Wikileaks, Iraq edition

[HappyPuppy]

The protests over US involvement began in 1945. It became organized and widespread (internationally) in 63. It hit home with the big NY protests in 64. There was PILES of research, journalism, and evidence by the time you joined.

20/20 hindsight is easily available to all those who can read. I didn't have that option.

 

[PrinceofWands]

20/20 hindsight is easily available to all those who can read. I didn't have that option.

The fact that they existed proves that you did. Ok, maybe not as easily where you grew up as it was for those who were wealthy, or in NYC and could see the parades, but the fact remains that enough knowledge was available to put millions of people in the street and force the creation of government programs to silence/investigate dissent.

People who are willing to go along with nationalism, marketing, etc allow themselves to be used by any who know how. It's ALWAYS the individuals responsibility when it comes right down to it. If you don't want to be a tool, refuse to accept anything you're ever told. It's possible, millions do it every day.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

I hate to think that my government would do something like this, but I'll accept and analyze criticism against it.

 

[Zorkorist]

The fact that they existed proves that you did. Ok, maybe not as easily where you grew up as it was for those who were wealthy, or in NYC and could see the parades, but the fact remains that enough knowledge was available to put millions of people in the street and force the creation of government programs to silence/investigate dissent.

People who are willing to go along with nationalism, marketing, etc allow themselves to be used by any who know how. It's ALWAYS the individuals responsibility when it comes right down to it. If you don't want to be a tool, refuse to accept anything you're ever told. It's possible, millions do it every day.

If you want to be a tool, call other people tools.

There are reasons for every man's actions, and unless you think all men are "tools," and that you are superior, you should just shut the fuck up.

-John

 

[PrinceofWands]

If you want to be a tool, call other people tools.

There are reasons for every man's actions, and unless you think all men are "tools," and that you are superior, you should just shut the fuck up.

-John

Not at all, I merely point out that claiming to have taken part in something do to lack of information, when others shared that information openly, is illogical. People take part in things like this because they're open to being manipulated. They're conditioned for it, and embrace it. Those who choose not to be susceptible tend not to fall victim.

When slavery was endorsed in our Constitution there were people who gave their lives opposing it. When Vietnam was brewing (before the internet or even widespread TV) there were still people against it. Same with Iraq (and all the media options we have today). Throughout history there have been people who share the information and ask people to assimilate it. That's the theme of this thread - getting the truth to the people so they have the option to not be tools of the state (or whatever entity).

 

[Zorkorist]

I understand that. But you must realize that these are super-humans.

Not normal people, like you and I.

A normal person should not be judged by super-human standards.

A nation, should not be judged by super-nation standards.

-John

 

[PrinceofWands]

I understand that. But you must realize that these are super-humans.

Not normal people, like you and I.

A normal person should not be judged by super-human standards.

A nation, should not be judged by super-nation standards.

-John

WTF comic book world do you live in? You're saying that the hippies protesting Vietnam were super-humans? The random blogging housewife or teenager who questioned invading Iraq was super-human? John Brown...

John Brown was born May 9, 1800, in Torrington, Connecticut. He was the fourth of the eight children of Owen Brown (February 16, 1771 – May 8, 1856) and Ruth Mills (January 25, 1772 – December 9, 1808) and grandson of Capt. John Brown (1728–1776).[6]
In 1805, the family moved to Hudson, Ohio, where Owen Brown opened a tannery. Brown's father became a supporter of the Oberlin Institute (original name of Oberlin College) in its early stage, although he was ultimately critical of the school's "Perfectionist" leanings, especially renowned in the preaching and teaching of Charles Finney and Asa Mahan. Brown withdrew his membership from the Congregational church in the 1840s and never officially joined another church, but both he and his father Owen were fairly conventional evangelicals for the period with its focus on the pursuit of personal righteousness. Brown's personal religion is fairly well documented in the papers of the Rev Clarence Gee, a Brown family expert, now held in the Hudson [Ohio] Library and Historical Society.
As a child, Brown lived briefly in Ohio with Jesse R. Grant, father of future general and U.S. President Ulysses S. Grant.[7]
At the age of 16, John Brown left his family and went to Plainfield, Massachusetts, where he enrolled in a preparatory program. Shortly afterward, he transferred to the Morris Academy in Litchfield, Connecticut.[8] He hoped to become a Congregationalist minister, but money ran out and he suffered from eye inflammations, which forced him to give up the academy and return to Ohio. In Hudson, he worked briefly at his father's tannery before opening a successful tannery of his own outside of town with his adopted brother.
In 1820, Brown married Dianthe Lusk. Their first child, John Jr, was born 13 months later. In 1825, Brown and his family moved to New Richmond, Pennsylvania, where he bought 200 acres (81 hectares) of land. He cleared an eighth of it and built a cabin, a barn, and a tannery. Within a year the tannery employed 15 men. Brown also made money raising cattle and surveying. He helped to establish a post office and a school. During this period, Brown operated an interstate business involving cattle and leather production along with a kinsman, Seth Thompson, from eastern Ohio.
In 1831, one of his sons died. Brown fell ill, and his businesses began to suffer, which left him in terrible debt. In the summer of 1832, shortly after the death of a newborn son, his wife Dianthe died. On June 14, 1833, Brown married 16-year-old Mary Ann Day (April 15, 1817—May 1, 1884), originally of Meadville, Pennsylvania. They eventually had 13 children, in addition to the seven children from his previous marriage.
In 1836, Brown moved his family to Franklin Mills, Ohio (now known as Kent). There he borrowed money to buy land in the area, building and operating a tannery along the Cuyahoga River in partnership with Zenas Kent. [5] He suffered great financial losses in the economic crisis of 1839, which struck the western states more severely than had the Panic of 1837. Following the heavy borrowing trends of Ohio, many businessmen like Brown trusted too heavily in credit and state bonds and paid dearly for it. In one episode of property loss, Brown was even jailed when he attempted to retain ownership of a farm by occupying it against the claims of the new owner. Like other determined men of his time and background, he tried many different business efforts in an attempt to get out of debt. Along with tanning hides and cattle trading, he also undertook horse and sheep breeding, the last of which was to become a notable aspect of his pre-public vocation.

