Pineguy wrote: They’re crying alarm over this, as they always do in the case of every case of a leak. Certainly they did with the Pentagon Papers. In fact, in that case, they said that the damage to national security was so great that they had to stop the presses for the first time in our history, but the Supreme Court ruled otherwise, having heard testimony on that. And nineteen newspapers, altogether, decided otherwise and did print the papers, in what amounted to civil disobedience against the warnings of the attorney general. In no case was there any harm discovered in that case. And as for the releases in July, with all the warnings we heard passed on by the media, quite uncritically, no damage has been reported.
The Associated Press obtained a Pentagon letter reporting no US intelligence sources or practices were compromised by the leaks.
And, rhetoric aside, it's NOT as bad as the Walker case, in terms of identifying operatives in the field.
Can you guarntee that this are no worse than the Walker case. You want me to listen to Wiki, not going to happen. They cannot be trusted either. So tell me, when we see all this, and as WIKI also stated in your press release shortcut, they cannot guarntee it also. So if there is anything in the documents about troop strength, locations, bases, type of bases, etc do you think it is ok to publish this? If there is anything in the documents about killings of those trying to surrender, or abuses by the Iraqi forces etc, do you think this will make things easier or cause more troubles for both our troops and the Iraqi forces? Here is my answer, It will make things alot harder and more difficult and can cause more attacks on the innocent civilians.
Everything I've read has that information edited out. Here's an example:
ON ---, EOD/WIT RESPONDED TO A SUSPECTED VBIED IVO --- ME ---. WIT ARRIVED ON SCENE AND INTERVIEWED A MEMBER OF THE IP WHO --- HE RESPONDED TO A CALL OF AN ABANDONED VEHICLE. THE IP --- THE CALL CAME FROM AN UNKNOWN CIVILIAN. THE IP POINTED OUT WHAT APPEARED TO BE A TAXICAB (STILL RUNNING) IN AN --- JUST OFF OF RTE ---.
What I find interesting is you (and others) are arguing the release is compromising our troops but you haven't even bothered to read any of the material to form your own opinion, based on the material.
navycpo7 wrote: Find all that released these documents, get a firing squad together and shoot them. They are traitors, they have endangered the United States and our Military. I have no sympathy. NONE
And how do you feel about the soldiers who committed the atrocities documented in the leaked material? Do you have sympathy for them or do you think they should be shot, too? After all, by committing those crimes (if the documents are correct), they endangered U.S. troops by fostering increased violence against U.S. forces.
Alot of what you might read in those, they may have already been brought out. The outfit in the State of Washington from Ft Lewis, the are waiting for a courts martial. There are others. And if the crime fits the rule for death then yes I do. What they did was not what we in the military stand for. Those that I just mentioned, from what I have found out so far, the ring leader should get the death sentence. What he talked this other troops into did exactly what you stated above. To also clarify something for you I am against any of our Military going against legitimate. We do not go out and kill innocent civilians, we do not go out and chop the heads off people, we do not bomb innocent people. We do at times make mistakes, intel not being correct etc. Then we have, as does all those that think they can do as they want to without regard to human life or property. Those that violate due regard for human life should be dealt with according to the UCMJ. What has to be taken into consideration, is was what one did voluntary or was it caused by mental distress(now called PTSD). That group from Ft Lewis was voluntary. The ring leader was able to convince some other troops, that it was ok to kill any civilians. That is wrong. He should be given a death sentence.
PRO-TROOP ORG CHARGES ANTI WAR GROUP CODE PINK WITH PROMOTING HARM TO TROOPS!
Sacramento, Calif. – The nation’s largest grassroots pro-troop organization Move America Forward is standing up for U.S. troops again, as yet-again, the virulent anti-war group CODE PINK is threatening the lives of U.S. troops around the world.
"CODE PINK is back at it again, this time they are asking President Obama to give a full pardon to the dangerous traitor Bradley Manning, the apparent WIKI LEAKS source!" said Danny Gonzalez, Director of Communications for the Organization.
"Last week dozens of military analysts and millions of Americans around the country were absolutely mortified that our military had a traitor in it’s ranks. A traitor who passed along critical information, knowing it would be made public, so that our enemies could use it to KILL OUR TROOPS.
Pineguy wrote: Everything I've read has that information edited out. Here's an example:
ON ---, EOD/WIT RESPONDED TO A SUSPECTED VBIED IVO --- ME ---. WIT ARRIVED ON SCENE AND INTERVIEWED A MEMBER OF THE IP WHO --- HE RESPONDED TO A CALL OF AN ABANDONED VEHICLE. THE IP --- THE CALL CAME FROM AN UNKNOWN CIVILIAN. THE IP POINTED OUT WHAT APPEARED TO BE A TAXICAB (STILL RUNNING) IN AN --- JUST OFF OF RTE ---.
What I find interesting is you (and others) are arguing the release is compromising our troops but you haven't even bothered to read any of the material to form your own opinion, based on the material.
I have read a very tiny bit only, and some of what I read can be misinterpeted to fit thier needs. Which seems to be common over there. Thus violence can be increased dramatically.
The ones that talk about how the US Military did not investigate the so called atrocities of the Iraqi Army. The rule was to notify the upper echlon (through proper channels) and it was up to the Iraqi Army to investigate this. See if you can find that somewhere in there. Doubt you can, but thus they only view that as atrocities committed by the US.
OK, some people have chosen to take this to a personal level, including names and employment, which I believe is against the terms of service, so I am withdrawing from this debate.
