Belkira the Tulip wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
As a troop, this absolutely disgusts me. No innocent foreigner's life is more valuable than an innocent US Soldier's life. Period. As a leader, it is my job to ensure that all of my troops come back alive as unharmed as possible to their loved ones. I'm not sacrificing anyone's life, other than my own, for anyone that doesn't have a US flag on their uniform. Period.
I have four in-laws and two very close friends who have been or are in the military. Every single one of them served multiple tours in Iraq. I love them all very much, and their lives are incredibly valuable to me.
Having said that, I would be interested in a little clarification on your statement. Are you implying, as it certainly seems to me, that a US soldier's life is more valuable than an innocent foreigner's life? Because
that's disgusting.
If I had to choose between one of my Soldier's lives or someone else life, I would choose to save my Soldier's life. I'm sorry if you think it's ok for Soldiers to die unnecessarily in battle, but
that's disgusting to me...
Those actions are already done. Do the right thing and report them properly as opposed to allowing an authorized users to compromise classified information.
Belkira wrote:
I'm confused. If these reports are considered classified or top secret or confidential or whatever magical term you are using, then doesn't that mean they were reported?
No it does not at all. These reports are merely SIGACTS (Significant actions) as opposed to what you consider a "police report".
You are implying that the US committed a war crime, reported it and then slapped a classification sticker on it to hide it. That's 100% inaccurate. If you just took a second to stop arguing with me and just imagined that I might actually know what I'm talking about (you know since it was kinda my job for the past 3 years), you would understand it.
I've stated numerous times already that there is a third party (IG) whose sole purpose is to ensure that procedures are being followed. So, if this guy was so concerned about doing the right thing, then he would have done the right thing and filed an IG complaint, not blog classified information. What does that solve? Are people going to Iraq and Afghanistan and monitor war crimes now? No.. The only result of this was stir up emotion within the states, which is exactly why this is considered a publicity stunt.
Please listen to what I'm trying to tell you...
The military is generally broken up in a few major categories: personnel, intel, operations, logistics and communications. Each section (with possible others,i.e, medics, legal, chaplain, safety, etc.) all have reports that they brief to the commander. During classified operations, those briefs are defaulted to at least the classification of the brief. So, you can't make the assumption that someone made a "police report" and then slapped a classified sticker on it to hide it.
All of these briefs are then dumped onto one central data system for the Commander to be able utilize in order to see everything from one computer. What this guy has done was simply tap into that data system and released those files. Ignoring the fact that in its self is wrong, if he were really concerned, he could have reported those incidents to IG or to "higher". He didn't, so I ask again, why are you supporting the blog over the correct reporting procedures?
Belkira wrote:
And then subsequently brushed aside and hidden without any action taken? Isn't that the point of leaking them??
No, the point of leaking them was for a publicity stunt.
Read above.
ELinda wrote:
You mean we're not technically slipping on a banana peel and skinning our knee?
The US decides to do something unethical, or does something stupid. The peeps making the decision and giving the orders to do the unethical deed, or let the stupid deed happen are the same ones that get to classify the documentation of the event as 'top secret'.
lawl.
No, they aren't the ones classifying the documents, so I fail to see your point... Which proves my point. This is a publicity stunt playing on people's ignorance. I'm trying to educate you, but you refuse to accept it.
Belkira wrote:
Sure, I get that. I don't consider a personal value judgement the same as saying that since it's possible (though incredibly unlikely) that the information recently leaked could lead to an armed unit being fired on, we should do nothing about these war crimes.
It's the fact that these reports were taken from the same data base that has current information that puts Soldiers in harm. Who's to say that this guy doesn't have any current information that can harm Soldiers? Just because he hasn't released it? The fact that he has broken the rules by both possessing the information and releasing the information, who's to say that he wont sell it to anyone? He hasn't done anything noble to say that he wouldn't and there is absolutely nothing to say that he couldn't.
"Ok, mr. hacker/thief, it's ok to browse our system, just be sure not to touch our recent stuff ok? We trust you..." Really?! Seriously?! get real....
No one is saying not to do anything about the war crimes, I'm saying do the right thing about the war crimes and report them. Wikileaks is not the proper protocol.
Belkira wrote:
You call it a luxury. I call it the ability to think clearly. I also don't consider Alma's opinoin on the subject to be very far reaching.
And the same people who swept this under the rug and didn't deal with the war crimes when they were reported were sitting as far away from the action as you or I.
What opinion? Are you referring to the opinion that he should have used proper protocol to report any war crimes instead of compromising classified information?