that's a super-human?


There's no such thing. There's just people who pay attention and care. I joined the military after high school to do my part as an American citizen, but I still refused to do things that were illogical or morally reprehensible. I faced punishment for it, but I stuck to it. That's all it takes.

 

[Zorkorist]

Yes it is super-human.

What can I say. To be on the "right" side of arguements like slavery, gays, Vietnam, Iraq, every time?! Is super-human.

The rest of us learn as we go. We have no inaight ability to say this is wrong, or right.

At some point we do come to a conclusion, that something is wrong or right, but to expect us to immediately grasp all facets of an idea, is super-human.

-John

 

[PrinceofWands]

And yet, millions of people do it every day. I guess you have a very low bar for super-human.

Like I said, there's only 3 elements to it: be aware, question, care. That's it. Those are all the skills you need to not be used. Any child can do it (and does instinctively, until they're brainwashed to assimilate).

 

[Zorkorist]

Only millions, of the Billions of people on the planet?

Maybe you are just making stuff up?

Superman

-John

 

[Acanthus]

Hee, hee, you kiddies are way too soft. War is war and these documents won't reveal anything one tenth as bad as what we did to those commie bastards in Viet Nam.

I don't care what our people did if it saved even one American life.

We could've saved 5000 not going over there in the 1st place.

 

[colonel]

send the bill to Bush-Cherney and the neoconservative, the war is over.

 

[Modelworks]

What I have to laugh at is the people that are commenting on news stations that they are shocked, surprised, never knew it was this bad.

NEWSFLASH !!!!! - WAR IS NOT PRETTY.
If anyone thinks that you can deploy all the troops we have, used up all the ammunition we have and lost as many soldiers as we have and just hurt a few people and it is fire a few shots and everything is now good, then they are fools.

That is why I hate listening to politicians talk about wars. War is bad, people die, it sucks , that is why most sane people want to avoid it.

 

[umbrella39]

You can't win a war by being nice or worrying about collateral damage.

You can't win a war from your armchair either.

 

[BoberFett]

This thread has been completely derailed into the merits of war or lack thereof.

What should piss everyone off is how the government repeatedly lies to us and then when the truth comes out, the act like some guy with a website is the bad guy.

Sorry, the US federal government cannot be trusted. It has to go. All of it. Tear it down completely and distribute it's power to the states.

 

[GarfieldtheCat]

Not true.

A kid wins a war when he fights the bully, even when the bully eventually wins.

It's not the winning or losing that counts, it's the fighting.

Don't you ever forget that they attacked us at 9/11.

-John

Really, Iraq attacked us on 9/11? Who knew? You are clueless, you do know that, right?

No it wasn't nor isn't it.

Our Government, as well as our people, firmly believed they were behind the attacks. Iraq was the face of Islam to most of us back then.

We have learned more about the threat since then.

Wow, stupidity abounds in your posts. Not only did we not believe that, there was no evidence or proof of that. If you knew anything, you would know that at the time, Saddam was useful as a non-religious buffer zone between Saudi Arabia and the religious Iran.

Thinking that Saddam's Iraq was the face of Islam is just 100% wrong.

Of course, if you have any facts that you think prove your case, please show them. Please show us that Iraq attacked us on 9/11. Educate yourself before posting false statements.

