesty the right to marry another man who didn't want to have anything to do with him.
Click to expand...

Sorry you wasted your time typing all that, but I know the story. Truth is, you like to pretend to know what he was thinking, but you really don't. Nobody knows but Manning and God (if you believe in God).
 
Geoist said:
Sorry you wasted your time typing all that, but I know the story. Truth is, you like to pretend to know what he was thinking, but you really don't. Nobody knows but Manning and God (if you believe in God).
Click to expand...

And you come off as being completely ignorant of the story. It doesn't take a psychic to know what someones motivations are. You can deny it all you want, but justice has prevailed, and he will be rightfully sentenced for his crimes.
 
Surtr said:
And you come off as being completely ignorant of the story.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I am very familiar with the story. I just didn't come to the same conclusions you did.

It doesn't take a psychic to know what someones motivations are.
Click to expand...

No, that requires evidence. And I am not talking about what you mentioned, which is circumstantial evidence at best.

You can deny it all you want, but justice has prevailed, and he will be rightfully sentenced for his crimes.
Click to expand...

Oh yes, in prison far longer than almost any rapist, child molester, or murderer could expect. That is definitely the RIGHT sentence. :roll:
 
Geoist said:
Oh yes, in prison far longer than almost any rapist, child molester, or murderer could expect. That is definitely the RIGHT sentence. :roll:
Click to expand...
He recklessly endangered the lives of every uniformed service member, every person who ever worked for us, every undercover agent operating in a combat zone, and every informant who helped us when he indiscriminately gathered and released documents that he didn't even read. The only reason I'm glad they didn't find him guilty of the one charge that would put a noose around his neck is because I think he's mentally ill. That kid is so ****ed up in the head that he doesn't even know what gender he is, and he should have never been in the Army, let alone Iraq.
 
Surtr said:
He recklessly endangered the lives of every uniformed service member, every person who ever worked for us, every undercover agent operating in a combat zone, and every informant who helped us when he indiscriminately gathered and released documents that he didn't even read. The only reason I'm glad they didn't find him guilty of the one charge that would put a noose around his neck is because I think he's mentally ill. That kid is so ****ed up in the head that he doesn't even know what gender he is, and he should have never been in the Army, let alone Iraq.
Click to expand...

Manning's crime was exposing the truth. It was the US govt that decided to unnecessarily endanger the lives of young soldiers. You can thank the US govt for the thousands of soldier deaths, you can thank the US govt for thousands of physical wounds, you can thank the US govt for thousands of mental wounds (many of which have led to suicide).

And how you think exposing the truth warrants far more jailtime than for molesting a child is beyond me.
 
Geoist said:
Manning's crime was exposing the truth. It was the US govt that decided to unnecessarily endanger the lives of young soldiers. You can thank the US govt for the thousands of soldier deaths, you can thank the US govt for thousands of physical wounds, you can thank the US govt for thousands of mental wounds (many of which have led to suicide).

And how you think exposing the truth warrants far more jailtime than for molesting a child is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Actually the "crime" or "crimes" that Manning was convicted of were six espionage counts, five theft charges, a computer fraud charge and several (violating a lawful general regulation) military infractions. Most which he actually tried to plead guilty to for reduced charges. Just because you think what he did was right for your stated reasons, does not mean his "crime" was exposing the truth. How you think that if any rapist, child molester or murderer were convicted on over a dozen charges of the same (and or other crimes related to committing those crimes) would not be serving a similar lengthy prison stay is beyond reason and at odds with this truth you speak about. ;)
 
Last edited:
Geoist said:
Manning's crime was exposing the truth. It was the US govt that decided to unnecessarily endanger the lives of young soldiers. You can thank the US govt for the thousands of soldier deaths, you can thank the US govt for thousands of physical wounds, you can thank the US govt for thousands of mental wounds (many of which have led to suicide).
Click to expand...
Which are all natural risks of enlistment during wartime.

And how you think exposing the truth warrants far more jailtime than for molesting a child is beyond me.
Click to expand...

I love how you people have to manipulate the truth to get a point in.
 
repeter said:
You know what, I think the problem is evolution's/God's (whichever way you go) fault for creating humans. If there were no people there would be no Iraq or any war

Does that help you understand why your point is irrelevant to the current conversation? My example is completely sound by your logic, but I hope you can see my example (and therefore your logic) is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

That was my post.

Geoist said:
God is not to blame for the evil actions of humans.
Click to expand...

It's incredible how badly you missed the entire point of what I said, I've never seen some miss such an easy point ever :doh

Geoist said:
And you didn't answer the question to my hypothetical: If we were occupied by another nation (say China) would you or would you not want those troops to have immunity?
Click to expand...

I don't have to respond to such an asinine query.

