• 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 embassy cables leak sparks global diplomacy crisis

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,443
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
The United States was catapulted into a worldwide diplomatic crisis today, with the leaking to the Guardian and other international media of more than 250,000 classified cables from its embassies, many sent as recently as February this year.

At the start of a series of daily extracts from the US embassy cables - many of which are designated "secret" – the Guardian can disclose that Arab leaders are privately urging an air strike on Iran and that US officials have been instructed to spy on the UN's leadership.

These two revelations alone would be likely to reverberate around the world. But the secret dispatches which were obtained by WikiLeaks, the whistlebowers' website, also reveal Washington's evaluation of many other highly sensitive international issues.

These include a major shift in relations between China and North Korea, Pakistan's growing instability and details of clandestine US efforts to combat al-Qaida in Yemen.

US embassy cables leak sparks global diplomacy crisis | World news | guardian.co.uk

Read the whole article, there's a ****-ton of LOL in it -- especially the part where the State Department said that the reason this kind of a leak could happen was 9/11.

I guess we're supposed to accept that as a valid excuse, despite the fact that the government has had 9+ years to figure this stuff out. :lol:
 
Cables Shine Light Into Secret Diplomatic Channels

A cache of a quarter-million confidential American diplomatic cables, most of them from the past three years, provides an unprecedented look at backroom bargaining by embassies around the world, brutally candid views of foreign leaders and frank assessments of nuclear and terrorist threats.

Some of the cables, made available to The New York Times and several other news organizations, were written as recently as late February, revealing the Obama administration’s exchanges over crises and conflicts. The material was originally obtained by WikiLeaks, an organization devoted to revealing secret documents. WikiLeaks intends to make the archive public on its Web site in batches, beginning Sunday.

Source: The New York Times

Some of the things they mention are rather juicy.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Merged threads
 
I love some of the comments at the bottom. :lol:

And I totally lol'd at this part:

When the Guardian put this allegation to Crowley, the state department spokesman said: "Let me assure you: our diplomats are just that, diplomats. They do not engage in intelligence activities. They represent our country around the world, maintain open and transparent contact with other governments as well as public and private figures, and report home. That's what diplomats have done for hundreds of years."

Yeah, sure, okay. whatever you say dood. :lol:
 
I love some of the comments at the bottom. :lol:

And I totally lol'd at this part:



Yeah, sure, okay. whatever you say dood. :lol:

What? Were you expecting the truth?
 
As I posted yesterday Obama could at any point shut down this Enemy of the United States and the West at any minute.

Why has he not ordered shutting it down?

Could it be that he is secretly enjoying seeing this information leaking out all the time?

We know it has to involve someone pretty high up in the Administration or Government higher than a Pfc. or the information would be much more limited in scope.

A Pfc. Bradley Manning is accused of leaking diplomatic cables and other classified documents to WikiLeaks, and if this is true how does he have access to such a wide variety of information.

If President Bush were allowing this to go on when we know the ability to stop it is only a few key strokes away the Anti-American, blame America "Firsters" would be screaming for his head on a platter.

If this is and I believe it is putting lives at risk and it it does cause anyone to die who ever is behind and or involved in any way are guilty of treason and should face the death penalty regardless of who the hell it is or how high it goes.

I believe that since Julian Assange Wikileaks founder has said he wants to bring down America I see this SOB as a legitimate target just like any we have gone after with the Predator in the past.

I also see anyone who supports and or defends him as an enemy who should be dealt with with any and all the force available.

In light of the knowledge this could have all been prevented Obama's protests are hollow window dressing at best.
 
If the Wikileaks info is supposed to surprise me, colour me unimpressed. There appears to be nothing here that will have long term consequences.
 
Last edited:
If the Wikileaks info is supposed to surprise me, colour me unimpressed. There appears to be nothing here that will have long term consequences.

If it costs someone their life does that possibly qualify as a long term consequence, or does it depend on if they are personally known to to you or maybe a family member?
 
Many more cables name diplomats’ confidential sources, from foreign legislators and military officers to human rights activists and journalists, often with a warning to Washington: “Please protect” or “Strictly protect.”

The Times has withheld from articles and removed from documents it is posting online the names of some people who spoke privately to diplomats and might be at risk if they were publicly identified. The Times is also withholding some passages or entire cables whose disclosure could compromise American intelligence efforts.

I'm sure that foreign newspapers and wikileaks will be similarly circumspect.
 
As I posted yesterday Obama could at any point shut down this Enemy of the United States and the West at any minute.

Why has he not ordered shutting it down?

And how exactly can he do this? The website is not on a US server and is run by non-American's... how exactly can he do anything. Block it from the eyes of American's? 1st amendment anyone? Funny how a conservative is for censorship all of a sudden.