 

[Lemon law]

I think this forum is confused about something when we talk abou the so called Iraq war of GWB.

The war part of it lasted only a few weeks, once American tanks reached Baghdad, the war part was over and Saddam was deposed. But the goal of a war is to use military might to conquer a hostile government. No matter how longt it takes.

Once the war phase was over, it became a basic American military occupation, with a goal of winning the peace. That winning the peace part requires far different tactics than winning a war.

Never confuse the two, the US military excels at winning wars, but sucks at winning the peace. But losing or winning the peace is really the job of our politicians. And the other thing to point out is that our politicians tried to win the peace on the cheap, and got the worse possible enemy to any military occupation in anarchy and corruption instead.

The USA shot itself in the foot and we were beat before we started. We can all trace it back to the day Donald Rumsfeld fired Shinseki.

 

[Craig234]

I think this forum is confused about something when we talk abou the so called Iraq war of GWB.

The war part of it lasted only a few weeks, once American tanks reached Baghdad, the war part was over and Saddam was deposed. But the goal of a war is to use military might to conquer a hostile government. No matter how longt it takes.

Once the war phase was over, it became a basic American military occupation, with a goal of winning the peace. That winning the peace part requires far different tactics than winning a war.

Never confuse the two, the US military excels at winning wars, but sucks at winning the peace. But losing or winning the peace is really the job of our politicians. And the other thing to point out is that our politicians tried to win the peace on the cheap, and got the worse possible enemy to any military occupation in anarchy and corruption instead.

The USA shot itself in the foot and we were beat before we started. We can all trace it back to the day Donald Rumsfeld fired Shinseki.

We can trace it back to the man who won the presidency in 2000 not becoming president.

 

[EagleKeeper]

We can trace it back to the man who lost the presidency in 2000 not becoming president.

fixed

 

[Craig234]

broken

fixed. You're ignorant of the election's facts.

 

[Lanyap]

What's interesting is that this leak sure brings out all the liberals from their holes. It's like a rotting buffalo to a pack of hyenas.

<snip>

So lets recap:

1. Insurgents shell US bases
2. An Apache is scrambled to the location
3. Insurgents attempt to flee, in a truck carrying mortar and rounds
4. The Apache identify them, opening fire
5. The insurgents surrender, at which point some military lawyer authorizes engagement
6. While the pilots work their way up the bureaucracy, the insurgents attempt to flee
7. The Apache is ordered to open fire from the squadron command
8. The insurgents are engaged again, this time taken out in a spectacular show of ordnance exploding

9. The Guardian publishes an article how US pilots killed insurgents who tried to surrender

Pretty awesome chain of events, don't you think.

Nice recap. The surrender attempt looks like a new tactic by the enemy. Suicide by military. If you get caught, pretend like you're surrendering, they kill you, you get martyrdom and they look bad to the press and the world.



Does anyone have a direct link to independent analysis of the 285,000 deaths number? All I'm finding is a reference to Al Jazeera saying it's 285,000.

Al Jazeera, which also got an advance look at the documents, reported a total of 285,000 war casualties on its Arabic-language website, a number that included both dead and wounded. It also reported that the documents said 681 Iraqi civilians were killed at U.S. checkpoints, 180,000 Iraqis were arrested during the war and 15,000 Iraqis were buried without being identified.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That is beyond ignorant.

That depends on how you look at it. You and I talked about this at the time, and it was my opinion that it the war was entirely baseless, but more of a matter of opportunity. Consider how Bush pushed the aluminum tubes after Sandia told him they weren't suitable. Considering that Iraq had no more relevance than any other ME country regarding 9/11 it's hard to justify virtually abandoning Afghanistan to get Saddam.

A lot of people died because nobody cared enough. That doesn't sit particularly well.

It was a more than useless war.

 

[Patranus]

The USA needs to raid the offices/servers of Wikileaks and arrest anyone who is involved.

The government needs to show that this type of behavior will not be tolerated.

 

[LumbergTech]

The USA needs to raid the offices/servers of Wikileaks and arrest anyone who is involved.

The government needs to show that this type of behavior will not be tolerated.

the information age is upon us

it will become much harder to hide for all in government

 

[Lemon law]

20/20 hindsight is easily available to all those who can read. I didn't have that option.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So you joined up in 1968, the same year Eugene McCarthy won the New Hampshire primary
because of LBJ failures in Vietnam. Shortly thereafter, LBJ announced he would not run for re-election for Prez. Living proof that an anti Vietnam war movement had already reached more than critical mass.

Yet you have the unmitigated gall to tell this forum that you were blissfully unaware of what even the most dense dumb fuck in the USA knew then, there were some serious questions being raised about the Vietnam war!

We all have the option to be aware and think, but given your posts on this forum I have to conclude you didn't think then and you have learned nothing since.