quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Indeed. I even suspect that it is a black ops directed against Hilary (as a bonus) and especially Iran.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy
OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Way too many links .... but wow....

OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

What puts American diplomats at risk is America. Can't really fix that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Way too many links .... but wow....

OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
Odd that both you and the NYT imply that Obama is impacted by this, but that the Bush administration is not.  The leaks date from 07.

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydawg

for those who don't bother to read the article we are discussing, (yet comment anyway in a rather trollish manner)

Then perhaps you should read the article before you comment in such a trollish manner


"A statement from the White House on Sunday said: “We condemn in the strongest terms the unauthorized disclosure of classified documents and sensitive national security information.”

Is this what you call "screwing the president?

The White House said the release of what it called “stolen cables” to several publications was a “reckless and dangerous action” and warned that some cables, if released in full, could disrupt American operations abroad and put the work and even lives of confidential sources of American diplomats at risk."

Or is this what you call "screwing the president"?
Perhaps you really do not understand the difference between embarrass and screw.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: hertz

What puts American diplomats at risk is America. Can't really fix that.

He actually said it would "put the work and even lives of confidential sources of American diplomats at risk."

The ones who get killed as 'traitors' by their own countries.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
It would appear that you do not believe that traitors should be punished

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
It would appear that you do not believe that traitors should be punished

No, I don't view things in terms of universal moral constants.

So some times it is ok to steal and other times no...sometimes it is ok to murder and other times not...some times it is ok to cheat on your husband and sometimes not....I think I understand your position.

If someone betrays me, I punish them.

If someone betrays my enemy to help me, I reward them.

I understand that my enemy will likely feel the same way, which is why I'm aware I need to protect my sources if I want their assistance to continue.

So you do not care that the president of afghanistan is a drug smugler.
You do not care that the u.s. coerced germany to not prosecute two cia kidnapper/ terrorists who kidnapped a german citizen and tortured him till they found out he was the wrong "habib"

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

So some times it is ok to steal and other times no...sometimes it is ok to murder and other times not...some times it is ok to cheat on your husband and sometimes not....I think I understand your position.

quote:


So you do not care that the president of afghanistan is a drug smugler.
You do not care that the u.s. coerced germany to not prosecute two cia kidnapper/ terrorists who kidnapped a german citizen and tortured him till they found out he was the wrong "habib"

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

So some times it is ok to steal and other times no...sometimes it is ok to murder and other times not...some times it is ok to cheat on your husband and sometimes not....I think I understand your position.

I don't want to get into what's "ok" because it's hard for me to define morality, but yes, the person who steals bread for his family is more sympathetic than the corporate embezzler,

Of course getting a job and earning the price of a loaf of bread would be out of the question.

the hostage who blows a terrorist's brains out with his own gun is more sympathetic than the serial killer with children's corpses in his basement,

Are you trying to equate self defense with murder?

the woman whose husband has been comatose for 15 years is more sympathetic than the gold-digger who cheats with the man she really loves.

I believe the phrase in the marriage vow is "till death do us part"

quote:


So you do not care that the president of afghanistan is a drug smugler.
You do not care that the u.s. coerced germany to not prosecute two cia kidnapper/ terrorists who kidnapped a german citizen and tortured him till they found out he was the wrong "habib"

No, I don't really care more than on a vague, abstract level...I mean, I feel sympathy for the innocent man who was kidnapped and tortured, but I don't 'care' in the political activist sense.

So if it were you who was kidnapped and tortured you would not be upset if the u.s. government got oz to not prosecute your kidnappers? Ain't you just the sweetest thang.


The people who have the power to change these things likely also have the security clearance to know about them legally.

I'm not naive and idealistic about the behind-the-scenes work of intelligence agencies. Which is why I don't think that leaked information is going to do anything more than heighten their security protocols. This is an embarrassment to the US because it's public, but it's not going to change our policies or tactics.

Ever hear of the pentagon papers?
50,000 + body bags with american corpses in them for a lie. How many more will the current lie bring us?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: FatDomDaddy

Way too many links .... but wow....

OK... so the link police don't cry, here is the NYT showing how Wikileaks screwed President Obama

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/29/world/29cables.html?_r=1&hp

Odd that both you and the NYT imply that Obama is impacted by this, but that the Bush administration is not.  The leaks date from 07.