Saying that, the website in question was attacked with DOS (Denial of service) attack so someone did try to at least hurt the site. They were not successful.. guess it was not the Russians or Chinese.

Could it be that he is secretly enjoying seeing this information leaking out all the time?

And why should be enjoying watching his country being the laughing stock of the world? Or maybe it is your hyper-partisan attitude shining through again? Then again most of it was pretty much common knowledge and is only being confirmed.

We know it has to involve someone pretty high up in the Administration or Government higher than a Pfc. or the information would be much more limited in scope.

A Pfc. Bradley Manning is accused of leaking diplomatic cables and other classified documents to WikiLeaks, and if this is true how does he have access to such a wide variety of information.

No it does not. After 9/11 the information sharing between the many many many US government organisations was pushed, since as everyone knows.. if these agencies had actually shared information, then 9/11 could have been prevented. Now one of the drawbacks is that many people will have access to such things, including a Pfc from Army Intelligence. I am guessing that the real fall out from this will be the walls that Bush and his government broke down after 9/11 will go up again and the FBI and CIA and so on wont talk to each other. On the bright side for you conservative types, no need for the Department of Homeland Security then! Money saver! You should be thanking this guy then.. saving you a ton of money!

If President Bush were allowing this to go on when we know the ability to stop it is only a few key strokes away the Anti-American, blame America "Firsters" would be screaming for his head on a platter.

Err the information sharing was started by Bush ... It was Bush policies that made it possible for this to happen, and of course supposedly preventing many attacks. Cant have it both ways..

If this is and I believe it is putting lives at risk and it it does cause anyone to die who ever is behind and or involved in any way are guilty of treason and should face the death penalty regardless of who the hell it is or how high it goes.

You mean any American of course. Treason cant be placed on non-American's..

I believe that since Julian Assange Wikileaks founder has said he wants to bring down America I see this SOB as a legitimate target just like any we have gone after with the Predator in the past.

You believe wrong.. not a shocker, but you do. At worst he has said he wants open government.

I also see anyone who supports and or defends him as an enemy who should be dealt with with any and all the force available.

LOL, so you are saying that Comcast and every ISP, every computer maker and so on are "enemy of the state" because they are helping wikileaks? So when are you gonna stop using your ISP since it allows you access to the site or sites that use the information.. have you stopped watching Fox News btw since they are now by your definition also traitors by even mentioning the story.

In light of the knowledge this could have all been prevented Obama's protests are hollow window dressing at best.

Again this has very little to do with Obama, since he did not put in place the policies that made it possible. Your hyperpartisanship has blinded you.
 
If it costs someone their life does that possibly qualify as a long term consequence, or does it depend on if they are personally known to to you or maybe a family member?

Point to the names of people whose lives you feel will be threatened, then we'll talk.
 
I'm sure that foreign newspapers and wikileaks will be similarly circumspect.

With a team of more than 50 reporters and researchers, SPIEGEL has viewed, analyzed and vetted the mass of documents. In most cases, the magazine has sought to protect the identities of the Americans' informants, unless the person who served as the informant was senior enough to be politically relevant. In some cases, the US government expressed security concerns and SPIEGEL accepted a number of such objections. In other cases, however, SPIEGEL felt the public interest in reporting the news was greater than the threat to security. Throughout our research, SPIEGEL reporters and editors weighed the public interest against the justified interest of countries in security and confidentiality.

The Guardian has made the same approach. No idea about El Pais and Le Monde. I believe Wikileaks itself is taking the same tact. Criticise it when it actually happens.
 
If the Wikileaks info is supposed to surprise me, colour me unimpressed. There appears to be nothing here that will have long term consequences.

The long term consequence is that America cannot be trusted with intelligence from foreign intelligence services because Americans can't keep secrets. This drives a stake into the heart of American intelligence.

But that's a good thing if it weakens the US Govt. The federal govt. is a force for evil.
 
The Guardian has made the same approach. No idea about El Pais and Le Monde. I believe Wikileaks itself is taking the same tact. Criticise it when it actually happens.

Yeah. Wikileaks is a model of scrupulousness.
 
The Guardian has made the same approach. No idea about El Pais and Le Monde. I believe Wikileaks itself is taking the same tact. Criticise it when it actually happens.

No, I'll criticize now. The secrecy of our sources should not be subject to the balancing tests of foreign editorial boards.
 
No, I'll criticize now. The secrecy of our sources should not be subject to the balancing tests of foreign editorial boards.

That isn't what your original post implied. You claim that foreign news sources would be less responsible than the NYT. When that happens, you can criticise them.
 
That isn't what your original post implied. You claim that foreign news sources would be less responsible than the NYT. When that happens, you can criticise them.

