|
On November 30 2010 06:29 Nitan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 03:29 Taguchi wrote:tufas, all this info most probably came from a low level military man simply exporting the entire database of articles onto a flash drive and giving it to wikileaks, outsiders didnt actually hack the military network so its very doubtful they have secret info from other countries, though if others were inclined to "share" a database of secret communications, wikileaks is the platform for it~ edit: On November 30 2010 03:21 DaCruise wrote:
This is a huge bomb under diplomacy. The leaked documents doesnt add anything shocking to the generel population but it does severely undermine future diplomatic negotiations between US and the rest of the world as the US has now lost a lot of its credibility. Diplomatic discussions NEED to be kept secret or they wont ever happen.
Dont even get me started on how many agreements that wouldnt have happened if they had to be public.
What the hell do we care if some upperclass dude called Sarkozy for "Emperor with no close" or Berlusconi a "clovn? Its just trash talk and it happens all the time.
And countries spying on eachother,,,SURPRISE!! only the most ignorant and naive people didnt know this.
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?.......... no see, you cant argue that "there is nothing of importance added from these documents, everyone knows this all already" and in the same breath say that "its a huge bomb under diplomacy" if nothing of import was added from this and it is general diplomatic practice to actively seek out personal info / codes from UN members etc, well nothing to see here, just say "sorry" in your next meeting and everything will be business as usual as for the comparison to dayanna, well... if u see a connection between heckling paparazzi and revelations as to the workings of usa foreign policy, live a happy life and dont bother replying  It's one thing for diplomats to suspect each other of saying unflattering things in private and another for these thoughts to be announced publicly. How will negotiations over nuclear arms reduction go with Russia now that it's public information that our officials have accused them of being in bed with organized crime? How will negotiations go with China now that we've accused them of attacking not only Google but American companies?
That's so ridiculous. Don't you think the Russian government already knew it was "in bed with organised crime". Similarly for China, they attacked Google, they're not surprised by what was in those documents.
Also, to the person that mentioned this, nuclear weapons in the Netherlands are officially denied, but were long suspected to exist. The significance here isn't learning about their existance, the point is that there's evidence the government lied.
Mind you, none of this is really top-secret information, so any covert and secret actions won't be mentioned.
|
On November 30 2010 07:38 Mothxal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 06:29 Nitan wrote:On November 30 2010 03:29 Taguchi wrote:tufas, all this info most probably came from a low level military man simply exporting the entire database of articles onto a flash drive and giving it to wikileaks, outsiders didnt actually hack the military network so its very doubtful they have secret info from other countries, though if others were inclined to "share" a database of secret communications, wikileaks is the platform for it~ edit: On November 30 2010 03:21 DaCruise wrote:
This is a huge bomb under diplomacy. The leaked documents doesnt add anything shocking to the generel population but it does severely undermine future diplomatic negotiations between US and the rest of the world as the US has now lost a lot of its credibility. Diplomatic discussions NEED to be kept secret or they wont ever happen.
Dont even get me started on how many agreements that wouldnt have happened if they had to be public.
What the hell do we care if some upperclass dude called Sarkozy for "Emperor with no close" or Berlusconi a "clovn? Its just trash talk and it happens all the time.
And countries spying on eachother,,,SURPRISE!! only the most ignorant and naive people didnt know this.
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?.......... no see, you cant argue that "there is nothing of importance added from these documents, everyone knows this all already" and in the same breath say that "its a huge bomb under diplomacy" if nothing of import was added from this and it is general diplomatic practice to actively seek out personal info / codes from UN members etc, well nothing to see here, just say "sorry" in your next meeting and everything will be business as usual as for the comparison to dayanna, well... if u see a connection between heckling paparazzi and revelations as to the workings of usa foreign policy, live a happy life and dont bother replying It's one thing for diplomats to suspect each other of saying unflattering things in private and another for these thoughts to be announced publicly. How will negotiations over nuclear arms reduction go with Russia now that it's public information that our officials have accused them of being in bed with organized crime? How will negotiations go with China now that we've accused them of attacking not only Google but American companies? That's so ridiculous. Don't you think the Russian government already knew it was "in bed with organised crime". Similarly for China, they attacked Google, they're not surprised by what was in those documents. Also, to the person that mentioned this, nuclear weapons in the Netherlands are officially denied, but were long suspected to exist. The significance here isn't learning about their existance, the point is that there's evidence the government lied. Mind you, none of this is really top-secret information, so any covert and secret actions won't be mentioned.
The point is that once these statements are made public, it becomes difficult to conduct negotiations with a government you just yesterday called "in bed with organized crime".
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence.
|
On November 30 2010 07:48 Elegy wrote:
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence.
I think all arguments about international relations can be resolved by just assuming that the highly educated and trained officials whose job it is to conduct diplomatic affairs are, in reality, just awkward teenagers. In other news, the current wave of hostility between India and Pakistan all springs from that occasion in 1970, when India didn't take Pakistan to the prom, and chose Bangadesh instead.
|
On November 30 2010 07:48 Elegy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 07:38 Mothxal wrote:On November 30 2010 06:29 Nitan wrote:On November 30 2010 03:29 Taguchi wrote:tufas, all this info most probably came from a low level military man simply exporting the entire database of articles onto a flash drive and giving it to wikileaks, outsiders didnt actually hack the military network so its very doubtful they have secret info from other countries, though if others were inclined to "share" a database of secret communications, wikileaks is the platform for it~ edit: On November 30 2010 03:21 DaCruise wrote:
This is a huge bomb under diplomacy. The leaked documents doesnt add anything shocking to the generel population but it does severely undermine future diplomatic negotiations between US and the rest of the world as the US has now lost a lot of its credibility. Diplomatic discussions NEED to be kept secret or they wont ever happen.
Dont even get me started on how many agreements that wouldnt have happened if they had to be public.
What the hell do we care if some upperclass dude called Sarkozy for "Emperor with no close" or Berlusconi a "clovn? Its just trash talk and it happens all the time.
And countries spying on eachother,,,SURPRISE!! only the most ignorant and naive people didnt know this.
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?.......... no see, you cant argue that "there is nothing of importance added from these documents, everyone knows this all already" and in the same breath say that "its a huge bomb under diplomacy" if nothing of import was added from this and it is general diplomatic practice to actively seek out personal info / codes from UN members etc, well nothing to see here, just say "sorry" in your next meeting and everything will be business as usual as for the comparison to dayanna, well... if u see a connection between heckling paparazzi and revelations as to the workings of usa foreign policy, live a happy life and dont bother replying It's one thing for diplomats to suspect each other of saying unflattering things in private and another for these thoughts to be announced publicly. How will negotiations over nuclear arms reduction go with Russia now that it's public information that our officials have accused them of being in bed with organized crime? How will negotiations go with China now that we've accused them of attacking not only Google but American companies? That's so ridiculous. Don't you think the Russian government already knew it was "in bed with organised crime". Similarly for China, they attacked Google, they're not surprised by what was in those documents. Also, to the person that mentioned this, nuclear weapons in the Netherlands are officially denied, but were long suspected to exist. The significance here isn't learning about their existance, the point is that there's evidence the government lied. Mind you, none of this is really top-secret information, so any covert and secret actions won't be mentioned. The point is that once these statements are made public, it becomes difficult to conduct negotiations with a government you just yesterday called "in bed with organized crime". If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence.
How does it matter? The Russians know they're corrupt, they also must suspect the USA knows it's corrupt - and probably they don't care what the USA thinks of their government. The fact that it now becomes public knowledge means nothing to either Russia/USA, except for that the public might start to ask: why are you doing X with a government you view as anti-democratic. In so far as this will happen, it'll be a good thing, because it forces the governments to be more honest about their motivations.
|
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?..........
“WikiLeaks is so powerful,” one user wrote. “I finally understand why the Chinese government needs to build so many ports and railways in those “xxstan” countries.”
“This times WikiLeaks not only embarrassed the U.S., but also China,” wrote another. “Whether the Iran issue or the Kyrgyzstan thing, it’s all a lesson that China should be a responsible power and not just sit around watching other countries make fools of themselves.”
The true actions of a traitor and a terrorist right?
For all your trashtalking, there has yet to be one incident of a single loss of life, or a single documented damage to policy.
Its amazing how media, power and money can influence public perception to such a degree it no longer resembles anything remotely resembling reality.
The point is that once these statements are made public, it becomes difficult to conduct negotiations with a government you just yesterday called "in bed with organized crime".
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence.
Why do you continue to imagine "far reaching damages" and "loss of life", when in reality, the people whom disseminating such information would be most beneficial have not yet done so, quite literally filling in the blanks in the propaganda for yourselves.
Don't think you think that if these disclosures actually broke an important peace talk, or had someone killed, it would be reported? It would be a huge asset for the U.S. to use that to destroy Assangers reputation.
But rather, while everyone spews words on how the documents "Hurt the international community" and "Endanger countless lives", only one documented loss of life was attempted to be connected to Wikileaks' leaks, which turned out to be an individual who was marked for death months before any leak was even published, one reported to a reuters reporter by the Taliban itself no less.
The only response I've seen from the international community is one thing. "Condemn". Don't you think if they had anything remotely condemning, it would be reported, instead of a bunch of politicians "condemning", while everything remotely condemning has been more or less discredited?
|
|
|
Interview by forbes
Quote
Early next year, Julian Assange says, a major American bank will suddenly find itself turned inside out. Tens of thousands of its internal documents will be exposed on Wikileaks.org with no polite requests for executives' response or other forewarnings. The data dump will lay bare the finance firm's secrets on the Web for every customer, every competitor, every regulator to examine and pass judgment on.
|
On November 30 2010 08:06 Half wrote:Show nested quote +
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?..........
Show nested quote +
“WikiLeaks is so powerful,” one user wrote. “I finally understand why the Chinese government needs to build so many ports and railways in those “xxstan” countries.”
“This times WikiLeaks not only embarrassed the U.S., but also China,” wrote another. “Whether the Iran issue or the Kyrgyzstan thing, it’s all a lesson that China should be a responsible power and not just sit around watching other countries make fools of themselves.”
The true actions of a traitor and a terrorist right? For all your trashtalking, there has yet to be one incident of a single loss of life, or a single documented damage to policy. Its amazing how media, power and money can influence public perception to such a degree it no longer resembles anything remotely resembling reality. Show nested quote +The point is that once these statements are made public, it becomes difficult to conduct negotiations with a government you just yesterday called "in bed with organized crime".
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence. Why do you continue to imagine "far reaching damages" and "loss of life", when in reality, the people whom disseminating such information would be most beneficial have not yet done so, quite literally filling in the blanks in the propaganda for yourselves. Don't think you think that if these disclosures actually broke an important peace talk, or had someone killed, it would be reported? It would be a huge asset for the U.S. to use that to destroy Assangers reputation. But rather, while everyone spews words on how the documents "Hurt the international community" and "Endanger countless lives", only one documented loss of life was attempted to be connected to Wikileaks' leaks, which turned out to be an individual who was marked for death months before any leak was even published, one reported to a reuters reporter by the Taliban itself no less.
I haven't said anything about endangering lives nor harming the international community, nor any loss of life.
But to deny that this won't have any impact at all, perhaps in ways that the public is unaware of, is rather ignorant of historical precedents, to say the least.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U-2_incident
Everyone knew (both the Russians and the US) that the Americans were spying on the Russians, but when it was revealed to be fact with real evidence, relations deteriorated severely. Now, that was a different time and a different historical context, but parallels can of course be drawn.
Do I think these leaks are a good thing? I don't think Assange should be prosecuted or branded as a traitor or whatever people are calling him (which makes no sense). I think the revealing of this information can set rather dangerous precedents, based on the nature of the material being revealed of course.
|
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101129/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_wikileaks_security
Regardless of the ramifications though...I think freedom of information is pretty important in America, and I think that in many ways, Julian Assange is justified in what he's doing.
While there is Executive Privilege and there is a precedent for holding onto precious security assets, none of the stuff released this far by WikiLeaks is THAT bad. Sure, it's reminiscent of the Pentagon Papers, but in all honesty, I'm liking more access to this information.
|
On November 30 2010 08:25 Elegy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 08:06 Half wrote:
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?..........
“WikiLeaks is so powerful,” one user wrote. “I finally understand why the Chinese government needs to build so many ports and railways in those “xxstan” countries.”
“This times WikiLeaks not only embarrassed the U.S., but also China,” wrote another. “Whether the Iran issue or the Kyrgyzstan thing, it’s all a lesson that China should be a responsible power and not just sit around watching other countries make fools of themselves.”
The true actions of a traitor and a terrorist right? For all your trashtalking, there has yet to be one incident of a single loss of life, or a single documented damage to policy. Its amazing how media, power and money can influence public perception to such a degree it no longer resembles anything remotely resembling reality. The point is that once these statements are made public, it becomes difficult to conduct negotiations with a government you just yesterday called "in bed with organized crime".
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence. Why do you continue to imagine "far reaching damages" and "loss of life", when in reality, the people whom disseminating such information would be most beneficial have not yet done so, quite literally filling in the blanks in the propaganda for yourselves. Don't think you think that if these disclosures actually broke an important peace talk, or had someone killed, it would be reported? It would be a huge asset for the U.S. to use that to destroy Assangers reputation. But rather, while everyone spews words on how the documents "Hurt the international community" and "Endanger countless lives", only one documented loss of life was attempted to be connected to Wikileaks' leaks, which turned out to be an individual who was marked for death months before any leak was even published, one reported to a reuters reporter by the Taliban itself no less. I haven't said anything about endangering lives nor harming the international community, nor any loss of life. But to deny that this won't have any impact at all, perhaps in ways that the public is unaware of, is rather ignorant of historical precedents, to say the least. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U-2_incidentEveryone knew (both the Russians and the US) that the Americans were spying on the Russians, but when it was revealed to be fact with real evidence, relations deteriorated severely. Now, that was a different time and a different historical context, but parallels can of course be drawn. Do I think these leaks are a good thing? I don't think Assange should be prosecuted or branded as a traitor or whatever people are calling him (which makes no sense). I think the revealing of this information can set rather dangerous precedents, based on the nature of the material being revealed of course.
So in other words, you've basically admit that these releases haven't infringed upon humanitarian morals what so ever, but simply disrupted the Status Quo in favor of truth and information.
ok. Yeah I'm kind of ok with that. I'd view that as a good thing. I'm glad you realize that though, but I'm really baffled by how many people who would basically lap up the empty words of politicians like honey, with so many readily and freely available information to the contrary.
And its clear that this information is actually educating tons of people across the world, making them question there governments more grey actions.
“WikiLeaks is so powerful,” one user wrote. “I finally understand why the Chinese government needs to build so many ports and railways in those “xxstan” countries.”
“This times WikiLeaks not only embarrassed the U.S., but also China,” wrote another. “Whether the Iran issue or the Kyrgyzstan thing, it’s all a lesson that China should be a responsible power and not just sit around watching other countries make fools of themselves.”
|
On November 30 2010 08:42 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 08:25 Elegy wrote:On November 30 2010 08:06 Half wrote:
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?..........
“WikiLeaks is so powerful,” one user wrote. “I finally understand why the Chinese government needs to build so many ports and railways in those “xxstan” countries.”
“This times WikiLeaks not only embarrassed the U.S., but also China,” wrote another. “Whether the Iran issue or the Kyrgyzstan thing, it’s all a lesson that China should be a responsible power and not just sit around watching other countries make fools of themselves.”
The true actions of a traitor and a terrorist right? For all your trashtalking, there has yet to be one incident of a single loss of life, or a single documented damage to policy. Its amazing how media, power and money can influence public perception to such a degree it no longer resembles anything remotely resembling reality. The point is that once these statements are made public, it becomes difficult to conduct negotiations with a government you just yesterday called "in bed with organized crime".
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence. Why do you continue to imagine "far reaching damages" and "loss of life", when in reality, the people whom disseminating such information would be most beneficial have not yet done so, quite literally filling in the blanks in the propaganda for yourselves. Don't think you think that if these disclosures actually broke an important peace talk, or had someone killed, it would be reported? It would be a huge asset for the U.S. to use that to destroy Assangers reputation. But rather, while everyone spews words on how the documents "Hurt the international community" and "Endanger countless lives", only one documented loss of life was attempted to be connected to Wikileaks' leaks, which turned out to be an individual who was marked for death months before any leak was even published, one reported to a reuters reporter by the Taliban itself no less. I haven't said anything about endangering lives nor harming the international community, nor any loss of life. But to deny that this won't have any impact at all, perhaps in ways that the public is unaware of, is rather ignorant of historical precedents, to say the least. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U-2_incidentEveryone knew (both the Russians and the US) that the Americans were spying on the Russians, but when it was revealed to be fact with real evidence, relations deteriorated severely. Now, that was a different time and a different historical context, but parallels can of course be drawn. Do I think these leaks are a good thing? I don't think Assange should be prosecuted or branded as a traitor or whatever people are calling him (which makes no sense). I think the revealing of this information can set rather dangerous precedents, based on the nature of the material being revealed of course. So in other words, you've basically admit that these releases haven't infringed upon humanitarian morals what so ever, but simply disrupted the Status Quo in favor of truth and information. ok. Yeah I'm kind of ok with that. I'd view that as a good thing. And its clear that this information is actually educating tons of people across the world, making them question there governments more grey actions. Show nested quote +
“WikiLeaks is so powerful,” one user wrote. “I finally understand why the Chinese government needs to build so many ports and railways in those “xxstan” countries.”
“This times WikiLeaks not only embarrassed the U.S., but also China,” wrote another. “Whether the Iran issue or the Kyrgyzstan thing, it’s all a lesson that China should be a responsible power and not just sit around watching other countries make fools of themselves.”
This is not about government transparency. I don't want other countries to read word-for-word what diplomats and others say about them in these cables. Most of it would be harmless, but it adds problems where the literally was none. I have no issue with them bringing legitimate issues to light with these documents, but most wont be. It's glorified gossip that will only embarrass the parties.
You overhear 2 associates talking about a third. They mention the shirt he's wearing makes him look like a fool. Do you immediately run and tell the 3rd person and rat out the first 2 for speaking candidly to each other? All you do is create tension and problems where there previously was none.
A second scenario is you and a coworker are discussing your futures over lunch. You talk about possibilities of leaving the company or starting a new one should certain things unfold or go poorly in your current position. Would you want word of this getting to the boss?
I'll reiterate this point: The legitimate things to discuss (which I'm sure there are a handful or more) will be by and large fine with me for being disclosed. However, a lot of them simply wont be and wikileaks under the guise of full-disclosure will tarnish reputations and relations for no reason.
|
|
|
On November 30 2010 08:01 Aim Here wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 07:48 Elegy wrote:
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence.
I think all arguments about international relations can be resolved by just assuming that the highly educated and trained officials whose job it is to conduct diplomatic affairs are, in reality, just awkward teenagers. In other news, the current wave of hostility between India and Pakistan all springs from that occasion in 1970, when India didn't take Pakistan to the prom, and chose Bangadesh instead.
So really, you're saying Pakistan is like the yandere jilted ex-girlfriend from hell, nuclear edition.
Wow.. That.. It makes too much goddamn sense!
|
On November 30 2010 08:50 Krigwin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 08:01 Aim Here wrote:On November 30 2010 07:48 Elegy wrote:
If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence.
I think all arguments about international relations can be resolved by just assuming that the highly educated and trained officials whose job it is to conduct diplomatic affairs are, in reality, just awkward teenagers. In other news, the current wave of hostility between India and Pakistan all springs from that occasion in 1970, when India didn't take Pakistan to the prom, and chose Bangadesh instead. So really, you're saying Pakistan is like the yandere jilted ex-girlfriend from hell, nuclear edition. Wow.. That.. It makes too much goddamn sense!
Diplomacy, when viewed in the grand scheme, looks very much like squabbling children. It's the nitty gritty of how they pull off capers and schemes that's interesting. But yes, the broad picture of things is rather petty and sad when it comes to geopolitics. It's very juvenile.
|
So in other words, you've basically admit that these releases haven't infringed upon humanitarian morals what so ever, but simply disrupted the Status Quo in favor of truth and information.
ok. Yeah I'm kind of ok with that. I'd view that as a good thing.
Now that North Korea is aware that China considers it a "spoiled brat," how receptive to their demands do you think Kim Jong Il will be? I still don't think war will break out on the Korean peninsula, but the probability is a lot higher than it was a few days ago. How ok are you with that?
More importantly, considering that wikileaks has essentially no policy of review when it comes to disclosure, how can we be sure that it won't leak something in the future that could cause numerous deaths? It does not appear that wikileaks cares all that much about the consequences of its disclosures. This is a clear example of a huge negative externality, and needs to be regulated.
|
|
|
I don't like the idea of releasing sensitive information during a war, perhaps once it is declassified, but now is just in bad taste. It will drag out this war and cause more innocent lives to be lost. I have no problem with them releasing information about war crimes or crimes against humanity that have been commited. If they want to make the world a better place they should opperate more like Celestial Being.
|
This is not about government transparency. I don't want other countries to read word-for-word what diplomats and others say about them in these cables. Most of it would be harmless, but it adds problems where the literally was none. I have no issue with them bringing legitimate issues to light with these documents, but most wont be. It's glorified gossip that will only embarrass the parties.
You overhear 2 associates talking about a third. They mention the shirt he's wearing makes him look like a fool. Do you immediately run and tell the 3rd person and rat out the first 2 for speaking candidly to each other? All you do is create tension and problems where there previously was none.
A second scenario is you and a coworker are discussing your futures over lunch. You talk about possibilities of leaving the company or starting a new one should certain things unfold or go poorly in your current position. Would you want word of this getting to the boss?
I'll reiterate this point: The legitimate things to discuss (which I'm sure there are a handful or more) will be by and large fine with me for being disclosed. However, a lot of them simply wont be and wikileaks under the guise of full-disclosure will tarnish reputations and relations for no reason.
You act as if the only information that was leaked were childish comments. Its clear that isn't the case.
|
On November 30 2010 08:01 Mothxal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 30 2010 07:48 Elegy wrote:On November 30 2010 07:38 Mothxal wrote:On November 30 2010 06:29 Nitan wrote:On November 30 2010 03:29 Taguchi wrote:tufas, all this info most probably came from a low level military man simply exporting the entire database of articles onto a flash drive and giving it to wikileaks, outsiders didnt actually hack the military network so its very doubtful they have secret info from other countries, though if others were inclined to "share" a database of secret communications, wikileaks is the platform for it~ edit: On November 30 2010 03:21 DaCruise wrote:
This is a huge bomb under diplomacy. The leaked documents doesnt add anything shocking to the generel population but it does severely undermine future diplomatic negotiations between US and the rest of the world as the US has now lost a lot of its credibility. Diplomatic discussions NEED to be kept secret or they wont ever happen.
Dont even get me started on how many agreements that wouldnt have happened if they had to be public.
What the hell do we care if some upperclass dude called Sarkozy for "Emperor with no close" or Berlusconi a "clovn? Its just trash talk and it happens all the time.
And countries spying on eachother,,,SURPRISE!! only the most ignorant and naive people didnt know this.
If you celebrate Assange as a hero you should also celebrate the paparazi´s that chased Princess Diana to her death.
The blindly pursue of scandals and drama, where there is none, benefits no one.
Assange is a traitor and a terrorist and I hope he will get treated as such.....you have death penalty over there right?.......... no see, you cant argue that "there is nothing of importance added from these documents, everyone knows this all already" and in the same breath say that "its a huge bomb under diplomacy" if nothing of import was added from this and it is general diplomatic practice to actively seek out personal info / codes from UN members etc, well nothing to see here, just say "sorry" in your next meeting and everything will be business as usual as for the comparison to dayanna, well... if u see a connection between heckling paparazzi and revelations as to the workings of usa foreign policy, live a happy life and dont bother replying It's one thing for diplomats to suspect each other of saying unflattering things in private and another for these thoughts to be announced publicly. How will negotiations over nuclear arms reduction go with Russia now that it's public information that our officials have accused them of being in bed with organized crime? How will negotiations go with China now that we've accused them of attacking not only Google but American companies? That's so ridiculous. Don't you think the Russian government already knew it was "in bed with organised crime". Similarly for China, they attacked Google, they're not surprised by what was in those documents. Also, to the person that mentioned this, nuclear weapons in the Netherlands are officially denied, but were long suspected to exist. The significance here isn't learning about their existance, the point is that there's evidence the government lied. Mind you, none of this is really top-secret information, so any covert and secret actions won't be mentioned. The point is that once these statements are made public, it becomes difficult to conduct negotiations with a government you just yesterday called "in bed with organized crime". If you had spent weeks/months building a relationship with a particular girl to sleep with her and your friend tells her that you said the only thing you want is to screw her brains out, that makes the next conversation slightly awkward, yes? Especially when its on Facebook and everyone and their mother can see exactly what you said, even if pretty much everyone knew it as common knowledge, just without real evidence. How does it matter? The Russians know they're corrupt, they also must suspect the USA knows it's corrupt - and probably they don't care what the USA thinks of their government. The fact that it now becomes public knowledge means nothing to either Russia/USA, except for that the public might start to ask: why are you doing X with a government you view as anti-democratic. In so far as this will happen, it'll be a good thing, because it forces the governments to be more honest about their motivations.
Really now? You expect the Russians simply to go "YOU GOT US HUR HUR HURRRR?" It's a serious accusation and while Russia may not care what America thinks it does care what America has spread to the world.
|
On November 30 2010 09:38 Half wrote:Show nested quote +
This is not about government transparency. I don't want other countries to read word-for-word what diplomats and others say about them in these cables. Most of it would be harmless, but it adds problems where the literally was none. I have no issue with them bringing legitimate issues to light with these documents, but most wont be. It's glorified gossip that will only embarrass the parties.
You overhear 2 associates talking about a third. They mention the shirt he's wearing makes him look like a fool. Do you immediately run and tell the 3rd person and rat out the first 2 for speaking candidly to each other? All you do is create tension and problems where there previously was none.
A second scenario is you and a coworker are discussing your futures over lunch. You talk about possibilities of leaving the company or starting a new one should certain things unfold or go poorly in your current position. Would you want word of this getting to the boss?
I'll reiterate this point: The legitimate things to discuss (which I'm sure there are a handful or more) will be by and large fine with me for being disclosed. However, a lot of them simply wont be and wikileaks under the guise of full-disclosure will tarnish reputations and relations for no reason.
You act as if the only information that was leaked were childish comments. Its clear that isn't the case.
You're right, there was also a lot of redundant and common sense cables in the group as well. I specifically state that I'm ok with the legitimate pieces, but they will be the extreme minority. There is clearly a difference between the types of cables and simply weeding them all out is my request. They wont, but that alone would pretty much make me be fine with the entire situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
