Over 90,000 US Military Records Leaked

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

If your really think that you should get banned or at least get an infraction IMHO. Why? This is not the place for death wishes and this kind of attitude!

If there wouldn't be people risking their life (not automatically meaning death but other things like imprisonment, loss of live standard etc.) to leak such informations then we would still think that f.e. the Gulf of Tonkin resolution was right. God bless there are people out there who are willing to sacrifice theirselfs for the better and bigger.

IMHO you should put yourself in the shoes of an informant or cooperative Afghani who may be shot very soon.

This is TREASON folks. Nothing more, nothing less. You can spout all the poetic Bullshit you want about the person leaking the information being noble, and fighting for the greater good, but in the end it's exactly that - bullshit.

I have friends in Afghanistan, not just American soldiers either. This leak is putting their lives in danger, and the lives of countless others, as well as many Afghan civilians who just want peace, and have cooperated with us to further that goal.

If you think I am going overboard by wishing that this sonofa***** get's executed, maybe your right. How about we tie them up, and leave them in a room with the widows of the dead. Is that better? :angryfire:

[Big Mac 19]

IMHO you should put yourself in the shoes of an informant or cooperative Afghani who may be shot very soon.

This is TREASON folks. Nothing more, nothing less. You can spout all the poetic Bullshit you want about the person leaking the information being noble, and fighting for the greater good, but in the end it's exactly that - bullshit.

I have friends in Afghanistan, not just American soldiers either. This leak is putting their lives in danger, and the lives of countless others, as well as many Afghan civilians who just want peace, and have cooperated with us to further that goal.

If you think I am going overboard by wishing that this sonofa***** get's executed, maybe your right. How about we tie them up, and leave them in a room with the widows of the dead. Is that better? :angryfire:

I haven't been following this very closely because keeping a secret in political circles is like sending a woman into a prison and expecting the inmates wont have their way with her, so it didn't surprise me that someone would leak something about the war for whatever reasons. I personally dont consider it treason, but at the same time I don't consider it right either.

I can promise you the person who leaked this to the media was either an elected official or a disgruntled employee of an intelligence agency. I don't believe the person should be shot, imprisoned, drawn and quartered,or what have you just fired or impeached, but that's not likely to happen even if they do find the leak which they won't because it doesn't have to do with a super secret project, or nukes, or aliens so why waste the effort. Leaks are a fact of life when a bunch of people have access to classified material. Besides the US Government labels anything that is embarrassing to the national image Top Secret, even if all it would do is reinforce the world's opinion about us.

I do believe however somebody here said that info thatwas leaked really wasn't anything the public didn't already know..

I eye balled some of the leaked material myself and I didn't see anything that shocked me.

Taliban/ISI connection = Everyone knew about that.

Taliban with IR seeking missiles = We gave them and others a shit load of stingers in the 80s and I even remember hearing about the Taliban firing one during the invasion, It missed.

A new JSOC Hunter Killer Task Force by the name of TF273 = Remember TF121 and TF626? Same thing different name.

Iran is engaged in an extensive covert campaign to arm, finance and equip the Taliban and Afghan warlords allied to al-Qaeda = They did the same thing in Iraq. It's nothing too personal they're just trying to keep the balance of power.

Many civilian casualties - caused by Taliban roadside bombs = Roadside bombs know no prejudice

Nato missions that went wrong - have gone unreported = Nobody likes to report bad news.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Big Mac

[T.S.C.Plage 0]

IMHO you should put yourself in the shoes of an informant or cooperative Afghani who may be shot very soon.

And who tells you that the names haven't been altered by wikileaks or the source already. I mean the source made it quite clear that he/she/it has gone through all the stuff personally and altered such things and I don't think only the coalition side is included here. The source asked wikileaks and the medias that got the stuff before the release to do the same.

This is TREASON folks. Nothing more, nothing less. You can spout all the poetic Bullshit you want about the person leaking the information being noble, and fighting for the greater good, but in the end it's exactly that - bullshit.

That's your opinion. I like to differ.