Both of my posts imply the exact same thing - foreigners use very different standards when determining whether the benefit of publishing something outweighs the harms to the US. I don't trust foreign editorial boards (or domestic ones for that matter) to do what's in the best interest of the country and I certainly don't trust wikileaks. I'll criticize now, thanks.
 
If you don't trust the domestic ones, why on earth would you value the NYT's promise to be circumspect over Der Spiegels or any others overseas? That's what you implied originally.
 
If you don't trust the domestic ones, why on earth would you value the NYT's promise to be circumspect over Der Spiegels or any others overseas? That's what you implied originally.

...

I trust the NYT this much: [...].
I trust foreign editorial boards this much: [..].
I trust wikileaks this much: [.].

Note: None of these are large amounts.
 
a bunch of crap here
As I posted yesterday Obama could at any point shut down this Enemy of the United States and the West at any minute.

Why has he not ordered shutting it down?

Could it be that he is secretly enjoying seeing this information leaking out all the time?
tell us how Obama prevents this information from being disseminated on the net

We know it has to involve someone pretty high up in the Administration or Government higher than a Pfc. or the information would be much more limited in scope.

A Pfc. Bradley Manning is accused of leaking diplomatic cables and other classified documents to WikiLeaks, and if this is true how does he have access to such a wide variety of information.
what rank would you have doing the grunt work instead of the pfc?

If President Bush were allowing this to go on when we know the ability to stop it is only a few key strokes away the Anti-American, blame America "Firsters" would be screaming for his head on a platter.
you have to be kidding. it was bush's white house that was committing the leaks. or have you forgotten about the intentional disclosure of a covert CIA agent, a leak made purely for partisan politics

If this is and I believe it is putting lives at risk and it it does cause anyone to die who ever is behind and or involved in any way are guilty of treason and should face the death penalty regardless of who the hell it is or how high it goes.
point out what would be found treasonable

I believe that since Julian Assange Wikileaks founder has said he wants to bring down America
do you have a cite indicating he has actually said that; if so, please post it as i have not seen reference to such a statement until reading your post
I see this SOB as a legitimate target just like any we have gone after with the Predator in the past.
why, because he prints factual information that our government and others would rather be concealed from public view
why are you so opposed to the truth being exposed that you would be willing to kill someone to accomplish that end?
I also see anyone who supports and or defends him as an enemy who should be dealt with with any and all the force available.
then you must consider me your enemy as i appreciate and applaud those who have the courage and means to blow the whistle, exposing wrongdoing
In light of the knowledge this could have all been prevented Obama's protests are hollow window dressing at best.
you say there is knowledge all of this [whistle blowing, it is presumed] could have been prevented. again, explain how it could have been silenced
 
The newspapers and websites that publish this should be shut down. They are sharing illegally obtained information that is internationally important to the US. The owner of wikileaks should either be jailed or assassinated.
 
The newspapers and websites that publish this should be shut down. They are sharing illegally obtained information that is internationally important to the US. The owner of wikileaks should either be jailed or assassinated.

so you want censorship
where only what is published meets with the approval of the government
you are willing to kill to achieve that end

why is this any different than was imposed by the nazis and communists?
 
so you want censorship
where only what is published meets with the approval of the government
you are willing to kill to achieve that end

why is this any different than was imposed by the nazis and communists?

No, I don't feel people have the right to steal and publish, especially when it is internationally damaging information. Would it be censorship to keep someone from stealing your information and preventing them from publishing it all over the world?
 
The newspapers and websites that publish this should be shut down. They are sharing illegally obtained information that is internationally important to the US. The owner of wikileaks should either be jailed or assassinated.

:lamo

So censorship basically? The Government exerting its will and stopping free press?
Oh and US is welcome to remove its own First Amendment. It has no authority over the rest of the world.

Tut tut Saudi Arabia, turning on your fellow Muslim countries. Iran isn't going to be happy with you :lol:

Come on, seriously. This Wikileaks is ****. I could have told you all of that.
Arabs don't like Iran. US spying on everyone and anything (shock horror, a country using its intelligence agencies), China isn't happy with NK.

I was hoping for something more interesting but no, all Saudi's do is bitch about the evil Persians who aren't Arab or Sunni. The devils! :roll:
 
Last edited:
The newspapers and websites that publish this should be shut down. They are sharing illegally obtained information that is internationally important to the US.

So... any newspaper or tv station or website that even remotely publish anything about this should be shut down? So no media or internet for any American's... nice. Of course the US cant do it for any newspaper, tv-station or website that is based outside the US... but hey!

The owner of wikileaks should either be jailed or assassinated.

Well since he is no where near the US, then it must mean you want to break US law and assassinate him...



Funny how conservatives piss on law and order whenever it pleases their agenda..
 
Back
Top Bottom