I'm sorry, after your post, I just can't debate this with you, I can't take you the least bit seriously anymore.
 
I found this article, which provided more information about Manning's verdict. Quite an interesting read, and thankfully it seems the presiding judge heard my concerns, and found the following:

Manning was also found guilty of "wrongfully and wantonly" causing to be published on the internet intelligence belonging to the US, "having knowledge that intelligence published on the internet is accesible to the enemy". That guilty ruling could still have widest ramifications for news organisations working on investigations relating to US national security.
Click to expand...

I myself find it concerning that on the spectrum of liberty and, for lack of a better word at present, safety, we are very much on the safe side. Probably far more than the Founding Fathers intended. This isn't without precedent, but let's hope that the War on Terror subsides, and we return to a happier balance.
 
Gie said:
Actually the "crime" or "crimes" that Manning was convicted of were six espionage counts, five theft charges, a computer fraud charge and several (violating a lawful general regulation) military infractions. Most which he actually tried to plead guilty to for reduced charges. Just because you think what he did was right for your stated reasons, does not mean his "crime" was exposing the truth.
Click to expand...

Every whistleblower must commit at least one 'crime' to expose the truth.'


How you think that if any rapist, child molester or murderer were convicted on over a dozen charges of the same (and or other crimes related to committing those crimes) would not be serving a similar lengthy prison stay is beyond reason and at odds with this truth you speak about. ;)
Click to expand...

How are the crimes that Manning committed (added up) the equivalent, let alone worse, than molesting even one child?
 
Surtr said:
Which are all natural risks of enlistment during wartime.
Click to expand...

Yeah, because 18 year olds, who are not even considered old enough to be responsible with alcohol, fully understand the risks when they sign up. :roll:



I love how you people have to manipulate the truth to get a point in.
Click to expand...

It is the truth. Most conservatives and some 'progressives' get more froathy at the mouth over people exposing corruption in the military and homeland security than they do over murderers, rapists, and molesters.
 
repeter said:
It's incredible how badly you missed the entire point of what I said, I've never seen some miss such an easy point ever :doh
Click to expand...

And you miss the point I was making that you are comparing apples and oranges.



I don't have to respond to such an asinine query.
Click to expand...

Because you and I both know your answer. Who, in their right mind would want to give foreign invaders immunity? You expect the Iraqis to act irrationally for our military's convenience.

I'm sorry, after your post, I just can't debate this with you, I can't take you the least bit seriously anymore.
Click to expand...

Goodbye. :peace
 
Geoist said:
Every whistleblower must commit at least one 'crime' to expose the truth.'
Click to expand...

You can be a whistleblower without ever committing a crime. Facts = gud. Lies = bad.
 
Geoist said:
Yeah, because 18 year olds, who are not even considered old enough to be responsible with alcohol, fully understand the risks when they sign up. :roll:
Click to expand...
Yes, we all know you and the other extremist libs hate the military.


It is the truth. Most conservatives and some 'progressives' get more froathy at the mouth over people exposing corruption in the military and homeland security than they do over murderers, rapists, and molesters.
Click to expand...
It's an intentional oversimplification of the facts, accompanied with a false comparison.
 
Geoist said:
Every whistleblower must commit at least one 'crime' to expose the truth.'
Click to expand...
Bunk hooey. What was the "crime" that Enron whistle blowers were charged with then? Oh wait, that was an empty platitude.

Geoist said:
How are the crimes that Manning committed (added up) the equivalent, let alone worse, than molesting even one child?
Click to expand...
I never said they were, try to keep up. I replied to your earlier (specious) claim and addressed it. Namely how you think that if any rapist, child molester or murderer were convicted on over a dozen charges of the same (and or other crimes related to committing those crimes) would not be serving a similar lengthy prison stay is beyond reason and at odds with this truth you speak about. :doh
 
War on Drugs, War on Terror, War on Liberty.

They just can't announce that last one with trumpets blaring and flying colors because somebody would shoot them, so they're trying the quiet approach.
 
Gie said:
Bunk hooey. What was the "crime" that Enron whistle blowers were charged with then? Oh wait, that was an empty platitude.
Click to expand...

I am talking about whistleblowers on our military. Because of their particular professions, most people in the military have no way of whistleblowing without committing a federal crime. Snowden is a perfect example.


I never said they were, try to keep up. I replied to your earlier (specious) claim and addressed it. Namely how you think that if any rapist, child molester or murderer were convicted on over a dozen charges of the same (and or other crimes related to committing those crimes) would not be serving a similar lengthy prison stay is beyond reason and at odds with this truth you speak about. :doh
Click to expand...

So you believe that, added up, all the crimes Snowden committed are worthy of more time in prison than a single charge of child molestation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom