Dueling Cultures: Wikileaks

[Aj.Nobs]

I was raised since i was very young, as are most children i know, to believe that the government is some sort of all powerful and benevolent entity, with its sole purpose to protect my freedom and happiness. I am no longer a naive little boy and i have come to understand a lot about the world and i have settled into my own niches and comfortable setting. But recently, i have had a hard time defining the rightness of an action that i might have easily judged before.
The reason for this recent shift in thinking is the collision of the two things i hold most dear in my life: the code of honor, respect, and chivalry that i have always relied on and my need for knowledge and truth that has developed over the past few years. Even within each of those completely different viewpoints, we can see similar cases being brought up. This leads me to my question:

Was Wikileaks in the right by exposing classified US documents in order to make our government more transparent or is it hindering our government's ability to do what is necessary to operate in the modern world and how do you support your view.

 

[Anarchemitis]

Government transparency is an important thing, but balance between some and little is equally important.

 

[Gindil]

*facepalms*

Our government is full of human beings that unfortunately think they own the GD world...

The leaks are being exposed, yes. But NO HARM has actually been the direct result of a leak. The leaks have shown how DynCorp had a story downplayed (the Afghan little boy party... It's worse than it sounds...) so it didn't look bad.

They showed how US pressure was changing copyright law in other countries.

It shows how Hillary really REALLY needs to get laid and lay off Iran.

And instead of these stories, people are STILL talking about how Wikileaks is wrong/right for showing this.

Folks, Wikileaks is equal opportunity. The US has a lot of issues with FOIA requests that do nothing but become silent markers so far eroded from transparency, as to be a joke. Last I checked, Wikileaks still leaked info from other countries. The best thing that the US government could do (which it won't...) is declassify the info, read it and try to help with the back log.

 

[BonsaiK]

Wikileaks didn't harm anyone who didn't have it coming through their own stupidity. Impact on things like American security is basically zero because Wikileaks thoughtfully edited out names in sensitive cases where certain people might have been put in danger by leaked documents.

People forget that the government are their employees - and that's why we pay them, through taxes - to run our countries for us. It's only right that they operate in as transparent manner as possible and allow themselves to come under scrutiny, both positive and negative.

 

[Jackpot524]

As long as Wikileak's goal remains about transparency... or at least compiling document's that might embarrass politicians, I'm fine with it. Since that stuff is relatively quite harmless.

If they stepped to the level that could seriously be considered treason (Making classified military or scientific information available to an enemy state,) my support will disappear.

Also, when I mention 'classified military information' I mean something like blueprints for prototype weapons, or the roster of a military unit...

 

[Naheal]

I understand the strategic necessity for keeping some things secret, but...

Wikileaks didn't harm anyone who didn't have it coming through their own stupidity. Impact on things like American security is basically zero because Wikileaks thoughtfully edited out names in sensitive cases where certain people might have been put in danger by leaked documents.

Bolded is most important.

Because of that, I can't stand against WikiLeaks.

 

[Ultrajoe]

However, the people who are leaking these documents to wikileaks need to be tried for treason.

Did they do it to undermine their nation, or out of their passion for it's improvement?

 

[Syntax Man]

However, the people who are leaking these documents to wikileaks need to be tried for treason.

Did they do it to undermine their nation, or out of their passion for it's improvement?

A lot of good men and women have been executed for trying to improve their country.

 

[BabySinclair]

I understand the strategic necessity for keeping some things secret, but...

Wikileaks didn't harm anyone who didn't have it coming through their own stupidity. Impact on things like American security is basically zero because Wikileaks thoughtfully edited out names in sensitive cases where certain people might have been put in danger by leaked documents.

Bolded is most important.

Because of that, I can't stand against WikiLeaks.

They don't censor the names of locations though. One document was literally a list of important locations in the Mid East that if were taken out or attacked could cripple the ability of US and NATO forces over there. It's a laundry list of "to hit" places.

Now it's nice that they do that for individuals but people live and work at those locations too.

Also, should we really give a flying f#@k about what one politician say about another person behind closed doors? People talk shit about other people, is the international political gossip really the best use of resources?

*quick edit* The treason bit comes from stealing (ie downloading) documents from the government without permission to do so. Selling government documents technically falls under treason so I can see the charges easily.

 

[BonsaiK]

I understand the strategic necessity for keeping some things secret, but...

Wikileaks didn't harm anyone who didn't have it coming through their own stupidity. Impact on things like American security is basically zero because Wikileaks thoughtfully edited out names in sensitive cases where certain people might have been put in danger by leaked documents.

Bolded is most important.

Because of that, I can't stand against WikiLeaks.

They don't censor the names of locations though. One document was literally a list of important locations in the Mid East that if were taken out or attacked could cripple the ability of US and NATO forces over there. It's a laundry list of "to hit" places.

Now it's nice that they do that for individuals but people live and work at those locations too.

Also, should we really give a flying f#@k about what one politician say about another person behind closed doors? People talk shit about other people, is the international political gossip really the best use of resources?

*quick edit* The treason bit comes from stealing (ie downloading) documents from the government without permission to do so. Selling government documents technically falls under treason so I can see the charges easily.

With regard to locations - all the more reason to leak the documents. If I was a citizen who lived or worked there, if a bomb was potentially going to drop near me soon, I'd really like to know about that shit beforehand. As for giving the enemies of the US valuable intelligence - I doubt it matters tbh.

Because I pay taxes, politicians are my employees, I pay them to run my country for me. Therefore if there's a "workplace dispute" or some bitching and backstabbing, I don't want it behind closed doors, I want everything out on the table.

I'm not sure if any documents were sold at all, I'm pretty sure they were all given. Is it still treason? Maybe but why is the government keeping secrets from the people who it is employed to serve?

 

[BonsaiK]

However, the people who are leaking these documents to wikileaks need to be tried for treason.

Did they do it to undermine their nation, or out of their passion for it's improvement?

The gay guy did it to undermine his nation. He enlisted specifically to stir shit up. He didn't accidentally stumble upon something he found unconscionable, which he felt he had the duty to share with the world, he went there with specific intent to try to screw with the army because of "don't ask don't tell."

In my opinion working to eradicate a stupid army policy on homosexuality even through subterfuge falls squarely under "improving the nation".

 

[Naheal]

I understand the strategic necessity for keeping some things secret, but...

Wikileaks didn't harm anyone who didn't have it coming through their own stupidity. Impact on things like American security is basically zero because Wikileaks thoughtfully edited out names in sensitive cases where certain people might have been put in danger by leaked documents.

Bolded is most important.

Because of that, I can't stand against WikiLeaks.

They don't censor the names of locations though. One document was literally a list of important locations in the Mid East that if were taken out or attacked could cripple the ability of US and NATO forces over there. It's a laundry list of "to hit" places.

Now it's nice that they do that for individuals but people live and work at those locations too.

That falls under strategic necessity; thank you for reading what I put.

Also, should we really give a flying f#@k about what one politician say about another person behind closed doors? People talk shit about other people, is the international political gossip really the best use of resources?

When people are talking shit about our allies, this is a problem for international relations.

*quick edit* The treason bit comes from stealing (ie downloading) documents from the government without permission to do so. Selling government documents technically falls under treason so I can see the charges easily.

Transparency is a major necessity in a democracy.

 

[Ultrajoe]

But nothing he did actually helped to remove the policy, instead he just leaked a lot of information that had nothing to do with it. There's a difference between doing something to try and get back at the government, and doing it because you're trying to improve the government. What he did falls in with the former.

The American government is making enemies of it's citizens through this utterly ridiculous bit of legislation, I think he just sent a pretty powerful message.

 

[BonsaiK]

However, the people who are leaking these documents to wikileaks need to be tried for treason.

Did they do it to undermine their nation, or out of their passion for it's improvement?

The gay guy did it to undermine his nation. He enlisted specifically to stir shit up. He didn't accidentally stumble upon something he found unconscionable, which he felt he had the duty to share with the world, he went there with specific intent to try to screw with the army because of "don't ask don't tell."

In my opinion working to eradicate a stupid army policy on homosexuality even through subterfuge falls squarely under "improving the nation".

But nothing he did actually helped to remove the policy, instead he just leaked a lot of information that had nothing to do with it. There's a difference between doing something to try and get back at the government, and doing it because you're trying to improve the government. What he did falls in with the former.

Then that government is paying the price for having such a stupid policy. If they didn't have that stupid policy, he wouldn't have done that and therefore they could have kept their secret documents a bit more secret. Have a stupid policy, get punished for it - it seems fair enough to me.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

My view on the subject is based entirely on one critical piece of information: did Wikileaks solicit the information. If they did, then they are guilty of espionage. If they did not, then they are guilty of being bereft of good sense a crime all of us answer for at some point.

The party who gave the information is a traitor plain and simple. If the information was passed to wikileaks without solicitation, then wikileaks is more or less free to transmit the information. The penalties for revealing classified information only apply to those who are supposed to be working with it in the first place.

Of course, there will be repercussions naturally. I suspect the founder of Wikileaks will quickly realize that international espionage is a dangerous business and the world's intelligence communities do not care for being made to look a fool.

 

[Wolf-AUS]

I think as long as what they publish doesn't cause the loss of lives, I see no reason why governments and people shouldn't be held accountable for their actions, why should people be able to hide acts when they have clearly done the wrong thing?

It shows how Hillary really REALLY needs to get laid and lay off Iran.

If it helped international relations...I'd take one for the team.