I have friends in Afghanistan, not just American soldiers either. This leak is putting their lives in danger, and the lives of countless others, as well as many Afghan civilians who just want peace, and have cooperated with us to further that goal.

The persons who in first place have put these lives (and many others) in danger is the former president of the United States and his coatholders.

If you think I am going overboard by wishing that this sonofa***** get's executed, maybe your right. How about we tie them up, and leave them in a room with the widows of the dead. Is that better? :angryfire:

You surely are getting overboard. That's not my personal opinion that's a fact! You're from a western country which has democracy and Christianity written all over its flag. I'd suggest you act like that if you stand behind your constitution. Edited July 30, 2010 by T.S.C.Plage

[Lhowon 10]

IMHO you should put yourself in the shoes of an informant or cooperative Afghani who may be shot very soon.

How will this information lead to that? Informants are either known to the Taliban, in which case they're fucked, or they aren't, in which case this information has no bearing on their safety whatsoever.

Or is your logic that when the Taliban find out some factual accounts of American activities they will be super extra keen to kill them and anyone associating with them? Like they weren't already?

This is TREASON folks. Nothing more, nothing less. You can spout all the poetic Bullshit you want about the person leaking the information being noble, and fighting for the greater good, but in the end it's exactly that - bullshit.

Oh stop being a drama queen. No doubt you thought the Pentagon Papers were treason too. These documents are from a previous period, only had a low-level secrecy assigned to them, and have had anything deemed too sensitive held back. Calling something "bullshit" isn't an argument by the way.

I have friends in Afghanistan, not just American soldiers either. This leak is putting their lives in danger, and the lives of countless others, as well as many Afghan civilians who just want peace, and have cooperated with us to further that goal.

Believe it or not you can't just say something and make it be true. You need to justify it. How exactly is this leak putting those people in more danger than they were already?

If you think I am going overboard by wishing that this sonofa***** get's executed, maybe your right. How about we tie them up, and leave them in a room with the widows of the dead. Is that better? :angryfire:

Widows? What widows? Hypothetical widows from the future? Widows you just made up right now? How about the relatives of civilians killed in some of the operations detailed in the documents - they actually exist, but I'm guessing you've got rather less self-righteous anger on their behalf.

[Big Mac 19]

You're from a western country which has democracy and Christianity written all over its flag.

I thought it was a republic. Damn you public school!! Edited July 30, 2010 by Big Mac

[WhoCares 0]

I didn't say anything about government altering the reports. I was talking about the actual soldiers at the war making false reports.

But you answer your last question. I trust the reports more. but there is a chance that reports might be false.

A good example might be the Kunduz Airstrike on 3rd Sept. 2009, which made some big wakes here in Germany:

Wardiary vs. Wikipedia

Granted that Wikipedia might not be the perfect link, but anyway... That's 56 Taliban by the initial report vs. 119 incl. at least 30 civilians.

[Pathy 0]

---------- Post added at 02:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:07 AM ----------

[/color]

Blah blah blah

As I previously pointed out, no matter what evidence or studies I (or anyone else) posts, nothing is going to change your opinion anymore than any posted by you will change mine. Which is pretty much why I didn't bother to do so.

It's just a troll trick. Whatever I post you refute. So why bother?

Blah blah blah

And this is why it's pointless to have a discussion with you. Rather than coming out with sources that refute the ones i've provided that are apparently so flawed and biased that they're easily refuted, you just paper over it with babble. If your argument was that solid, you wouldn't be clutching at straws - You would instead be providing, or commenting on, actual evidence that i'm wrong. So far, you haven't.

I'm coming to the conclusion that you're very intelligent, a deep thinker. Because of that, I think you've grown very used to being able to BS everyone around you without ever having to actually prove what you're saying in your everyday life. Now, you can chase words around in circles and come up with all kinds of intellectual explanations as to why this and why that, and whilst I'm presuming that in your daily life, you can appear blindingly intellectual by talking what is, effectively, theory, but I for one am a person that requires something more than theory to be convinced.

As someone who studied Economics and Politics as a degree, this is something i'm very familiar with. I'm also very aware that theres a stark difference between talking about something theoretically, and talking about something in real world terms. And from an intellectual standpoint, when putting your theory into real world terms, you have to provide evidence. If you don't have evidence, you can't expect to stand up in a debate.

As for studies that prove that, stop the press, yes, the Coalition have killed Civilians? Think about your reaction if I provided you with a study that showed soley that the Taliban had killed civilians. You'd dismiss me outright for posting a source that didn't provide evidence towards the point I was making. Consider it a mark of respect that I haven't done likewise.

Quite frankly, your attempt to frame me as someone who would refute any evidence given is pathetic, since you've given me no evidence to actually play with. All you've given me so far, is your intial statement of fact.

The only problem is we kill far more women and children than they do.

We're at the point in discussion where you're telling me 'studies that show X and Y' are opinions (fair enough), yet lets not lose sight of the reason this arose; because you made a claim, a factual claim, that we kill far more women and children than they do. I'm also going to pre-empt. Please don't do what I think you'll do, and claim that you never presented it as fact, because I don't want to have to start explaining English.

If you're willing to stand by this factual claim, produce the goods.

[Deadfast 43]

Believe it or not you can't just say something and make it be true. You need to justify it. How exactly is this leak putting those people in more danger than they were already?

Well, by releasing their names and addresses for one.

[pre-Vet 10]

So let me get this straight previously you were saying that the Taliban would punish people who listened to music.

But now that I have pointed out to you that I do not think this is a crime worthy of death you have changed your story to now say that they kill people who listen to music.

I said:

dont forget they slaughterd a lot of civilians before 2001 when they where the goverment. Stoning women because they got raped and killing people when they would listen to music. no trail just execution.

than I had to spell it out for you

what I meant is the Taliban would kill people who would listen to music, so I guess you agree with me that is not our morality.

I think its just too hard for you to agree with someone and thats why the half of this board is having problems with your way of discussion, always twisting your own words only to get them quoted back to you so you can read back what BS you posted.

not backing up a single argument and then telling its only based on opinions, doesnt work when you use words like:

baby killers.

It's one thing to only kill in defence, it's quite another to willfully place yourself in a confrontational position where you force a life or death scenario in which you must kill to defend yourself or your compatriots. This is not defence, it is aggression. Specifically, provocation.

I'm not saying you are wrong to have done what you have done,

that doesn't even make sence. telling me what a agressor I am and then telling it snot wrong..

btw, "ABu Gharaib or Haditha" has nothing to do with NATO, as someone who would be interested in this subject would know the U.S. isnt NATO and OIF was not a NATO operaton.

If you will only kill in defence, what on earth were you doing in Afghanistan?

bringing freedom, seeing how a country developed very strong and positive in only 2 years of freedom from the Taliban.

what did you do to make the world a littlebit better? (and giving money to let someone else do the dirty job obviously doesn't count.)

[Guest]

It's the government who caused the situation, it's the government that has to get out of it.

I am not saying it's right, I'm not even saying it's avoidable, but it is a side effect of keeping shit secret, for the better or worse.

[Baff1 0]

I said:

that doesn't even make sence. telling me what a agressor I am and then telling it snot wrong..

I am reasonably comfortable with the concept of pre-emptive war and invasion in the name of my national intrest.

Not a 100% comfortable perhaps... I think there is a strong sense of guilt involved for me still. These actions are still a case of the strong picking on the weak which ever way you look at it. Misery still ensues as a result of our actions. More misery than we would wish on people if we actually knew them personally or were confronted with them face to face.

The idea for example that I might fight a war I consider as inevitable with an expeditionary force in their own country rather than allowing them to build up the strength required to fight it in mine, is one I find to be of sound logic.

(This is a principle I practise everyday with pest control on my farm).

But this is contrary to the standards I would wish to be applied to myself. Conflicting with my principles of say "innocent until proven guilty" for example.

The idea that as a foreign investor who has a personal stake in the growth and development of foreign nations that I would be willing to use force in those nations to protect my assets and investments on which my livilihood is dependant is also quite rational for me.

I think of it in the same way as I think about cleaning my toilet. A necessary evil. Something that however unpleasant and unpalatable still needs to be done to maintain my standard of living/health. To provide the optimum enviroment for raising my children etc etc etc.

There is a time and place for aggression.

I don't expect the people I attack to thank me for it. Quite the opposite.

Neither do I seek to assuage my sense of guilt by telling myself I am bringing freedom and liberty etc.

I like to recognise evil where I see it. I wish to retain my overall sense of humanity even though some of my endeavours maybe in direct conflict with this.

Who knows? Perhaps in this way I am able to limit the negative effects I bring to the world in some way.

I believe myself to be a basicly good person... but not everything I do is. That's just life. I try to make the best of it.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Baff1

[walker 0]

Hi all

Washington Post Interview with the founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2010/07/28/VI2010072804930.html

Kind Regards walker

[Baff1 0]

I'm coming to the conclusion that you're very intelligent, a deep thinker. Because of that, I think you've grown very used to being able to BS everyone around you without ever having to actually prove what you're saying in your everyday life.

And I think some of the things you recognise as being absolutely factual are by their very nature inaccurate/unprovable and hence cannot ever be considered factual.

Opinion is the best you are ever going to get.

Further to this I had believed this to be self evident. Beyond dispute. So blindingly obvious to all that no qualification was required.

In that I guess I was wrong.

So, better late than never I will qualify it to you now so that that this discussion might move on.

It is my belief that we have killed more civilians in Afghanistan during our tenure there than the Taliban have. Significantly more. This is as close to being a fact as I am personally able to ascertain. Should your own opinion differ, I am able to respect this, but I disagree with it.

For what it's worth in the above posted interview Wikileaks man has the deathtoll of civilians by Taliban actions since 2006 as 2,000. Which numbers 50-75% less than those provided in that other study previously linked, caused by coalition forces in just the first year alone.

I hope you would agree that these sort of numbers don't mean dick. That they support my perception of events still does not make for a very factual discussion in my opinion. I might as well have pulled these numbers out of my arse. I feel no doubt that you will be able to find other statistics to further your own perception or evidence to refute those sources as bias. In stating this I am not wishing to enter into a discussion on the relative accuracy of various studies but only to reinforce my position to you as both an informed and educated one and one that is not wildly beyond any credance.

I concur and sympathise with your posting link in the efforts to demonstrate your own opinion to have been an educated one.

Personally however, since it is unprovable in my eyes it is just time wasted since I have already extended you the benefit of the doubt of being an educated and informed person and for the main part seek to be addressed in the same respectful manner, not by validation, but by default. Out of common courtesy.

It is indeed a waste of your time to argue this point with me. My opinion remains the same and I have no desire to alter yours on this subject, only to state my own.

Obviously I can be wrong. I'm not used to being wrong however and usually it takes multiple repeated bludgeoning to get me to realise when I am. This of course is quite normal in most people and whenever my errors are finally got through to me I do very much appreciate any corrections and the efforts people have made in persisting with my education.

If I realise I have made a mistake, then rest assured I will fess up to it and thank those people who have corrected me.

---------- Post added at 03:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:26 PM ----------

what did you do to make the world a littlebit better? (and giving money to let someone else do the dirty job obviously doesn't count.)

What I do to make the world a little bit better is not always the same as my making the world a little bit better. Some of the things I have done to this ends in my younger days are no longer things I agree produced the results I was aiming for.

There are plenty of idealists who make things worse.

On a personal front the things I do and have done over my lifetime that I am proud of include 22 years of educating young people, charitable fund raising for medical research and historic conservation, beautifing my surroundings for both myself and all others who see it.

I spent some years as a performance artist and sought to use my position within the media to spread my ideals and philosophy (aah the foolishness of youth!). But mostly I think I brought pleasure and entertainment to people.

I own and maintain a nature reserve that preserves endangered species. I invest my money in societies that need it for mutual benefit.

I have stepped into countless fights to defend those weaker than me. (All of these achievements are probably more minor in nature than I would prefer to believe).

I have never considered killing someone to make the world a better place. I understand the concept and don't seek to judge those that do, but that is not the life path I have chosen for myself.

Neither do I recognise the life path of a soldier to be one more contributive to mankind than my own or indeed most other peoples. You may scorn the efforts of those people who fund your endeavours and the lifestyle you have chosen, but it's a team effort. Without them, your own efforts wouldn't have got very far. That lowly bus driver he is doing a job you couldn't stand. But it still needs doing. It still helps people. I rile at soldiers who are unable to respect the endeavours and contributions of all those that support them.

I consider myself to be a contributive member both to society and my species. Not a massive one for sure, but I think if we all do our little bit, if everyone takes care of our own little patch, then we've got it right there. The whole planet.

Edited July 30, 2010 by Baff1

[echo1 0]

IMHO you should put yourself in the shoes of an informant or cooperative Afghani who may be shot very soon.

This is TREASON folks. Nothing more, nothing less. You can spout all the poetic Bullshit you want about the person leaking the information being noble, and fighting for the greater good, but in the end it's exactly that - bullshit.

I have friends in Afghanistan, not just American soldiers either. This leak is putting their lives in danger, and the lives of countless others, as well as many Afghan civilians who just want peace, and have cooperated with us to further that goal.

If you think I am going overboard by wishing that this sonofa***** get's executed, maybe your right. How about we tie them up, and leave them in a room with the widows of the dead. Is that better? :angryfire:

Do you have anything to qualify how this particular information is a threat to people's lives, or are you just barking like a rabid dog?

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Do you have anything to qualify how this particular information is a threat to people's lives, or are you just barking like a rabid dog?

He's one of the few that cheered when JFK was shot. You see, 7K unit contracts for military transport helicopters don't just get agreed without good reason.

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

Do you have anything to qualify how this particular information is a threat to people's lives, or are you just barking like a rabid dog?

FPDR

Are you completely ignorant? Other than detailed information on previous engagements (which, if analyzed, can show any patterns we use, our tactics, the time it takes support to arrive, etc. etc.) it gives out detailed information on the Afghan civilians who are cooperating with us. I'm pretty sure the Taliban or one of their supporters are poring over this "war diary", looking for names/addresses etc.

Wikileaks has put the lives of INNOCENT people, who are simply trying to further peace, and stop Taliban attacks on them/their villages/coalition forces, at risk. If you fail to see how giving out their names, the name of their village, and in some cases their fathers name, harms or multiplies the potential for harm to come to them, you are a complete idiot.

A search by The New York Times through a sampling of the documents released by the organization WikiLeaks found reports that gave the names or other identifying features of dozens of Afghan informants, potential defectors and others who were cooperating with American and NATO troops.

The founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, has said that the organization withheld 15,000 of the approximately 92,000 documents in the archive that was released on Sunday to remove the names of informants in what he called a “harm minimization†process. But the 75,000 documents WikiLeaks put online provide information about possible informants, like their villages and in some cases their fathers’ names.

Asked on NBC’s “Today†show on Wednesday if the killing of an Afghan as a result of the WikiLeaks disclosure would be considered “collateral damage†in his efforts to make details of the war public, Mr. Assange said, “If we had, in fact, made that mistake, then, of course, that would be something that we would take very seriously.â€

In one 2007 report, for instance, a military officer discussed meeting with a person who was named in the report, who claimed to have worked with allied forces and wanted to continue doing so. The Times withheld details that could identify the man.

In another 2007 report, American troops met privately with an Afghan official, who was named in the report, who told the Americans about the recent movements of a local militant leader and his heavily armed force. The report also identified several other informants who were part of the official’s network.

Do you get it now, you ignorant hippie? :confused: :confused: :confused:

[-Snafu- 77]

Sorry but I don't recognise these to be "facts".

Evidence yes, facts no.

Perhaps you will learn to be more discerning one day.

The first report posted cites figures from the ISAF CIVCAS Database as well as utilising other databases.

The second report which is by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) includes a section in their report detailing how they arrive at those statistics. They explain their process in information gathering and analysis. It is very thorough.

The report by the Afghanistan Rights Monitor also includes a section to explain their methodology. Again, very thorough.

They establish and explain that, yes, their statistics are not 100% accurate and likely never will be. Their figures, however, are reached through detailed research and analysis utilising many sources and they do their best to make sure the information is as accurate as possible.

They do not come up with figures and sweeping statements based on half-assed perceptions and feelings.

However since someone else here has posted evidence to contradict Pathy's evidence, your point has become entirely moot.

Perhaps you will be able to understand now that these so called "facts" are commonly disputed and hence not "facts" at all but actually opinion.

It does not contradict Pathy's as he has already explained. Perhaps you should have actually looked at it.

Would it really have been so difficult for you to look this up for yourself?

Are you serious? Why would I do your research for you?

When you put forward an argument you provide evidence to back it up. You don't tell others to do it for you. How do you think university would go for you if you attended, handed in a report that put forward an argument, with no citations and no bibliography, and when questioned on that told the lecturer to go find it themselves?

Edited July 30, 2010 by Snafu

[fighterman 10]

i downloaded the file theirs loads of info about special forces calling in airstrikes

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Darkhorse 1-6,

if you're of sound mind, then you should tell a difference of supposedly putting lives of innocent civilians via release of some documents on the internet, versus holding down the trigger for continuous bursts of 30mm cannon shells that do kill innocent civilians on their home soil, as well as international reporters that happened to be there.

You'll be judged in the history books, not on the internet(s).

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

Oh shit not that fucking video again. They were helping the damn insurgents, and if they weren't then they were just a couple of idiots. Seriously, if you see an Apache Gunship firing at a house, would you run towards the house to mingle with the occupants?

Stop idolizing the leaker for gods sake! He IS NOT fighting for the greater good of humanity or whatever bullshit you guys are saying. Jesus Christ!

If this were WWII, the Korean War, Hell probably even Vietnam, or the Cold War (If it was the cold war he would already be dead by now) they would execute the sonofabitch for treason! Don't idolize a goddamned idiot who decided to put peoples lives at risk because he didn't like his boss or didn't get the fucking promotion he wanted!

Snap out of it people!

[Big Mac 19]

Oh shit not that fucking video again. They were helping the damn insurgents, and if they weren't then they were just a couple of idiots. Seriously, if you see an Apache Gunship firing at a house, would you run towards the house to mingle with the occupants?

Stop idolizing the leaker for gods sake! He IS NOT fighting for the greater good of humanity or whatever bullshit you guys are saying. Jesus Christ!

If this were WWII, the Korean War, Hell probably even Vietnam, or the Cold War (If it was the cold war he would already be dead by now) they would execute the sonofabitch for treason! Don't idolize a goddamned idiot who decided to put peoples lives at risk because he didn't like his boss or didn't get the fucking promotion he wanted!

Snap out of it people!

So maybe Scooter Libby and Dick Cheney should be executed for treason. They did more than this guy did, they actually outted an active CIA agent...

Why should this reporter be shot for exercising his right as an American to freedom of the press? Most reporters are responsible and redact a lot of information that could be harmful, except people like Matt Drudge and Geraldo Rivera, who don't give a shit about who they put in danger if it means getting their story. If you really want someone tried for treason then maybe you should look at the countless politicians, military officials, and intelligence agencies who leak stuff like this for a political agenda, they're the real criminals. Besides people aren't executed for treason here anymore, we just stick them in the supermax prison in Florence Colorado which is sentence worse than death.

Wikileaks has put the lives of INNOCENT people, who are simply trying to further peace, and stop Taliban attacks on them/their villages/coalition forces, at risk. If you fail to see how giving out their names, the name of their village, and in some cases their fathers name, harms or multiplies the potential for harm to come to them, you are a complete idiot.

More like people who took money from NATO in exchange for intel. Most of them are either taliban themselves or local warlords and I'll bet you a few of them are playing both sides of the fence. They're hardly innocent and they're hardly doing it for anything other than their own interests. The world isn't anywhere near as clear cut as you make it out to be. Everyone over there and here at home is out for their own interests.

Do you get it now, you ignorant hippie?

So anyone who disagrees with you is a hippie? Sounds like you've been to one tea party too many...

Other than detailed information on previous engagements (which, if analyzed, can show any patterns we use, our tactics, the time it takes support to arrive, etc. etc.)

Like they didn't know a lot of that already. They spend just as much time observing our forces as they do attacking them.. Edited July 31, 2010 by Big Mac

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

Why should this reporter be shot for exercising his right as an American to freedom of the press?

#1 - What reporter are you talking about?? :confused:

#2 - I'm talking about the military person(s) or the political person(s) who actually sent the files to wikileaks, not anybody from wikileaks.

#3 - Yes, stuff has leaked in the past. Small stuff here and there, bits and pieces of information, occasionally something good, mostly something useless, and sometimes both (I believe there was a leak saying that we used 12 AC-130s on an assault on an Afghan airfield during the beginning of the invasion. We actually had 3-4 in the entire theater at the time.) but never something like this. I mean, 90,000 documents ffs?

#4 - Are you an American? If so then you must be one of the idiots who rank an American prison worse than prison in a 3rd world country where you don't even get food, and your likely to be raped/shot.

[Big Mac 19]

#1 - What reporter are you talking about?? :confused:

#2 - I'm talking about the military person(s) or the political person(s) who actually sent the files to wikileaks, not anybody from wikileaks.

#3 - Yes, stuff has leaked in the past. Small stuff here and there, bits and pieces of information, occasionally something good, mostly something useless, and sometimes both (I believe there was a leak saying that we used 12 AC-130s on an assault on an Afghan airfield during the beginning of the invasion. We actually had 3-4 in the entire theater at the time.) but never something like this. I mean, 90,000 documents ffs?

#4 - Are you an American? If so then you must be one of the idiots who rank an American prison worse than prison in a 3rd world country where you don't even get food, and your likely to be raped/shot.

I misunderstood you on the first two. I thought you were referring to the NY Times reporter who broke the story.

As for 3 and 4,

A: I call the outting of an active CIA Agent a big thing. Plus most of that stuff that leaked wasn't anything new. If you go back a few pages I pretty much did a copy and paste from the article about what was in those 90,000 documents and I even saw some of it for myself and it wasn't anything that hasn't been released or that anyone with common sense couldn't figure out for themselves. It pretty much confirmed what people already suspected.

B: I am an American and have you ever been to an American prison? I have many times when I was in college for criminal justice and it's not a fun place especially if it's a maximum security prison where you're locked up 23 hours a day with very little social interaction, and for 1 hour a day you get to go outside in what amounts to a just a room with no roof.

If you're going to resort to calling me and others idiots and hippies because you're debates are being proven to be flawed then why even bother responding? Myself and others have been civil with you and have resisted calling you names. Why dont you show the same respect?

Edited July 31, 2010 by Big Mac

[sputnik monroe 102]

More like people who took money from NATO in exchange for intel. Most of them are either taliban themselves or local warlords and I'll bet you a few of them are playing both sides of the fence. They're hardly innocent and they're hardly doing it for anything other than their own interests. The world isn't anywhere near as clear cut as you make it out to be. Everyone over there and here at home is out for their own interests.

So once again there is no innocence and neither side is good or bad. Why do you care then? It confounds me how people argue about how the coalition are the bad guys in one breath then argue that there are no good guys or bad guys in the next breath in response to any accusation that the Taliban are not good.

If there are truly no good or bad guys then stop complaining about NATO forces and the USA as they are not bad or good either.

[Big Mac 19]

If there are truly no good or bad guys then stop complaining about NATO forces and the USA as they are not bad or good either.

Who's complaining? I wasn't nor was anyone else.. I was just putting things in perspective as to how gray the real world is. Edited July 31, 2010 by Big Mac