Over 90,000 US Military Records Leaked

[Guest]

Looks like lots of information about US operations in Afghan/Iraq has been leaked. Full story here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-10758578

[HyperU2 11]

Doesn't sound too enlightening.

[Serclaes 0]

I don't like this. This could be very dangerous for the troops there. I know they are withholding some time critical information until it is safer to release but i hope they didn't make a mistake while sorting these out.

There is a reason why these things are secret and it's not just to keep curious people out, but to save lives.

[Lhowon 10]

I don't like this. This could be very dangerous for the troops there. I know they are withholding some time critical information until it is safer to release but i hope they didn't make a mistake while sorting these out.

There is a reason why these things are secret and it's not just to keep curious people out, but to save lives.

While that's no doubt true in many cases, it's worth remembering that in the past documents have been kept secret to seriously mislead (and outright lie to) the public in regards to America's motives and strategy leading up to and during wartime, the obvious example being the Pentagon Papers.

The press has shown itself to be capable of censoring itself to exclude information that could be a security threat, and it certainly seems like that's happening in this case too. Given the cost in lives that can be attributed to "secret" policies and motives (again, the Vietnam War is a prime example) I think the small risk that the press makes a mistake is worth taking to inform people of what their administration is doing.

I should say that I don't approve of anything and everything being leaked, of course not. But when a leak exposes something that is at odds with what the public is being told, well that seems to me important and worthwhile.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Lhowon

[echo1 0]

I don't like this. This could be very dangerous for the troops there. I know they are withholding some time critical information until it is safer to release but i hope they didn't make a mistake while sorting these out.

There is a reason why these things are secret and it's not just to keep curious people out, but to save lives.

Except for when it is stuff like this -

The documents released by the Wikileaks website include details of killings of Afghan civilians unreported until now.

[Deadfast 43]

...in an intentionally misleading and biased way.

There are tow sides of coin at play here. One is a complete secrecy and the other is blowing the bubble for maximal publicity. Neither one is good in particular.

[echo1 0]

The problem is that no one is really in a position to make an objective decision on such things. The public will blow the whistle for the lulz, and the military will hide everything up to protect it's own ass. Bit of a lose-lose situation really.

[Serclaes 0]

While that's no doubt true in many cases, it's worth remembering that in the past documents have been kept secret to seriously mislead (and outright lie to) the public in regards to America's motives and strategy leading up to and during wartime, the obvious example being the Pentagon Papers.

The press has shown itself to be capable of censoring itself to exclude information that could be a security threat, and it certainly seems like that's happening in this case too. Given the cost in lives that can be attributed to "secret" policies and motives (again, the Vietnam War is a prime example) I think the small risk that the press makes a mistake is worth taking to inform people of what their administration is doing.

I should say that I don't approve of anything and everything being leaked, of course not. But when a leak exposes something that is at odds with what the public is being told, well that seems to me important and worthwhile.

I concur. It's not right to intentionally mislead the public about this.

But having seen their edit of the Apache shooting cameramen and "civilians" i lost my trust in the unbiasedness of Wikileaks. What tells you they didn't withhold other documents which would give an explanation why these people did what they did.

[Guest]

A very valid point.

It's quite scary isn't it, humans are so stupid, that we live in a world where we literally cannot trust anyone.

What a stupid race we are!

[STALKERGB 6]

I don't like this. This could be very dangerous for the troops there. I know they are withholding some time critical information until it is safer to release but i hope they didn't make a mistake while sorting these out.

There is a reason why these things are secret and it's not just to keep curious people out, but to save lives.

I believe the documents go from 2004 - 2009 so hopefully any info wouldn't compramise troop safety. The US have said they changed tactics at the end of 2009 in response to the leak (the staemaent that is, not the tactic change) as well IIRC

[NoRailgunner 0]

Strict censorship or cleaned files for public presentation or just plain and true facts?

Who is able to give a non-biased explanation?

What would be a good reason to hide or neglect true facts and documents?

Or is it just better to "reveal-leak" such facts after 10+ years?

But maybe some people dont like to see that war isnt a clean thing with stereotype good and evil side. Trying to blind themselves and others....

[Guest]

Another thing weird at the moment, deaths on our side have absolutely sky rocketed this year. There hasn't been such a high mortality rate in UK forces since 2001, when it all started.

Seems like the Taliban have upped their game somewhat.

[HyperU2 11]

Well when they ran from Iraq they had to go somewhere.

[Baff1 0]

The UK forces?

[Guest]

The UK forces?

Huh?

What I mean is that the UK has suffered it's highest losses in one period of time since the war began.

I am not sure about other countries though.

[Daniel 0]

...

richiespeed13 postured that the Taliban are recently inflicting high casualties on coallition forces.

HyperU2 replied that the enemy fled from Iraq and had to go somewhere.

Baff1 mistook HyperU2 as referring to UK forces fleeing Iraq.

At least that's how I read it.

Either way with the new "Courageous Restraint" tactic and the enemy using more IED based attacks we were bound to take more casualties. :/

[Guest]

"Courageous Restraint", oh dear, that sounds like a stupid tactic made up by some politicians...

What exactly is that tactic?

[Daniel 0]

As far as I recall, it's essentially Coallition Forces using the minimum force necessary to take out the threat if there's the possibility that civilians could be in the area - not firing back if necessary. It's intended to reduce the number of civilian deaths, especially from airstrikes.

There was talk that some commanders are employing the tactic too strictly for fear of breaking ROE and in doing so risking their own men's lives. I think General Petraeus said he intended to look into that as part of his new strategy.

Edited July 26, 2010 by Daniel

[TangoRomeo 10]

At some they even wanted to hand out a "courages restraint medal" .. did that actually happen? For the rise in casualty figures, also consider foregoing troop surges, creating a target rich environment.

[HyperU2 11]

...

richiespeed13 postured that the Taliban are recently inflicting high casualties on coallition forces.

HyperU2 replied that the enemy fled from Iraq and had to go somewhere.

Baff1 mistook HyperU2 as referring to UK forces fleeing Iraq.

At least that's how I read it.

Either way with the new "Courageous Restraint" tactic and the enemy using more IED based attacks we were bound to take more casualties. :/

I doubt he mistook what I said. I believe he just added his interpretation of events.

The big headline in this story was "civilian deaths are up" the small print is it's from Taliban roadside bombs. Got to love that media spin.

[mattxr 9]

There is no good in WAR no matter what side your on! There is no Good vs Evil! No matter how hard you try to coverup the bad it will always be found out in the end!!

[HyperU2 11]

I love the "no war" argument. It may even work on some planet.

[bascule42 10]

It's a shame that mostly sensationalist media groups have to get thier hands on this.

It is worth reading Wikileaks statement on this: Here.

In particular: "We have delayed the release of some 15,000 reports from total archive as part of a harm minimization process demanded by our source. After further review, these reports will be released, with occasional redactions, and eventually, in full, as the security situation in Afghanistan permits".

One would hope of course that the source is qualified to make decisions on materials that could impact the safety and security of coalition forces.

=====================================

On a lighter note there is some good source material, best there is in my mind, to inspire Mission Makers here. :)

[Prydain 1]

OVER 90000!!!!!

Sorry, I had to.

[Guest]

over 90000!!!!!

Sorry, i had to.

looool!